Readme

how Sallie Mae my payment is now Zero dollars

wallie222 — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 00:40:52 GMT

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/2288803/great_news_for_student_loan_debt_stressed.html?cat=3

Dumb Ground Rules

muzza — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:09:54 GMT

So we have here an analytical "smackdown" -- where newspaper readers are pitted against web reader/watchers/listeners -- where the webbies are forbidden to read newspaper content on the web? In which alien universe would that actually happen? The deliberate necking down of what the webbies could access for this experiment tells you all you need to know about the future. Newspapers are a subset of the larger, better, more flexible information generation, delivery an analysis system. Period.

Note how some other posters on this topic tend to key on intangibles like voices and expressions. If these weren't important, why do others feel compelled to comment on same? Perhaps because these affective displays do matter.

Alledged communications professionals in print might at last embrace the web for its information rich content on all levels, rather than purposely necking down our perceptions to "just" the so-called "hard" facts.

By the by, ABC News Online is kicking everyone's ass right now on news delivery because they carry video, audio and print components for the same story. That's a new level of immersion. If you're a print-head, it's now a reasonable use of time to go to ABC (TV!) news.

Yikes. Those shallow TV guys from J school are actually winning!

It's the end of the Triumph of the Print Nerds.

Not only is Ron Burgundy better looking than you. Turns out he's smarter and more effective.

Style matters.

Podcast

mustireallyweighin — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 18:31:49 GMT

Did Michel Kinsley have a stroke or something? (If he did, I apoligize) but damn he's painful to listen to.

"Soak The Rich Plan"?

Guylinder — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 16:47:52 GMT

You are what my grandfather would call a goodamned idiot.

"Soak the rich plan" my behind.

Have the rich pay their fair share plan.

Which "Times"?

ronking — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:21:26 GMT

"I'd expect the Times will have the final word...."

Which Times? There's more than one, you know.

Why can't the graph be printed to illustrate the story??

rain39 — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 22:05:16 GMT

Why will you not let the graph be printed along with the article? Without the graph, the article is pretty meaningless unless you like to build your own graph as you read the article. I wanted to save it to use as objective evidence every time another person says that the democrats are spend thrifts, don't support the military, have high deficeits etc. Please fix the graph so it can be printed. Thanks! Barbara

an obvious problem for me

Viejita — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 20:37:38 GMT

Isn't there a text version of this anywhere? I'm a reader, not watcher.

Banking Experiment

viewpoint — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 08:20:34 GMT

From the web

An interesting post from thomashusted:

HEY NORTH DAKOTA IS RUNNING A SURPLUS DUE MAINLY TO THE BANK OF NORTH DAKOTA WHICH IS OWNED AND RUN BY THE STATE NOT BY THE PRIVATE BANKSTERS. WE NEED TO HAVE A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BANK AND GET RID OF THE FEDERAL RESERVE WHICH IS AS FEDERAL AS FEDERAL EXPRESS IS. THE FEDERAL RESERVE IS A PRIVATE CORPORATION OWNED AND OPERATED BY THE BIG BANKS. AS I RECALL THE CONSTITUTION STATES CONGRESS SHALL PRINT, COIN, AND CONTROL THE MONEY SUPPLY NOT SOME PRIVATE CORPORATION LIKE THE FEDERAL RESERVE. ON TOP OF IT THE FEDERAL RESERVE HAS NEVER BEEN AUDITED BY ANYONE SO WHO THE HELL KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE REALLY DOING WITH ALL THE MONEY?? AND WE THINK BERNIE MADOFF HAD A BIG SCAM GOING ON, WELL THIS ONE IS A MULTI-TRILLION DOLLAR ONE!! FOR MORE INFO. ON ALL THIS WATCH FREEDOM TO FASCISM ON YOUTUBE: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VIB9FWKYNJ0

The above was posted commenting on an article here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/arianna-huffington/states-forced-to-cut-serv_b_244039.html

Why not look at the North Dakota experiment and learn from it?

