A recent article about the rails-to-trails movement, accompanied by a color photo of --- wait for it -- the C&O Canal towpath!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It bothers me to see people here trying to outdo one another by how little they pay to get a subscription. You are the problem. I go out of my way to subscribe to other newspapers that I rarely look at just to support them.

If you agree having a free press is important, why aren't you paying for it?

Thank you. I’m a journalist, not for the Post, but completely agree with its tagline: Democracy dies in darkness. I think the Post does a decent job with national and international news, but am saddened by the continued decline in local news.

Post’s international coverage is third rate.

Compared to what? Also buy a friggin subscription. If more people paid, they could afford to cover more things. The limiting factor for all newspapers is the number of subscribers. None of it works if readers don’t pay. Selling ads amounts to shit.

Compared to the BBC, DW, The NY Times, wsj, Etc.
If the Post wants more people to pay, they need to put out a better product. I was a ten year subscriber until 4 months ago. I cancelled because I became unimpressed with reporting that made every story an editorial. I frankly felt insulted reading it. I love newspapers by the way (even though I recognize they are a dying industry). I now subscribe to the NYT and WSJ.

I subscribed for about 20 years. Most of that for the WaPo’s print copy. The local coverage is what ultimately made me cancel it. The education coverage in 2020 was so incredibly biased. It was just regurgitating whatever FCPS put out in a press release or just interviewing random people. Zero actual reporting that required any further work. And the rest of the local section was extremely thin. I was just too fed up after awhile to keep giving $.

I subscribe to the NYT now. I don’t expect local coverage (of course) from them so I’m not disappointed there is none.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't subscribe to newspapers who complain about the news should shut the fkcu up. You're part of the problem.

No, we should not. Sorry you don't like the stance or the opinion. I would tell you that it is you that should SFTU but its easier to let you keep talking so people see what you say and make up their own mind, like a adult would.

You are a freeloader. If you don’t pay, then don’t read (and definitely don’t complain). Newspapers are not charities.

You’re correct, they are not charities. I used to gladly pay for several. I did this not because of “democracy” but because I wanted real news, excellent writing, excellent analysis, and some storytelling. I’ve dropped all of my subscriptions over the past several years. Today’s 4,000-word (?) essay in the NYT by an actual staff editor about whether Taylor Swift is sending her coded clues about bisexuality is a perfect example of failing on all fronts — bad writing, bad thinking to the point of possible mental health delusion, bad editing. Pathetic and depressing.

I saw a comment online about the 5k- word Taylor Swift sexuality fan fic fever dream essay in the NYT that said: I once thought being a writer or editor at the NYT was for the smartest and most talented.

This person is right — it once was! Ditto the Post, etc. And they aren’t anymore. Those days have been gone for nearly two decades.

The bananas Swift essay is the sort of reporting and writing (or the Post piece on the dishwashers, or the NPR piece on trans people in California’s wine industry, and a million more examples) is the wildly dumbed down and irrelevant journalism that’s everywhere.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't subscribe to newspapers who complain about the news should shut the fkcu up. You're part of the problem.

No, we should not. Sorry you don't like the stance or the opinion. I would tell you that it is you that should SFTU but its easier to let you keep talking so people see what you say and make up their own mind, like a adult would.

You are a freeloader. If you don’t pay, then don’t read (and definitely don’t complain). Newspapers are not charities.

You’re correct, they are not charities. I used to gladly pay for several. I did this not because of “democracy” but because I wanted real news, excellent writing, excellent analysis, and some storytelling. I’ve dropped all of my subscriptions over the past several years. Today’s 4,000-word (?) essay in the NYT by an actual staff editor about whether Taylor Swift is sending her coded clues about bisexuality is a perfect example of failing on all fronts — bad writing, bad thinking to the point of possible mental health delusion, bad editing. Pathetic and depressing.

Taylor Swift writes all her lyrics. If you take every fifth word from any song and recite them backward, they summon one of the elder Gods.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It bothers me to see people here trying to outdo one another by how little they pay to get a subscription. You are the problem. I go out of my way to subscribe to other newspapers that I rarely look at just to support them.

If you agree having a free press is important, why aren't you paying for it?

+1

I subscribe to eight newspapers.

People who brag about not reading newspapers sound to me like people bragging about how much junk food they eat. Congratulations?

Sure there is a free press in the US. Supporting it is not mandatory. The Soviets had to support Pravda. But I don't have to support WaPo or the NYT. If you choose to, that's all good with me. If you can subscribe to 8 papers, you must have alot of disposable income.

