"Because that's the way it is!" We've all heard these words from our parents at some point in our lives. We usually roll our eyes and ignore the advice only to find ourselves dispensing it in our roles as parents later on in life. Why do we seem to hold on to such a notion when time after time we try to talk ourselves into believing that it is no longer relevant? Fear. We are afraid of any type of real change that might affect the level of comfort in our day to day lives.
As innovative and entrepreneurial as we are as a country, we have some deep rooted issues as it relates to change and new paradigms in our lives. Every time there is a new technology most people are slow to embrace it, focusing on all the negatives without realizing how important and positive the change will be. When radio came along with its new form of entertainment, some folks thought of it as a tool of the devil. In actuality it brought the country together during World War II and helped steel the nation's resolve through President Roosevelt's famed fireside chats. When television came along it was thought that radio would be obsolete and television would be a negative influence, but yet we still listen to it almost every day. TV has transformed our lives in ways too numerous to list here but we can't imagine our lives without it. And don't even get me started about the internet, which many have still not yet embraced.
We should never just think that something needs to stay around just because it has existed for a long time. As we have seen throughout history, nothing is meant to last forever and we should not expect it to. The newspapers have been spiraling toward bankruptcy for many years now and will continue to do so unless major changes are made by the newspapers to gain more readers and more revenue. For a great discussion of how this can be done I refer you to Dallas Maverick's owner Mark Cuban's blog. In the event that this does not happen is there a real reason to keep the newspapers going? Maybe not.
President Obama entertained the idea of some sort of a bailout package to keep the Washington Post, New York Times and other papers running because it would be in the best interest of the country. I don't know anybody who reads these papers and we seem to get along fine in our lives. Why are these select sources of information placed above all others? I honestly don't know. We supposedly live in a capitalist society where you put out a good product and you reap the rewards. Put out a product people don't like and you'll find yourself out of business. Between TV and the internet very few people are getting much information from newspapers.
Circulation is down for newspapers for many reasons. The proliferation of the internet is certainly a reason but so is the editorial slants of the paper. Newspapers, whether leaning right or left, tend to only give one perspective on an issue and fail to give consumers the balance of information that they crave. The papers force readers to see the world as they see it rather than as it really is. Locally in Los Angeles, local radio hosts John and Ken held two rallies to protest all the proposed tax hikes in California. The LA Times was nowhere to be seen. 300 kids walk out of school to protest potential teacher layoffs and the LA Times covers the story from all angles. The reason is because the LA Times editorially wants more taxes to increase government spending so to cover the opposing side would hurt their cause. The LA Times would also love to keep every teacher employed even if it means higher taxes for local residents. The protest served the purpose of advancing the Times' agenda so they made sure every reader knew all about it and portrayed it in a positive light. I will have more on this whole story later but this editorial reporting on news stories is leading to the demise of the newspapers.
I don't want to have more money taken out of my paycheck to prop up a failing newspaper I don't read. It's simply not the American way and it is a shame that as soon as the economy starts to slide and things are looking the least bit bleak, we are willing to throw away the principles we have been operating under for decades. The government should not be in the business of spending our tax dollars on keeping failing businesses alive. We have operated for 250 years in this country on the premise that if you run a successful business you will succeed and if you don't, you won't. When the incentive not to fail is gone, all that will be left are failing businesses and less compelling competition as up and coming smart businesses are pushed out by the giants being subsidized by the federal government. Newspapers should be no exception to any other capitalistic enterprises. If they can't attract readers and make enough money to stay afloat, they should go. Just my editorial opinion.
As innovative and entrepreneurial as we are as a country, we have some deep rooted issues as it relates to change and new paradigms in our lives. Every time there is a new technology most people are slow to embrace it, focusing on all the negatives without realizing how important and positive the change will be. When radio came along with its new form of entertainment, some folks thought of it as a tool of the devil. In actuality it brought the country together during World War II and helped steel the nation's resolve through President Roosevelt's famed fireside chats. When television came along it was thought that radio would be obsolete and television would be a negative influence, but yet we still listen to it almost every day. TV has transformed our lives in ways too numerous to list here but we can't imagine our lives without it. And don't even get me started about the internet, which many have still not yet embraced.
We should never just think that something needs to stay around just because it has existed for a long time. As we have seen throughout history, nothing is meant to last forever and we should not expect it to. The newspapers have been spiraling toward bankruptcy for many years now and will continue to do so unless major changes are made by the newspapers to gain more readers and more revenue. For a great discussion of how this can be done I refer you to Dallas Maverick's owner Mark Cuban's blog. In the event that this does not happen is there a real reason to keep the newspapers going? Maybe not.
President Obama entertained the idea of some sort of a bailout package to keep the Washington Post, New York Times and other papers running because it would be in the best interest of the country. I don't know anybody who reads these papers and we seem to get along fine in our lives. Why are these select sources of information placed above all others? I honestly don't know. We supposedly live in a capitalist society where you put out a good product and you reap the rewards. Put out a product people don't like and you'll find yourself out of business. Between TV and the internet very few people are getting much information from newspapers.
Circulation is down for newspapers for many reasons. The proliferation of the internet is certainly a reason but so is the editorial slants of the paper. Newspapers, whether leaning right or left, tend to only give one perspective on an issue and fail to give consumers the balance of information that they crave. The papers force readers to see the world as they see it rather than as it really is. Locally in Los Angeles, local radio hosts John and Ken held two rallies to protest all the proposed tax hikes in California. The LA Times was nowhere to be seen. 300 kids walk out of school to protest potential teacher layoffs and the LA Times covers the story from all angles. The reason is because the LA Times editorially wants more taxes to increase government spending so to cover the opposing side would hurt their cause. The LA Times would also love to keep every teacher employed even if it means higher taxes for local residents. The protest served the purpose of advancing the Times' agenda so they made sure every reader knew all about it and portrayed it in a positive light. I will have more on this whole story later but this editorial reporting on news stories is leading to the demise of the newspapers.
I don't want to have more money taken out of my paycheck to prop up a failing newspaper I don't read. It's simply not the American way and it is a shame that as soon as the economy starts to slide and things are looking the least bit bleak, we are willing to throw away the principles we have been operating under for decades. The government should not be in the business of spending our tax dollars on keeping failing businesses alive. We have operated for 250 years in this country on the premise that if you run a successful business you will succeed and if you don't, you won't. When the incentive not to fail is gone, all that will be left are failing businesses and less compelling competition as up and coming smart businesses are pushed out by the giants being subsidized by the federal government. Newspapers should be no exception to any other capitalistic enterprises. If they can't attract readers and make enough money to stay afloat, they should go. Just my editorial opinion.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment