-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
How lazy we are to not be able to hold up a newspaper.
-
I think it has more to do with the ease of access and expense. You could to wait for the paper to get to your home (if delivered) or just pull out your phone to get news.Something also needs to be said about pricing; News on the internet is "free". It may not be the best however.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
If journalism is so important and capitalism is 'bad,' what difference does it make? Do it for love. Do it for the people. That's enough, right? (Progressives want their cake and to eat it too.)
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
And that was the problem. Newspapers were STILL selling a lot of ads in 2006, a decade after they had been told the internet would kill their business model.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Not caused by changing media. Digital & cable do not cover local news. Local TV has been around for decades. What's changed is "journalists" became unable to set aside liberal activism. Every story in the paper has a liberal bent, every one, even the weather.
- End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
when radio came, people said newspapers were dead...nope...when TV came, people said newspapers were dead...nope...when the internet came, people said newspapers were dead...yep...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
is the drop in revenues a consequence of
#fakenews?Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This is part of Putin's plan. Only the rich can afford real news. The rest of us pay for what we get. Nothing for nothing leaves nothing.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.