tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18171692.post2739549226466490189..comments2023-10-03T12:20:53.726-04:00Comments on ¡Cecilieaux!: The Information-free SocietyCecilio Moraleshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05283375962527765787noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18171692.post-86156637267396142552016-03-10T20:25:56.330-05:002016-03-10T20:25:56.330-05:00You were a semiologist and you didn't know it!...You were a semiologist and you didn't know it!!! <br />I totally agree with your post. Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00571900290548639016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18171692.post-10320018359764149512007-05-10T17:10:00.000-04:002007-05-10T17:10:00.000-04:00Oooh I just wrote about yellow journalism (obvious...Oooh I just wrote about yellow journalism (obviously from the reader POV). ITA about broadcast news.<BR/><BR/>In the same way police changed from "public servants" to "public enemy" in many people's POVs, reporters have morphed in most people's opinion from "friendly conveyor of important information" to "person out to Get Me."<BR/><BR/>I think you are right: it's from tabloid and television.<BR/><BR/>Paper to electronic media is a problem for all types of publishing. As is the mindset of "no time to learn the information" and "no interest in information I think is outside my immediate sphere."<BR/><BR/>Then there's "no actual information that I really believe in the news...I take it with a grain of salt" mentality that detracts.<BR/><BR/>And all the points you make.<BR/><BR/>I wonder what the solution is.<BR/><BR/>I tried to dig down to the bottom of completely contrasting allegations and defense between two mayoral candidates---the media had no interest since it wasn't even covered---and could not.<BR/><BR/>Excellent post!Julie Pipperthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03169574697104642479noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-18171692.post-65489374024438675612007-04-29T11:25:00.000-04:002007-04-29T11:25:00.000-04:00Two comments: ~People who complain about frontpag...Two comments: ~People who complain about frontpage news (content, photos, headlines) do not read pages 2, 3, 5, 7, 10, etc.<BR/><BR/>~ People who _do_ subscribe and read newspapers are inundated with piles of junk paper which in this day and age supports a scandal of waste. I wish there was a way for the readership to be selective in their subcriptions as to choice of sections that are most important to them, especially in the major 'papers. Cost may go up to offset ads' but it would be worth it.<BR/><BR/>*Time* to read, or lack of it is a major reason why people hit the internet briefs. If people who want indepth coverage could receive the main section and commentary and forego the chitchatty sections and not see piles of unread papers waiting to be tossed, maybe subscriptions would increase. Perhaps the computer-age will facilitate this for publishers.<BR/><BR/>My brother who is the most (of all the sibs) like me in in religious observance is completely different in our belief in how our ideals play out in the political and social realm. Because he is (literally) busier than me, Fox (or a cloned source) is his translator. It's disheartening, for me, that he can't read between the lines.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com