Comments on: Times Trash http://marccooper.com/times-trash/ Thu, 08 Jan 2009 16:06:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: daylesford accommodation http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-586289 daylesford accommodation Mon, 11 Feb 2008 23:55:07 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-586289 <strong>daylesford accommodation...</strong> daylesford accommodation... daylesford accommodation…

daylesford accommodation…

]]> By: all internal videos http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-584987 all internal videos Sun, 20 Jan 2008 04:30:49 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-584987 <strong>all internal videos...</strong> all internal videos... all internal videos…

all internal videos…

]]> By: ovfkkjshcc http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-544520 ovfkkjshcc Mon, 09 Jul 2007 00:56:50 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-544520 Thanks for this site! <a href="http://zeny.yum2.biz" rel="nofollow">zeny.yum2.biz</a> <a href="http://aucuw.yum5.biz" rel="nofollow">aucuw.yum5.biz</a> <a href="http://lwz.liza3.biz" rel="nofollow">lwz.liza3.biz</a> <a href="http://citst.seno5.biz" rel="nofollow">citst.seno5.biz</a> <a href="http://miakx.pipka1.biz" rel="nofollow">miakx.pipka1.biz</a> <a href="http://nbdul.seno4.biz" rel="nofollow">nbdul.seno4.biz</a> <a href="http://ybg.seno2.biz" rel="nofollow">ybg.seno2.biz</a> <a href="http://wyfmg.nipol2.biz" rel="nofollow">wyfmg.nipol2.biz</a> <a href="http://wvg.popi4.info" rel="nofollow">wvg.popi4.info</a> Thanks for this site!
zeny.yum2.biz
aucuw.yum5.biz
lwz.liza3.biz
citst.seno5.biz
miakx.pipka1.biz
nbdul.seno4.biz
ybg.seno2.biz
wyfmg.nipol2.biz
wvg.popi4.info

]]> By: ntrcubawwp http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-539590 ntrcubawwp Fri, 06 Jul 2007 18:37:47 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-539590 Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! pamkdmwzlut Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! pamkdmwzlut

]]> By: matos monica http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-517749 matos monica Mon, 25 Jun 2007 22:51:20 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-517749 <strong>matos monica...</strong> shit-happens 3671963 Reviews on matos monica.... matos monica…

shit-happens 3671963 Reviews on matos monica….

]]> By: Salinas http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-489380 Salinas Sat, 09 Jun 2007 20:05:25 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-489380 COOOOOOL!!!!!!!! Let's be friends!!! Go to my site and post your info :) COOOOOOL!!!!!!!! Let’s be friends!!! Go to my site and post your info :)

]]> By: adipex diet pill http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-427830 adipex diet pill Sat, 28 Apr 2007 20:49:57 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-427830 <strong>adipex diet pill...</strong> reentering!demultiplexed collaboration petticoat:calibrates ... adipex diet pill…

reentering!demultiplexed collaboration petticoat:calibrates …

]]> By: free hardcore anal clip http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-375765 free hardcore anal clip Sun, 25 Mar 2007 13:19:37 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-375765 <strong>free hardcore anal clip...</strong> free hardcore anal clip application... free hardcore anal clip…

free hardcore anal clip application…

]]> By: Abigail http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-303343 Abigail Sat, 03 Feb 2007 15:07:57 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-303343 COol :) COol :)

]]> By: Addy http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-299715 Addy Thu, 01 Feb 2007 05:15:05 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-299715 I hate spammers! ( I hate spammers! (

]]> By: Buy Ultram http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-226352 Buy Ultram Fri, 08 Dec 2006 08:09:26 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-226352 <strong>Buy Ultram...</strong> Ultram buy Ultram Buy cheap Ultram online order cheap Ultram online. Ultram... Buy Ultram…

Ultram buy Ultram Buy cheap Ultram online order cheap Ultram online. Ultram…

]]> By: reg http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23334 reg Wed, 30 Nov 2005 20:00:03 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23334 I've been reading Liebling and, so far, the main thing I've learned is the greatness of Rocky Marciano... I’ve been reading Liebling and, so far, the main thing I’ve learned is the greatness of Rocky Marciano…

