So, I was just reading this, and this paragraph struck me:
First, I think I'd skip the "paper" part. I've visited a lot of newspaper offices, and many of them proudly display the printing presses that produce their product, just as older newsmen often glory in the title of "ink-stained wretch." But their product isn't paper (in fact, for those of us who recycle, the paper is a drawback, not a plus, at least until it's time to pack things for a move). Their product is information. Paper is just an increasingly obsolete delivery platform. It's expensive, and on the way out. Get rid of it, or start a new "paper" without it.
As a journalist by education and profession, I obviously don't entirely like the thought of newspapers dying on the vine. But. . .
Last week, my girlfriend opted to receive four free weeks of the Rochester Post-Bulletin. Now, I haven't received a paper in years, so I'd kind of forgotten what it's like, but after one week, here's what I think: what a complete waste. Although the cats enjoy playing underneath the paper, there's really no earthly reason for me to want to continue receiving a paper after the four weeks are up. I glance at the front page, peruse the letters-to-the-editor, breeze through the classifieds, and I'm done. Five minutes, tops. I already know, thanks to the Internet, all the national and international news, and local news just isn't all that interesting to me. So, I'm left with all this newspaper lying around that I have to dispose of before the next day's influx arrives. Seems to me like a colossal waste. And I used to work for newspapers, so that's saying something.
No sir, I don't need it.
Posted by Ryan at March 22, 2006 10:31 AM | TrackBackEverytime the paper calls up and offers us the free month, I ask them if they'll come and haul away all of the unopened, unread papers at the end of the month and recycle them too.
They don't call so much anymore.
Posted by: Johnny Huh? at March 24, 2006 11:18 AM
Stumble It!
