October 1, 2011 at 7:00 pm in INFORUM
It’s October, and change is in the air.
Tags: columns, Matthew Von Pinnon, Opinion 20 Comments »
Always fixing what ain’t broke. How about a mens section to go along with the women’s?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 67 8
No kidding. First Von Pinnon says the influence of women is at an all-time high. Well then perhaps they would like to be treated with respect by not having a section dedicated to menstruation and coupon-clipping??? If I were a woman I would be annoyed to open a newspaper and find a WOMAN section, as if I don’t know how to scan through a paper and pick out the articles I want to read by myself.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 64 5
LOL. Yep the newspaper industry isn’t broken. Not at all.
:: fingers in my ears ::
LA LA LA DEE DAH THINGS ARE FINE LAA DEE DAH.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 32 2
The broken part to which you refer is not what I meant. I meant the layout of the paper. The one sided bias for the democrat party will never be broken until people stop buying their product.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 18 3
Could be interesting. As long as you don’t take away my crossword!
Hot debate. What do you think? 17 17
I agree. Love the cryptoquip, too.
Like or Dislike: 9 4
Hidden due to low comment rating. Click here to see.
Changes upset and confuse the blue hairs and greedy geezers.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 20 41
They need a man to tell us about the new women’s section?
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 33 3
Why do you keeping changing the format? Just leave it alone! Every morning I open the front page to see the weather. Now, I have to dig through the whole thing to find the Sports page. You did this once before and no one liked it. Put the weather page back to the front page.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 42 2
the weather was NEVER on the front page. you had to ‘dig’ inside the main section to get there.
now its on the back of the sports page. zero digging required. flip the page over and viola.
nice job “thinking it out” before you posted.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 3 29
Did you actually read what I wrote? “open the front page” maybe I should have said “turn”the front page. Would that have made it easier for you to understand? You don’t have to look for the front page, you DO have to look for the Sports section.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 30 1
This is exciting news? It goes from bad to worse.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 38 2
I suppose the new section for the women is fine, but the other changes are absolutely terrible! Everything now seems like a jumble or sorts. Now I will have “two” sections that I won’t be reading. Not one of these women reporters have anything she could say that would be of any value or use to an older former combat Marine.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 33 4
Psssttt. They aren’t writing for you and they don’t care about you. The rest of the paper is for you, just like its always been. Content by dying old men, for dying old men, written by dying old men.
Just like it was back in my day.
Poorly-rated. Like or Dislike: 11 22
“Who let the dogs out?”
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 19 2
Hey I have an idea for the forum. Stick to news and try to get that right!!! Who needs a womans section or a variety section in a “NEWS PAPER”!!!
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 42 1
I must admit my initial reaction was simply a “meh” and I almost moved on. But there is something interesting here.
There’s an assumption at work in this new “women’s section” – an echo left by its very creation. Why would I create a new section specifically for half of my demographic? The only logical answer being that I feel they’re under-served. Or, conversely, that the other half of my demographic (men) are being over-served. A simple solution: add a counterweight! The heavier the better! Give them a segregated walled city where their culture can flourish without influencing ours. So with best intentions we arrive at today’s issue. A similar format, a similar voice; the same old house you’ve always known but now with a tree-fort in the back yard where the SheSays club can meet. Visions of the Little Rascals come to mind. Innocent sweetness with a touch of bitter.
Like or Dislike: 18 4
Newspapers are ‘broken’ all over this nation (perhaps the world). They’re all desperately trying to maintain some semblance of ‘print’ editions but can’t because of the inter-net. New, goofy sections, bizarre columnist etc are just part of that effort
It’s quick, easier, faster, plus 99% of the ‘old’ print news is still ridiculously mega, ultra, uber left wing; at least the net’ is closer to 50-50.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 17 2
Much cheaper to throw a few bucks at some biddies and let them write about bridesmaids dresses than to actually spend time on the phone or sniffing out a real story.
Well-loved. Like or Dislike: 38 0
If any og you Forum editors read this You can get rid of the variety section and put back the Life section with every thing that was in it. the new variety section is mostly classified so might as well be named classified. The new womens section is something I would have expected to find in a small town local newspaper back in the 1930’s. Just bring back the old format.
Like or Dislike: 9 0
Click here to cancel reply.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
To start connecting please log in first. You can also create an account.
Topics is proudly provided by the Forum Communications Company