And since Congress definitely has final authority on the money supply, how long can Federal Reserve, Inc withhold information from Congress and keep its job?

Good points today

Americafirst — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 19:21:35 GMT

Interesting article today. I think he hit on something very important here. He, as a journalist, has time, in fact gets paid for, scanning all the available internet sites to get all the news that would otherwise be wrapped up in one paper. How many have the time to do that? If you're like me, you barely have time to scan the local rag. Newpapers, no matter how slanted they may be politically, sitll serve the invaluable service of boiling all the relevant news down into a format you can consume on an hour or so and then you're done. I don't know about you, but after a full day of trying to survive this economy, I do not have the energy or the patience to sit at my computer for hours on end going through 100 blogs and news outlets. That just ain't going to happen. I also have a life away from my computer and the paper gives me time to lead it.

Big trouble

Americafirst — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 02:41:32 GMT

Newspapers made themselves obsolete. During the past presidential campaign papers and newtwork news were so extremely biased towoard Obama there was no news, only disinfromation and slander of anyone Republican. The NYT, Slate and Katie Kourick are extreme examples, but all the others fell into line.

Without real news and real investigative journalism, we are indeed in trouble. Who is going to investigate politicians like Nixon? No one. Who is going to blow the whistle on corporations dumping toxic waste into rivers? No one. Who is going to investigate crroked congressmen, senators, governors, criminal enterprises, war crimes (on both sides)? No one. All blogs are politically skewed to the politics of the blogger. Libs will go with lib bloggers and consevatives will go to right wing bloggers and objective journalism will disappear, much to our detriment. The government will have no watchdogs and even if there were, they would have no vehicle to get the word out. This will lead to the total colapse of our society and result in civil war or anarchy.

NYT coverage of "Skip" Gates...Vanish Software

c2hubbard — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 10:04:06 GMT

Confession: rabidly routing for the newspaper team!

NYT had the story about the Vanish software in Tuesday's paper - science section, I believe. Just the kind of story that gets hyped on the Web but covered in a newspaper.

Same is true of the Professor Gates story. Was it front page news? Personally, I don't think so because I sense that the facts and consequences of the story are still coalescing. But, it definitely is news, and the NYT played it prominently on the "front page" of its National section. Echoing Mr Kinsley, this story at this stage is perfect column fodder - thus, perfect for the Web where everyone is a "columnist." And given the President's news conference last night, now it is front page news. I would argue that it is appropriately front page worthy now, especially after other worthy companion pieces (i.e., Slate's own Explainer).

/c2hubbard, Dallas, TX

Wrong Bigot, Wrong Place

viewpoint — Thu, 23 Jul 2009 07:16:29 GMT

Today a white bigot in a police uniform can't just hassle a black man without worrying if he's a friend of the President.

Why is the world steadily eroding the rights of whites?

I ask you, Pat Buchanan.

What about cable news and NPR?

Odie — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 14:06:04 GMT

They both have viable business models and rely relatively little on newspapers as sources. Are the contestants forbidden exposure to them? If not, what is really being compared?

"I read the news today, oh boy...."

jayreeg — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:40:36 GMT

Print and computer, art and kitsch, journalism and literature....

I get home delivery of the NY Times, Boston Globe and WSJ (along with more than a dozen magazines ranging from Artforum to NYer...) and I'll take hard copy any time vs digits. For example, the Times op ed page highlights an artist at the start of each season...Hockney, Pettibone, Walker, etc...how great to rip this out and hang it up.

Morning coffee along with the daily pile of print is the best way to start a day...Time is the ultimate value.

Thank God as kids we had a peelable banana album from the Velvets and Nico, something my daughter's generation will never experience in a culture that tries desparately to fight gravity and short circuit the future, all under the guise of some sort of progress.

