the newspaper business

It has to be a boycott.

It has to be that state and local party bosses just hate newspapers so much that they steer candidates away from spending money with newspapers.

It has to be that advertising agencies hate newspapers.

It has to be that the political handlers hate newspapers.

Otherwise, why would statewide and national spend money to advertise in a X Box 360 video game and completely and totally ignore local newspaper readers?

We’re being punished.

It’s been payback time for decades, but I still hate it that state and national political candidates don’t see the value of reaching an informed electorate by using local newspapers.

Oh they still traipse in looking for endorsements and publicity for their projects - but that’s only so they can run out and buy more television time to tout the newspaper’s support.

I hate that.

Thanks Newcoma.

10. Finally: Newspaper companies hate modern journalism. Yes, that’s an enormously over-broad tarbrush, but this is a message I want to deliver via 2×4: Newspapers companies will not survive the transition to the multimedia future so long as the people within those companies oppose the rules, conventions and culture of that future. You’ll never successfully reinvent your company if you’re punishing the innovators, killing the messengers, rewarding the political infighters and sneering down your noses at the “pajamas-clad rabble” you blame for your troubles.

Nine more observations here, I agree with all ten.

The Paducah Sun calls itself the sponsor for an important debate between Senator Mitch McConnell and challenger Bruce Lunsford. McConnell is a 24 year veteran of the Senate, the highest ranking Republican.

But the Paducah Sun just doesn’t want anyone wandering in off the streets. So they are charging a $20 admission. No tickets will be sold at the door.

Nice. Things must be especially tough at the Paducah Sun if they need to use a political debate as a way to raise revenue.

I sure hope I find out their plans are to donate the money to the League of Women Voters or another nonpartisan organization.

I made a call to the Paducah Sun to see if I could find out who keeps the money and apparently only one person at the newspaper knows any details. She was unavailable. The newsroom clerk said she didn’t know of anybody in the newsroom that knew any of the details.

Sarah Palin, verbatim,  in her latest Fox News interview, with Carl Cameron,  which was meant to clear up some of “misunderstandings” in the Katie Couric sessions:

“As we send our young men and women overseas in a war zone to fight for democracy and freedoms, including freedom of the press, we’ve really got to have a mutually beneficial relationship here with those fighting the freedom of the press, and then the press, though not taking advantage and exploiting a situation, perhaps they would want to capture and abuse the privilege. We just want truth, we want fairness, we want balance.”

David Adams decided to hijack an innocuous post about “dead” banks lending money to “dead” newspapers and turn it into a rant about how the public should not have to pay for advertising public notices in the newspaper.

He called it a “long standing bailout.”

Others have joined the band-wagon and David Thompson, Kentucky Press Association Executive Director, tried to bring some rational thought to the posts.

It seemed better to continue this discussion here.

Here is a well-written commentary on the topic.

- - - - - - -

Public Notice: Taxpayers have a right to know

By Donnis Baggett
Editor-in-Chief
The Bryan-College Station Eagle

“Public notice.” Sounds great, but it costs money … at least in the print media. So why in the world should governmental entities spend taxpayers’ money on public notices when they can post them on the Internet for next to nothing?

Because the taxpayers have a right to know, have a need to know and want to know, that’s why. The argument is as simple as that.

Sure, a school district, a city, a county, a utility district or a state government can post legal notices online at little or no cost. But so what? If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear, does it make a sound? If a notice gets posted on an obscure Web site and taxpayers don’t think to look at the site, does the notice really matter?

Nope. That’s why newspaper notice is important.

The difference between governmental or third-party online-only postings and newspaper postings is very simple. It comes down to whether a reader — i.e., a taxpayer — has a reasonable opportunity to see the notice or not. If the notice is one that the reader must search for online, chances are it won’t be seen by very many of us who eventually pay the bills. It’s a simple readership issue — or, in Web-speak, a traffic issue.

That is the nut of the matter. If our government is based on transparency — and we like to think it is, despite all the open records and open meetings battles we fight every day — then our government’s actions need to be published in the most accessible form possible. The reality is that the most visible, endurable medium is still the printed newspaper, along with its associated Web products.

Most newspaper Web sites are the stars of the online market in their respective communities. Almost without exception, newspaper Web sites have more traffic than any other local or regional sites. Any “notice” that is posted independently online by a governmental entity or a vendor is likely to be read only by those who have a vested interest and are searching for notices of that sort. A published newspaper notice, on the other hand, is right there in black and white for anyone who reads the classified ads…and, in most cases, online as well.

Obviously, legal notices are a source of revenue for newspapers. But generally, they’re not our bread and butter. Most newspapers give the lowest rate available for these notices, and we’re happy to do so —not only because we make a little bit of money off the notices, but because they’ re an important part of the public record. And the public record is what newspapers protect and preserve every day, every week, every month and every year.

To relegate public notice to online services only would be a severe detriment to the people’s right — indeed, the people’s demand — to know what our government is up to. That is why we must continue to fight to maintain printed public notices. After all, information is power, and power determines the direction of our republic. To weaken that is to weaken our control over the government that we empower.