Fresno Famous

my problem with news is that they have become too chummy

with the people & orgs they report on, don't research important stories or they report on nonsense
Clinton's indiscretions with Monica
Bush 43 had it easy his 1st 6 years
didn't report on Enron until too late
shenanigans in Bakersfield by Texaco

people are saying that newspapers go more in-depth, then why did Jon Stewart do a better job in 8 minutes,
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=220252&title=cnbc-...

than McClatchy's Bee's, LATimes, NYTimes, Wash Post, WSJ or CNBC, NBC, CBS, TIME, NEWSWEEK, 60 Minutes did?
all of which are now going after the messiors, after the fact
isn't that called, "closing the barn door, after the horses have run away"?
Great job y'all, wonder why you're losing $$$
.
.
.
......................
welcome to the future

oh edward ....

tv stations are losing money just like newspapers.

and yes, TV reporters win sometimes.

but we win more.

i'd be scared of a world where the only "reporters" work for tv stations.

oh michael

so, we are supposed to believe that only newspapers have these strange things called "reporters" that do research on stories? horseshit.

if ksee24 went out of business who would the bee steal all their content about the police beating from?

i'm not saying newspapers are bad. in fact, i love the online content provided by many of them. but papers in the biggest cities struggle because they're still using a model that has been hemorrhaging cash for quite some time.

yeah, ed ...

But who is TV news going to steal its stories from?

okay

so, if the newspapers fold, and take their articles, we'll still have...wait for it...television news. and the internet. and advertising on both. whether or not a fishwrap gets thrown on your doorstop or not, the news will still be available.

" 'Online content can never

" 'Online content can never approach the in-depth, lengthy articles of hard copy.' why not? are articles written on news websites not as in depth or reliable? i mean, i can read full length articles on the latimes.com or fresnobee.com and it's the exact same article as the one in the print edition."

Yes---but if the Fresno Bee folds...so folds its Web site.

Advertising--not subscription sales--is a newspapers main source of income. And when a paper like the Bee is part of a larger chain (in the Bee's case, McClatchy) it not only has to pull its own weight financially, but also help out with the dollars and cents end of things for the corporation as well.

while Bill Maher may be funny

I don't take him seriously
he is a comedian, a clown if you will
dressed in suit & tie he may look official
but hey, if you believe him for anything, I got a bridge to sell,
Monterey Street Bridge, cheap, near housing & hiways
.
.
......................
welcome to the future

Whers the local news????

It's true the Bee offers very little local. Most national stuff is filler items. Stuff LA or SF has printed a week before.

The newspaper legacy

A.) You make a good a point about newspapers needing to look at their business model. This is not a readership problem, it's a revenue problem.

B.) But I do think that on-line news sources (those not connected to news organizations) and television and radio news in their current forms don't do the in-depth reporting that newspapers do, and the disappearance of newspaper as a whole would leave a tangible void. Of course, that void would create opportunities for someone with a workable business plan, so ...

on the other hand

see, i don't this, "Online content can never approach the in-depth, lengthy articles of hard copy." why not? are articles written on news websites not as in depth or reliable? i mean, i can read full length articles on the latimes.com or fresnobee.com and it's the exact same article as the one in the print edition. in fact, i would say that online articles can go into greater depth because the cost of putting something online is greatly cheaper than printing and delivering.

i don't think newspapers should disappear, but i do think that all print media needs to re-evaluate their business model. television news services have had to rethink things and consider the online availability. maybe they were able to do so because they haven't been around as long, and they (networks) already had to adjust with cable news services. perhaps newspapers are dinosaurs or dodo birds, unable to change fast enough.

but if they did disappear, it's not like the entire news media would. just because the rocky mountain news died doesn't mean that people in the area can't get news. in fact, there still is another newspaper in the area in addition to all of the television and internet news sources.

hard copy of the paper

Here's what I *don't* want first thing in the morning---
to be booting up the computer, hoping the connection won't be slow, fighting a virus,
etc etc.

I want to walk out bleary-eyed and half-awake,
pick up the paper from the cold sidewalk and read the thing with my breakfast.

More local is always better

Maybe it sounds weird coming from a blogger but I only read the hard copy of the Bee. The only time I go to the Bee's site is when I need to find a link for a blog post. I get the Bee every day and there's something nice about having it waiting for me on my front porch and that I can carry it around with me.

Long live hard copy!
------
www.thefresnan.com

I agree

I agree that they need to focus more on local events and news.
Tell us more about what is happening here. The good and the bad.

I hope the Bee doesn't fold

I hope the Bee doesn't fold like so many other newspapers across the US. It has a wealth of information and opinion. The instant, quickie, short-sighted folks don't get it. Online content can never approach the in-depth, lengthy articles of hard copy. I cut out the articles and editorial cartoons and share them. The thing I like the most about the Fresno Bee is that it is an island of Democratic voice in a sea of Republican rhetoric in Fresno.