Paper vs twitter

Americafirst — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 22:36:42 GMT

The problem with kids who get their news form Twitter is the fact they go through life ignorant of everything that' going on the world. Ignorance is not bliss, it's extremely dangerous. Hitler fed on ignorance and so did Lenin. I agree with the idea of sitting down over coffee and reading a paper. Our local paper is a rag, but I do like to sit and have a mocha frappechino and read US Today. It isn't in depth by any stretch, but then you can move from UST to the web and fill in the blanks, after finishing the mocha.

A question for Kinsley

Sickday — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 21:26:47 GMT

What made the 7/21 David Brooks essay one of his best in your eyes?

To me it seemed like a very standard attack from the right that didn't do much but establish that Brooks feels that Blue Dogs are 'brave' and that Obama is weak and in the thrall of the old guard liberals.

Setting aside that I personally don't agree, I still have to wonder what about it stood out to you. If you want to tie it back in to your conversation here, how about tackling the idea that Brooks piece represents exactly what (to me) is kind of stodgy and generic about newspaper analysis -- nothing in it was particularly surprising or illuminating, just a rote repetition of Brooks' perspective.

In a webby world, I'm inclined to say that he's not doing much more than mouthing the same CW you'd find on a million conservative blogs with none of the quirk or personality you'd find on the web.

But maybe I'm missing something.

Problem With Newspapers: Their Content Is "Old News."

john adkisson — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:54:24 GMT

I still never go a day without reading my hometown Sacramento Bee. Sundays I never miss the New York Times. Most days I am able to read the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times and the San Francisco Chronicle. I'll keep reading them until they disappear. I'm a news junkie.

So I should be in the demographic most upset about the coming demise of the immensely pleasurable, hand held newspaper-- usually associated with in depth examination of current events, a cup of coffee and an easy chair.

A couple of years ago I would have been unable to imagine remaining an educated citizen without my daily newspapers -- and I don't mean the fake on-line kind. And when they go I will miss them.

But during the 2008 election I developed the internet bug for the first time. (OK, I'm an old fart.) CNN's quick summaries of news, Huffington Post's liberal-slanted entertainment version. Drudge's exploitative right wing version. Sites focusing on politics, polls, or state news. Eventually, I found dozens of sites (like this one) which I could zip through quickly until I figured I had enough news for the day. The Newshour usually filled the rest of my appetite for a civilized digestion of the issues.

The effect of this was to change the relationship I had with my morning newspaper. Now when I open it up I always feel as though I am reading yesterday's edition. Although there are the occasional details I pick up that I didn't find on-line or on television, the overall experience is less satisfying and I feel like turning on the damned computer before I leave for work.

Newspapers have been lamenting lost ad revenues for years -- but I don't think they have figured out why they have an irreparable problem. The main business of newspapers has always been that their content was "new," hence the word news. But newspapaers no longer have the newest information -- in fact, they have started to occupy the same niche that weekly news magazines once monopolized.

The core -- the essence -- of what makes information news is that it is new -- newer than the other guy's. This is why news outlets fight like dogs for exclusives that will get the jump on their competitors. Nowadays, with the exception of an occasional bomshell from a secret investigative report, newspapers always lose that battle.

I love newspapers -- even though they have become bearers of "old news."

Rotten internet!

What am I supposed to read with my coffee and with my feet up on my recliner in the morning?

I could live on Jezebel alone

Caerolle — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 19:55:47 GMT

It is kinda funny (sad?), but although i faithfully read my daily Times email, really i can get pretty much everything i want from Jezebel. Things i am interested in seem to show up there before they do on the general-interest sites (Yahoo and such) or more focused sites (DoubleX, Broadsheet, and such).

I do visit the general sites every little bit to see what is going on in the world. I have never really watched the evening news, and with the internet it is pretty much a waste of time (for me at least), to watch them, as everything they are going to say is something I already know, and i will have already read far more in-depth analysis on any of the topics i am interested in than they would ever have on the nightly new.

