How can newspapers (both offline and online) compete with new media, whilst making money?
It isn't a great time for print publishing. While there are publishers out there (books, magazines and newspapers) who are making money and may even be experience growth it's only because the market is shrinking for these products. Newspapers and magazines are facing the worst of this because they're harder to read than say through an iPad, phone or computer and they're not retained like a printed book. Instead newspapers are disposed of easily. However, like any product it can be diversified and there are things that newspapers can be used for that electronic media cannot. By departing away from news (because news can now appear online) printed newspapers could look at market places that need easily disposable materials. Such as, as outlandish as it may sound, camping. A newspaper aimed at the camper with instructions on how to build a fire in the rain, or how to smoke meat that can then be used as a firestarter would pose a cheaper option and a useful tool. If the newspaper industry is going to save its printed self it needs to look at making the product- paper- more applicable and useful. Creative thinking and adaptation is needed.
Why are mainstream journalists increasingly writing more news content that is at the very least sensationalized, often misleading, and at times downright false? I'm keen to hear how the declining few remaining honest journalists feel about this.
While I respect your views, I do not necessarily share them, especially the part about the “few remaining honest journalists.” I wonder if perhaps you have become immersed in the world of right-wing media, which repeatedly positions itself as the only brave truth-teller, when in fact its commentators and opinion writers often cherry-pick facts or intentionally distort quotes in order to make partisan points. (In fairness, a few extreme left-wing sites do this too. But in recent years, it has become much more common on the conservative side.)There is absolutely NO evidence that most mainstream journalists are dishonest, contrary to what Donald Trump or the commentators on Fox News would tell you. And there is also no evidence that most journalists are intentionally seeking to mislead you. Actually, most journalists are thoroughly trained and hardworking; they do their level best to gather and report the facts of the story. Do they ever get it wrong? Of course; they’re human and people can make mistakes. But good journalists will acknowledge an error and then correct it. My point is it’s never done intentionally.But you are right about some of the headlines, which can at times be sensationalized. That’s a very old custom, intended to get people’s attention so they would (in the old days) buy the paper at the news-stand, or (in our internet world) immediately click on the website and read it. Reporters generally do not write the headlines. And more than one of us has been puzzled or even upset by a headline we felt did not accurately reflect what we wrote. (Talking to the editor often helps, and headlines can be changed.) Still, my impression, both as a media historian and as a free-lance writer, is that things are not anywhere nearly as bad as you seem to believe, and there are a large number of credible reporters out there doing their jobs every day.
Is it irresponsible to quit all news consumption?
No. News is primarily consumed as entertainment, even when its subject is serious. While many regular watchers/readers of the news would disagree with that assessment, the fact remains that the news rarely provides individuals with information relevant to making decisions in their daily lives.News is biased. Not just in the obvious FOX/NBC way, but in a more fundamental way. The items presented on the news are newsworthy. Meaning not normal. People who consume a lot of news have their view of reality distorted by all of the exceptional circumstances being reported. Crime in America is at one of the lowest points in history, but people assume otherwise because the television shows them all the bad things happening without ever showing the counter-examples of countless people who were not shot or robbed in the last week.News consumption leads to fear, anger, and frustration. If you value these mental states, then you should seek out more news. If not, then skipping news might be good for your mental health.
H&R block Emerald Card... How to take all money off?
You must be really crazy! Before even loading that much $ on that card, first question you should have asked is if I can take all my money out at once? How much would I be charged for that? Don't blame the Block for that. They take advantage of people like you, ...ignorant, freaking uneducated, unresponsible! You should have got a check from them! The check has one time charge, my niece just cashed her check of $5864 at Wal Mart for about $5. Read your freaking card fees that comes with client tax folder. Do not do ATM transactions because you're probably going to be charged double (Bank ATM and the Block)- about $4-6 each transactions. The best way you can get your money out small by small not paying much is going grocery stores, walmart or other big box stores and use your freaking card as a debit card and then the cashier will ask you if you want cash back and then you ask them what is the daily limit and you should get the maximum daily amount allowed. If the stores don't give you money with no transaction, buy something you need from store... a gum, candy bar-$0.99 etc., If you don't find my advise is not very helpful, call/visit tomorrow the Block office and ask them. Good Luck!