]]> By: richard lo cicero http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23316 richard lo cicero Wed, 30 Nov 2005 17:52:48 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23316 Yes Reg, it was. Read A.J. Liebling for one. Also Ted White. And while you're at it pick up THINKING BIG or THE POWERS THAT BE and see how the LAT was instramental in creating the resistable rise of Richard Nixon. Yes Reg, it was. Read A.J. Liebling for one. Also Ted White. And while you’re at it pick up THINKING BIG or THE POWERS THAT BE and see how the LAT was instramental in creating the resistable rise of Richard Nixon.

]]> By: reg http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23283 reg Wed, 30 Nov 2005 04:00:49 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23283 "In the 1950’s the LAT was widely considered the worst big city newspaper in America. " Worse than the Chron ? Hard to believe... “In the 1950’s the LAT was widely considered the worst big city newspaper in America. ”

Worse than the Chron ? Hard to believe…

]]> By: richard lo cicero http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23262 richard lo cicero Wed, 30 Nov 2005 01:00:17 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23262 In the 1950's the LAT was widely considered the worst big city newspaper in America. Then came Otis Chandler and the TIMES flowered as the "Surfer" had national aspirations. Then the Chandler family. right wackos to the core, tired of the paper's so-called "liberal Bias" and wanted the kind of returns other chains were getting. And when they couldn't get that they sold it off to the Trib - home of Colonel McCormack. And now what Otis started is going full circle - back to medocrity. Say all you want about "Pinch" Schulzberger but that family believes in the idea of a great newspaper being a public trust. I suspect the NYT will be picking up a lot of subscriptions in LA soon. So sad. In the 1950’s the LAT was widely considered the worst big city newspaper in America. Then came Otis Chandler and the TIMES flowered as the “Surfer” had national aspirations. Then the Chandler family. right wackos to the core, tired of the paper’s so-called “liberal Bias” and wanted the kind of returns other chains were getting. And when they couldn’t get that they sold it off to the Trib - home of Colonel McCormack. And now what Otis started is going full circle - back to medocrity.

Say all you want about “Pinch” Schulzberger but that family believes in the idea of a great newspaper being a public trust. I suspect the NYT will be picking up a lot of subscriptions in LA soon. So sad.

]]> By: Mark A. York http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23208 Mark A. York Tue, 29 Nov 2005 18:54:17 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23208 "The MSM have stretched the traditional rules for news reporting to the point that there is no difference between the news section and the op/ed section." This patently provably false. We could look at your evidence but considering the fiction you added to Fred Kaplan why bother. We know. “The MSM have stretched the traditional rules for news reporting to the point that there is no difference between the news section and the op/ed section.”

This patently provably false. We could look at your evidence but considering the fiction you added to Fred Kaplan why bother. We know.

