Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/05/10

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: NY Times
From: Donal Philby <donalphilby@earthlink.net>
Date: Wed, 10 May 2000 16:03:58 +0000
References: <4.1.20000510155614.02ce09e0@gateway.photoaccess.com>

> At 05:59 PM 5/10/00 -0400, Steve LeHuray wrote:
> 
> >I would think a liberal paper like that would treat their people better.
> >
Steve,
Two thoughts:
First is that traditionally newspaper publishers have been pretty
conservative, but the staffs (staves, rhymes with slaves?)  have not.  

Second, the conglomerate mentality has taken over the magazine and
newspaper business with a vengence.  What this means is a change from
publications being owned and operated by those who care about the
publication and its quality with a passion (my own father was an example
of someone who thought all towns deserved a great paper and owned or
edited quite a few during his lifetime, and was willing to sacrifice
whatever it took to do good work), to the standard now with accountants
and "managers" who only see with short-term  bottom line vision and
probably couldn't tell or care about quality content if they saw it.  

We are no longer photographers or writers, but "content providers" in
the venacular. 

Newspapers are a business, but a business that has lost perspective and
ethics.  Who was it said you could have a free press without democracy,
but you couldn't have democracy without a free press?  The conflicts of
interest at work in the media today give true democracy a very dim
future in the US, and probably around the world.  

What has this to do with paying for web useage?  It is a subtle symptom
of a disease.

Ouch! Damn! Soapbox I was standing on just collapsed.  

So should I trade my 'cron ASPH for a 'lux?

donal


- -- 
__________
Donal Philby
San Diego
www.donalphilby.com

In reply to: Message from Jim Brick <jimbrick@photoaccess.com> ([Leica] Re: NY Times)