MSM journalism: the first draft of revisionist history.

I think the turning point came when journalism ceased to be a trade and became a profession. I'm unsure exactly when that happened; probably in the 60's or 70's.

Reporters traditionally came from the working class and got hired by newspapers because they wanted to report the news and had a talent for writing.

Nowadays starry-eyed youngsters pursue degrees in Journalism because they want to Change the World.

I think he meant to write..."truth is eternal but my metaphors are ever shifting..."

You nailed 'em;

Also helpful to remember that these are the noble print warriors for truth who couldn't get their heads into the sand fast enough during the Mohammed Cartoons "crisis." And then had the balls to come out with an editorial frumping and harumphing about respect for religion....snore..begone ye gnats of nothingness...

I've said it before and I'll say it again: I wouldn't mind the slant if the so-called "journalists" would get off their lazy butts and do their jobs the way they should. I've seen lazy writing. I've committed lazy writing. I know how it looks. And if you add lazy writing to lazy reporting and lazy arguments, you get the crap that is modern newspapers.

In contrast, I've seen good reporting— mostly online these days, but once or twice in an "alternative" paper. Those reporters go out and pound the pavement, look at what they're actually seeing, and refuse to draw conclusions until they actually have information. It's amazing what a difference that makes.

Excellent points, all, and they make me wonder... is there an overlooked opportunity in newspapers?

Is there some virtue that the printed page has that the on-screen page can't duplicate? A strength that a savvy businessman could take advantage of to run a successful, profitable, and growing newspaper?

I don't know the business well enough to guess at the answer. I'd be interested in your thoughts.

The death of the newspapers is, IMO, a great tragedy. I used to love reading the paper back in the 50s. In the 70s, even when they started becoming liberal propaganda rags, I liked them because they still had enough decent reporting.

I became more disgusted during the Clinton years, but since Bush was elected and 9/11 occurred, I just can't abide the torrent of in your face left wing propaganda. What also torques me off is that they have the hypocrisy to claim to be objective. I would have more respect for papers like the Seattle Times and the Post Intelligencer if they would openly declare that they are pushing socialist objectives and quit trying to pose as objective purveyors of truth.

After Abu Ghraib I quit the Times and seldom read a paper now. I actually miss the experience of holding those pages in my hands and leisurely scanning through them. But, like a romance gone permanently sour, I doubt if I'll ever subscribe to a newspaper again.

There used to be nothing as delicious as sitting down on a cold morning with a cup a' joe and reading the newspaper. This was when writers were more than writers. The little left-leaning lame brains coming out of J schools are not what I had in mind. They and their ilk have destroyed an institution so central to our lives past that it completely sickens me. That's OK - give it a little time and they'll all be selling vacuum cleaners for a living. H.L. Mencken, where are you when we need you? Instead we have Keith Olbermann. Barrff.

Yes, there are things that newspapers are good for that the internet will never match. I know it for certain.
We're currently housetraining two golden retriever pups. Newspaper's the only way to go. Really.

Nice job, GVDL. I love it when you agree with me and write about it; saves me time and energy, and the end product is better. :-)

To rickl #2:
That moment would be Watergate, more or less. So I've read, anyway. J-School didn't really exist until after then, and then Journalism became a celebrated end in itself instead of something you did *after* you became educated in something, anything, that you could write about with authority. That model doesn't seem to be working too well ...