What is a paid item fee on a bank statement?
That is when something was debited on your account and there was not enough money to cover it. The bank then pays it and turns around and charges you an extra fee usually around $35. So say you charged 50 to your account and there was only $10 in it. The bank pays the 50 and puts your account at a negitive $75. They will charge that for how ever many items come in that are not covered by your funds. So if they paid three items you can be charged the fee for each item.
People leaving dog poop on common areas at condo...breaking association and town rules..how to train owners?
Most of the people that live at our condo complx are very responsible dog owners with well trained dogs, and carry their own baggies. The association is against putting up "doggie pick up stations" like at parks, assuming the responsible people are OK, and it won't cure the irresponsible ones, and will add unfair extra cost for own non-pet-owner residents. We've tried notices in our association newsletter, they've ignored. I put up "curb you dog" signs in my window, they left fresh big poops below the sign. I put the sign in my car by the fields, they keyed my car. I've talked to the township, but they said we need pictures and "evidence" in order to press charges. We talked to some of the people personally, only to get nasty comebacks or lame excuses of "bad back" or "bags in the mail". Finally I tied up baggies to the courtyard lighting and trees, but this could get me in trouble for putting items in common areas. Any way to train these owners NICELY?
What is the best way to check fake news?
1. When you see anything that seems “too good to be true,” be suspicious. By “too good,” I mean its view is black and white — all good on one side or one party, all bad on the other. Life is rarely like that.2. Be especially suspicious of “background reports.” “When Hillary Clinton was 25, she…”. Why would you just be hearing about this NOW?3. Ask yourself “What group or party stands to gain from this news?” And if it is a group or party that is repeatedly favored on the network you’re watching, be suspicious.4. Don’t trust — verify. Anything you see on the news is now checked out by other sources. Politico. Fact Check. Snopes.com. Here’s a list: Evaluating Sources in a ‘Post-Truth’ World: Ideas for Teaching and Learning About Fake News (Evaluating Sources in a ‘Post-Truth’ World: Ideas for Teaching and Learning About Fake News)5. Don’t believe anything your friends tell you they “just heard from a friend!” Real news is repeated with solemnity. Fake news is repeated with glee.6. Understand this: A) some media organizations SOMETIMES print fake news but they try to avoid it by fact-checking. When fake news gets through their filter, they apologize, retract the story, and sometimes fire an editor. (Most newspapers and major networks do this.) B) some media organizations REGULARLY print fake news — they do not fact check, retract, or apologize. (Highly political media is in this category.). C). Some websites OFTEN print fake news and even make it up to suit their agenda. D) News satire — The Onion, the Borowitz Report and others — is often so close to the truth that it seems real. Many fake news items started out as jokes but gullible people believed them. Learn to laugh at the world.Good luck. This will not be on the test. This IS the test — of democracy.WELCOME (https://www.theattic.space/about...) to The Attic — for a kinder, cooler America
How can we engage more people in the democratic process?
As a parent of 2 teenage daughters, I hear the frustration they share with "rigged class elections, popularity vs. content, etc." within their own peer elections. I worry that our youth is missing the truth and honor of "personal integrity" and need to learn democratic integrity first from their parents and then from public role models such as teachers, community leaders and elected officials. The democratic process should begin in the home with active parenting; not passive or dictactorship styles. Active parenting provides a forum to share and to hear ideas, solutions, praise, criticism, etc. as well as an understanding that one's ideas should always be heard, considered and respected, but not necessarily always taken. This foundation then naturally expands into school where teachers may mirror this type of democratic atmoshere. Additionally, I feel more demonstrative practice is needed within the school system in order for our youth to understand the democratic process on a personalized local level. Washington is far away; OUR community is right in front of us. One solution may be to link community leaders with schools and to openly invite ideas, internship-for-a-day programs or other activities that marry "the process" with a reality that children understand. If the democratic process is understood and actively demonstrated locally then a national understanding is more easily comprehended. Of course all ages need to be engaged with this process. If we educate and engage at a younger age, it is a natural concequence that the democratic process will continue well into young adulthood and beyond. The age of 18 gives our youth the right to vote and to be a legal adult; if their upbringing engaged the democratic process, then our Leaders-of-Tomorrow will continue and expand the democratic process.