Re: [Leica] Re: NY Times

["Steve LeHuray" <icommag@toad.net>]

Donal,
I am not sure how to reply to this as my original post was about how Formula
1 photographers are making a significant amount of money. So, as far as my
comment about the NYT being a liberal paper I should say that i am more
conservative than liberal, and as the owner/publisher/editor of a monthly
film trade magazine (www.icommag.com for those who wish to look, but the
print version is much better) my basic philosophy will always remain that
"editorial is the key to the universe" meaning that readers respond to
excellent editorial, which drives up the readership, which drives up the
advertising revenue. My thoughts were formed many years ago when, because I
hated school I did not go on to college, I served an old-fashioned
apprenticeship for four years on a small daily newspaper in upstate New York
learning the soup-to-nuts in every department. Back then the advt. to edit
ratio was 40-60% today it has reversed to 60-40%. So I am not here to argue
with anything that you say, except, as individuals we do not HAVE to listen
to the MBA's, we have choices. As far as I am concerned "editorial is the
key to the universe" and my advt. to edit ratio continues to be 40-60%.
Steve (who wishes he had the money for a 50/1.4) LeHuray
Annapolis


- ----------
>From: Donal Philby <donalphilby@earthlink.net>
>To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
>Subject: Re: [Leica] Re: NY Times
>Date: Wed, May 10, 2000, 12:03 PM
>

>> 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
>
>