I should have mentioned this yesterday, but I didn’t want to bury my other post so soon.
Tim over at A Progressive on the Prairie has a nicely (and much better worded) view and critique of the recent Vilhauer vs. Argus three-part discussion. And because I always want to get my name out in the public, I’m giving you the link and instructing you to go READ READ READ!
From A Progressive on the Prairie:
Still, the problem from my perspective — and Vilhauer’s, I think — is that I get the Argus to read a newspaper, not because the paper wants me to look at its web site. The “Web first, paper second” seems antithetical to the reason most people get newspapers. If I wanted to use my laptop to read the news while I’m drinking coffee (and doing “other things”) in the morning, I wouldn’t subscribe to begin with. Maybe I am too old, but to me the purpose of a newspaper is to put “news” in the reader’s hands, not send them elsewhere to get it. And why go online for more photos of strangers’ dogs and anonymous comments on message boards?
Still, kudos to Lalley and Villhauer for feudin’ respectfully about something I know has been a topic of a lot of discussion in this area. And there is one unquestionable benefit of the change in format. I have more free time in the morning as it now takes me about five minutes to read the paper once I get past Section A.
Thanks for the kind words! (Though I notice Black Marks on Wood Pulp is missing from your blogroll. You might want to check that out – someone may have accidentally deleted it!)
In all seriousness, however, I’m glad to see I’m not the only one with these opinions. I think the approval rating of the paper has gone down significantly, especially since the recent change. I understand Lalley’s point – business first, decisions based on readership, etc. – but it still saddens me.
Enough of this. Doesn’t anyone want to complain about the most recent Pacers trade? Ew!