On Apr 2, 2009, at 3:21 PM, carol kirschenbaum wrote:
David Ritchie: ...section of "The Oregonian" for details. Hurry, while the newspaper is still in business.ck: Is the Oregonian in trouble, too? Serious trouble or just the usual whining? The Fresno Bee is alive, being a member of the relatively robust McClatchy family, but it's running the funnies in b&w--a sign of true desperation.
The Oregonian threatened to reduce the comics page, but found monies to "save" all our darlings. I think it's as healthy as a regional paper can be in these times, which is to say, not very.
I note that someone on the radio recently mooted not-for-profit status for some papers, along the lines of NPR. Can you imagine the call-a-thons?
In their current form newspapers are a little more than a hundred years old. Before that, they were financed by subscription, with very little revenue from advertising. Newspapers were thin, thickly printed (by which I mean there was little "white space") and made no distinction between charm and truth--I'm remembering here a story I came across when I taught the history of newspapers, "Butterfly seen in church" was the headline. Editor/publishers relied on travelers for foreign news, foreign meaning "out of town." The few blogs I have read remind me of early newspapers.
David Ritchie, Portland, Oregon ------------------------------------------------------------------ To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off, digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html