]]> By: notherbob2 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23200 notherbob2 Tue, 29 Nov 2005 18:09:27 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23200 If one consults the traditional view of the function of a newspaper, one clearly sees that opinions, especially political opinions, belong on the editorial page. The procedures for reporting a news story are long established. To oversimplify: a reporter should not say: “I think the candidate for dogcatcher is unqualified.” in a news story, but should feel perfectly free to say so in an op/ed. The MSM have stretched the traditional rules for news reporting to the point that there is no difference between the news section and the op/ed section. This has been done under the guise of “telling the story”. Add the ability and the skill to “frame” issues and you have created a real propaganda machine. The MSM news consumer has become aware of this change. As a result, a good portion of them have declined to patronize certain newspapers to the point that those newspapers are losing circulation. Circulation is what newspapers are about. The management of some newspapers has determined that a return to the traditional news reporting rules is appropriate – perhaps for ethical, professional or reasons of tradition and perhaps to increase circulation – no matter. Having made that determination, how best to implement that decision? Get leopards to change their spots or replace them with lions? If one replaces leopards with other leopards, the reading public will see the spots and vote with their feet, er, eyes. The readers who are also leopards will miss the spots and grumble that the lions totally lack them. Expect remarks from the readers who stayed on board about the “quality” of the old writers versus the new. Quite a bit of this “quality” is simply based on the old writer being another leopard. However, with the lions in place the news will become news again and, hopefully, the circulation will increase. In order to attract back the departed readers it may be necessary to hire some jackals for the op/ed pages, even though leopards hate jackals. Expect remarks from the readers who stayed on board about the new editorial page jackals. In a perfect newspaper there wold be equal numbers of leopards and jackals on the op/ed pages and the news would simply be news, with the “story” left to the writers on the op/ed pages. By the way, that last sentence belongs on the op/ed page, not in a news story. If one consults the traditional view of the function of a newspaper, one clearly sees that opinions, especially political opinions, belong on the editorial page. The procedures for reporting a news story are long established. To oversimplify: a reporter should not say: “I think the candidate for dogcatcher is unqualified.” in a news story, but should feel perfectly free to say so in an op/ed. The MSM have stretched the traditional rules for news reporting to the point that there is no difference between the news section and the op/ed section. This has been done under the guise of “telling the story”. Add the ability and the skill to “frame” issues and you have created a real propaganda machine.
The MSM news consumer has become aware of this change. As a result, a good portion of them have declined to patronize certain newspapers to the point that those newspapers are losing circulation. Circulation is what newspapers are about. The management of some newspapers has determined that a return to the traditional news reporting rules is appropriate – perhaps for ethical, professional or reasons of tradition and perhaps to increase circulation – no matter.
Having made that determination, how best to implement that decision? Get leopards to change their spots or replace them with lions? If one replaces leopards with other leopards, the reading public will see the spots and vote with their feet, er, eyes. The readers who are also leopards will miss the spots and grumble that the lions totally lack them. Expect remarks from the readers who stayed on board about the “quality” of the old writers versus the new. Quite a bit of this “quality” is simply based on the old writer being another leopard.
However, with the lions in place the news will become news again and, hopefully, the circulation will increase. In order to attract back the departed readers it may be necessary to hire some jackals for the op/ed pages, even though leopards hate jackals. Expect remarks from the readers who stayed on board about the new editorial page jackals. In a perfect newspaper there wold be equal numbers of leopards and jackals on the op/ed pages and the news would simply be news, with the “story” left to the writers on the op/ed pages. By the way, that last sentence belongs on the op/ed page, not in a news story.

]]> By: Mark A. York http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23183 Mark A. York Tue, 29 Nov 2005 16:31:44 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23183 I would agree but I don't think print media is sinking that far. There will always be printed news and commentary. As an aspiring journalist, and author when they accept a blog post and books only sold online as actual credits i.e. clips for job qualifications then I'll know things have changed. Right now the latter are just more vanity presses that don't count. I would agree but I don’t think print media is sinking that far. There will always be printed news and commentary. As an aspiring journalist, and author when they accept a blog post and books only sold online as actual credits i.e. clips for job qualifications then I’ll know things have changed. Right now the latter are just more vanity presses that don’t count.

]]> By: reg http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23176 reg Tue, 29 Nov 2005 10:19:11 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23176 good points...agreed...I've got one foot in the internet and love it, but I hate that I'm helping another form that I value and enjoy browsing go down the tubes. good points…agreed…I’ve got one foot in the internet and love it, but I hate that I’m helping another form that I value and enjoy browsing go down the tubes.