DP, but the Post is $29 a year. I also get the Los Angeles Times online for $12 a year and the Wall Street Journal online for $52 for a year. That's a grand total of $93 for three papers — not exactly the kind of annual expense that requires you to be rolling in cash. I do also get the Sunday NYT delivered to my house, which is several hundred dollars a year, so that IS more expensive, but none of this is totally cost-prohibitive.

And yet, they still sell advertising space. If you can't break even selling ads AND charging for your product, you are doing something wrong.

Anonymous wrote:How about Phil Bump’s moronic piece on whenter white people have black friends. WTF.

Sounds like something DCUM's finest would write a thread about. Scolding white people for not having any POC at their wedding, or some such nonsense. Meanwhile, it's a-ok for POC not to have any white people at their wedding. So predictably stupid.

Anonymous wrote:What is the Posts obsession with race? You cannot seem to go by a day without some piece on race in America. Paper is garbage.

+1
And sexuality/gender/ethnicity, etc. I posted about this a few months ago on a different thread, but I noticed the difference between the WaPo and WSJ immediately. The WaPo deliberately weaves in race, gender, etc. issues to *every* article. They cannot just write a piece without making some sort of -ism the focus. The WSJ, on the other hand, will take a story about real estate, for example, and cite several couples. Tim and his husband David, or Jane and her partner Stella, for instance. (Or Sally and her husband Pete, etc. you get the point) That's the only reference to their sexuality. Just an intro to cover the basics. They never patronize their audience, they simply state the facts, interview a wide range of people, and get on with it.

How about Phil Bump’s moronic piece on whenter white people have black friends. WTF.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't subscribe to newspapers who complain about the news should shut the fkcu up. You're part of the problem.

No, we should not. Sorry you don't like the stance or the opinion. I would tell you that it is you that should SFTU but its easier to let you keep talking so people see what you say and make up their own mind, like a adult would.

You are a freeloader. If you don’t pay, then don’t read (and definitely don’t complain). Newspapers are not charities.

You’re correct, they are not charities. I used to gladly pay for several. I did this not because of “democracy” but because I wanted real news, excellent writing, excellent analysis, and some storytelling. I’ve dropped all of my subscriptions over the past several years. Today’s 4,000-word (?) essay in the NYT by an actual staff editor about whether Taylor Swift is sending her coded clues about bisexuality is a perfect example of failing on all fronts — bad writing, bad thinking to the point of possible mental health delusion, bad editing. Pathetic and depressing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But where will Taylor Lorenz suffer her oh so public covid panic attacks???

It’s incredible that they let 240 people go and she’s still there. She’s got to have dirt on the publisher.

She's horrific. I've felt a responsibility to support WaPo as the local newspaper, but I cannot stomach subscribing to any institution that would have her on staff.

She cannot be relegated to the waste bin of history fast enough. Awful human being and a total fraud.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But where will Taylor Lorenz suffer her oh so public covid panic attacks???

It’s incredible that they let 240 people go and she’s still there. She’s got to have dirt on the publisher.

She's horrific. I've felt a responsibility to support WaPo as the local newspaper, but I cannot stomach subscribing to any institution that would have her on staff.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But where will Taylor Lorenz suffer her oh so public covid panic attacks???

It’s incredible that they let 240 people go and she’s still there. She’s got to have dirt on the publisher.

She is an absolute scumbag.

Even the sports columnists cannot help but show their left leaning biases. Srvluga, Blackistone - all awful.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People who don't subscribe to newspapers who complain about the news should shut the fkcu up. You're part of the problem.

No, we should not. Sorry you don't like the stance or the opinion. I would tell you that it is you that should SFTU but its easier to let you keep talking so people see what you say and make up their own mind, like a adult would.

You are a freeloader. If you don’t pay, then don’t read (and definitely don’t complain). Newspapers are not charities.

No, I chose not to support businesses that hate me. There are alot of ways to consume news these days. Sorry newspapers have become irrelevant.

I think the problem here is that you're an idiot. But, please, feel free to get all your news from your neighbor's slow cousin's blog. Sounds like that's more your speed anyway.

WaPo is your neighbor’s slow cousin’s blog. It’s non-stop woke nonsense. Gone are the days of the Bandwagon, Boswell and decent albeit left leaning reporting. Now it reads like a college newspaper.