Methodology Issues

MacAdvisor — Mon, 20 Jul 2009 23:46:28 GMT

First, the experiment only tests the subjects informativeness AFTER the experimental run, not before. Thus, all the experiment may measure is how well informed or not the participants are in general, but not how well informed they are due to source material. The experiment should have anti and well as post testing.

Second, the testing itself may show source bias. Those who learn material from the web might be more informed about some subjects, while physical paper may better prep people on other subjects. One may learn about politics on the web better, but gardening is best learned through a local paper.

Third, there could be news bias. One might learn best about rapidly changing events on the web, but gain greater depth and understand of long-term trends from the news paper. Thus, what counts as being better informed? I am better read because I've read all of Shakespeare or is my friend Charles better read because he's read the top ten on the NYTimes best sellers list? Most people might say I was, but Charles can have conversations with more people because those books are more widely read today. Is knowing old things better than knowing current things?

Essentially, this is a meaningless test without good controls. The natural question then is why bother? If you aren't going to do the test in any meaningful way, why bother doing it at all? Seems more a journalistic stunt than real research. Come on, Kinsley, you're a Harvard man with letters from Oxford! You're a bit better than a badly-planned experiment or a journalistic stunt.

re brooks

papillon — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 16:50:38 GMT

'devastating' is defined by results, not effort. brooks just doesn't have that kind of heft.

Brooks Makes Up

viewpoint — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 08:43:04 GMT

Reading Brooks' harsh comparison of Obama with Bush, I thought he'd been leaned on for being too nice to Obama lately, even criticizing the Republicans. A bit is OK, but he's been looking like he's making up for all those years he bit his tongue (TO SUPPRESS THE TRUTH).

And then his off-beat episode describing sitting through dinner with some prominent Republican senator's hand on his inner thigh. All over the web. These things are not helping the Republican BRAND. David's got a lot to make up for, if he wants to stay on the team.

And if he'd rather have full intellectual freedom, he can leave the team. Media Matters might be able to use someone with his inside perspective.

I still see major differences between Obama and Bush.

We're asking the wrong question here.

Loki's Curse — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 14:36:30 GMT

It's not about print vs cyber, but rather about being informed as opposed to blatant ignorance about the rest of the world. This ignorance shows up, for example, in polls that reveal the number of Americans who still believe that Saddam had to do with 9/11 and the lack of knowledge about Europe revealed in the discourse about health care. How many Americans are unable to put a finger on Iraq or Afghanistan on a world map without searching?

Long live the Empire!

print vs. internet

david wayne osedach — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 13:55:33 GMT

I get the printed newspaper's Friday,Saturday, and Sunday and often find myself not reading most of the articles. I am more or less glued to the internet. And get bored with that too!

Brooks is not a friendly conservative.

Kimmitt — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 07:55:27 GMT

I deeply pity anyone who agrees that defying the will of 70%+ of the American population is a good idea.

Brooks is Brooks. He's rightly disregarded by people who give a crap about this country.

I'd like news that someone dug for.

Scoot'r-d — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 23:26:19 GMT

Nothing is more aggravating than news that is nothing more than superficial softball reporting. When issues are screaming for answers and the interviewer asks about anything but the controversies. When a news interview is more of a promotion event than an interrogative interview. When a news conference gets seeded with questions or questions are taken in advance and hand picked for replies.

First off it is obvious when the paper or the reporter is in cahoots with the story. It is obvious when a chosen group of reporters is provided access and other reporters are kept away. The white washing is painfully clear and the people look and are stupid to think that they are tricking anybody. And this is not about just Obama or national issues. I think it is everywhere. Newspapers do not do investigative reporting like they used to. They spoon us feature stories, human interest stories and story stories. There is no news with bite.

So people search for news using the web. It is not readily available and it is certainly not anywhere on the big 3 news channels. FOX digs for the stuff FOX wants and they do a better job than most but the presentation is like a circus side show.