]]> By: Josh Legere http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23156 Josh Legere Tue, 29 Nov 2005 06:07:19 +0000 http://marccooper.com/times-trash/#comment-23156 Am I the only one that is a little skeptical of the death of print media and TV news? It seems like I am. I am not particularly exicted about my news consumption being reduced to e-mails on my hand held news device, me paying for the opinions that I want to read. Everyone, even Lefties and Cooper himself are eager to embrace the technological revolution of the internet. I just wonder how long it will take for that "new" format to get just as comodified as the print and tv news. In all of this NOBODY talks about the fate of investigative journalism. It might not be ideal, but investigative journalism costs money. In a somewhat centralized media outlet can provide that money. Blog will never be able to generate that kind of revenue. Ad rates for online sites are MUCH lower than print and TV. It will stay that way because the opportunities for FREE coverage on the decentralized internet are ripe. So no revenue, no investigative pieces on King Drew. Check out this from the head of CNN" “Within five years, people will be saying, ‘I want the news about Jordan,’ and they’ll type ‘Jordan’ into their handheld device and up will pop the news about Jordan that they want, nothing else,” says Klein as he sits opposite the panel of anchor-filled screens broadcasting the news in the format that has worked well for the past half-century. “There won’t be anchors. There won’t be people introducing the stories. Consumers won’t have the time or the need for that. They’ll just be getting the news they want, when they want it, in whatever form they want it.” Pretty disturbing if you ask me. I like going to blogs like the rest of us. But one thing I value in he LA Times editorial page, and in the more general coverage is that I read things that I would not normally have interest in. I read opinions that I do not agree with. That is valuable for a democracy. Things are only going to get worse if people only consume journalism that they already agree with. This is the death of objectivity (though impossible, a good goal) and truth. In the future I see Fox News type clap trap, not a good thing. I know that print opinion journals are all the rage now as well. The Nation has grown. But the problem with the Nation (it is supposed to be a debating ground between liberals and radicals but is hardly anymore) and the rest of them is that they do not really broaden the reader. It is all preaching to the converted. See Sontag's comments on the Nation and the cold war. Her point will be maginfied by the internet. The death of the LA Times is a REALLY bad thing for LA. Since the merger of the New Times and LA Weekly has been approved, I can only assume that the Weekly will take some sort of hit. No blog will fill the void. People would rather look at free porn. Social reforms should NOT give up on legislation to reform ownership caps in the media and embrace the internet. Like Iraq, things in the media are bleak.... Am I the only one that is a little skeptical of the death of print media and TV news? It seems like I am. I am not particularly exicted about my news consumption being reduced to e-mails on my hand held news device, me paying for the opinions that I want to read.

Everyone, even Lefties and Cooper himself are eager to embrace the technological revolution of the internet. I just wonder how long it will take for that “new” format to get just as comodified as the print and tv news.

In all of this NOBODY talks about the fate of investigative journalism. It might not be ideal, but investigative journalism costs money. In a somewhat centralized media outlet can provide that money. Blog will never be able to generate that kind of revenue. Ad rates for online sites are MUCH lower than print and TV. It will stay that way because the opportunities for FREE coverage on the decentralized internet are ripe. So no revenue, no investigative pieces on King Drew.

Check out this from the head of CNN”
“Within five years, people will be saying, ‘I want the news about Jordan,’ and they’ll type ‘Jordan’ into their handheld device and up will pop the news about Jordan that they want, nothing else,” says Klein as he sits opposite the panel of anchor-filled screens broadcasting the news in the format that has worked well for the past half-century. “There won’t be anchors. There won’t be people introducing the stories. Consumers won’t have the time or the need for that. They’ll just be getting the news they want, when they want it, in whatever form they want it.”

Pretty disturbing if you ask me. I like going to blogs like the rest of us. But one thing I value in he LA Times editorial page, and in the more general coverage is that I read things that I would not normally have interest in. I read opinions that I do not agree with. That is valuable for a democracy. Things are only going to get worse if people only consume journalism that they already agree with. This is the death of objectivity (though impossible, a good goal) and truth. In the future I see Fox News type clap trap, not a good thing.

I know that print opinion journals are all the rage now as well. The Nation has grown. But the problem with the Nation (it is supposed to be a debating ground between liberals and radicals but is hardly anymore) and the rest of them is that they do not really broaden the reader. It is all preaching to the converted. See Sontag’s comments on the Nation and the cold war. Her point will be maginfied by the internet.

The death of the LA Times is a REALLY bad thing for LA. Since the merger of the New Times and LA Weekly has been approved, I can only assume that the Weekly will take some sort of hit. No blog will fill the void. People would rather look at free porn.

Social reforms should NOT give up on legislation to reform ownership caps in the media and embrace the internet.

Like Iraq, things in the media are bleak….

]]>