I'd like to address the plight of the WSJ and other newspapers by arguing that newspapers have brought about their own demise by downsizing on news and upsizing on advertisements. My hometown Newspaper, "The Gainesville Sun" decided around the year 2000 to cut the size of the newspaper by a third. Ostensibly, the cut was motivated by concerns regarding the cost of paper. As one would expect, the advertisements and news stories were not downsized equally. Now I have a newspaper that manages to fit in only about ten to twelve pages in the main section, of which half are advertisements. The stories which it manages to keep are mostly contributions from the AP. I give this insight to show just how local newspapers (small newspapers, at least) have failed to provide us with adequate news articles. It is no surprise, then, that a significant portion of the readership has drifted to the internet with its wealth of offerings. I find going online to get my news rather annoying, actually. I would much rather have a thick newspaper with real news over breakfast. After all, isn't an attentive and diligent reader more valuable to the advertiser than is the one who just glances at headlines? It seems that the former avails more opportunities for product delivery. Thus, I reiterate, that the newspapers bring about their own demise by alienating people who are actually interested in READING them.

But on the other hand, Newspapers shouldn't be too worried. NY Times online probably garners higher revenues than the paper edition due to the interactivity of the adds. Think of the clicks...

forgot to post my nom.