(Mr. EUGENE DEBS is a very talented but also very frustrating young fellow. I don't know where he is or what he's doing, although I gather he's in some kind of hell. Nothing new there. He sent us the following:)The slow motion death of the American newspaper industry is already well documented; I keep expecting to one day wake up to a 72-point banner headline reading simply "BRAINNNS!" (with an insightful Lifestyle-section guide to preparation and garnishing by Martha Stewart).
But some people keep expecting more of the wheezing pre-decedent; for example, Brad DeLong is always asking "Why oh why can't we have a better press corps?", which is, I suppose, not a bad question and deserves an answer.
And here it is: because the readership wouldn't notice.
Exhibit A: The Register recently published a story on the Lt. Dan Choi mess, for which it solicited a comment from the Center for Military Readiness, a non-stop single-issue homo-free military PR shop (motto: "Virgin Cosmopolitans, Prayerful Celibacy, and the Lash"). Its president, Elaine Donnelly, obliged with a sentence of copy so inane the reporter had to resort to something I've only rarely seen in print:
"If you're too old, too young, if you have a medical condition, there are many reasons people are ineligible to be in the armed forces," she said in explaining her position that gays should be excluded from serving.
Yes, that's right: the reporter (Cameron Bird) appended what is essentially an in-sentence caption to identify for readers the intended meaning of the preceding gibberish. Conscientious, and amusing too; so far, so good.
Let's take a look at the next day's Letters Section:
Press release or news? The article about gay guardsman Dan Choi being expelled from the National Guard for violating the "Don't ask don't tell policy" demonstrates why newspapers are a failing industry ["Soldier battling on two fronts," May 11]. Disguised as news, the article might as well be a press release from some gay advocacy group. Considering the number of gays favorably quoted in the article, perhaps it was. Choi is treated as the heroic victim, numerous supporters are favorably quoted, and no supporters of the military's policy are allowed to speak. The reader is left wondering if there is any reason for the policy, or anyone willing to defend it. Thus, a nominal news article is used for subliminal issue advocacy.
So a reporter is charitable and in return is accused of not only bias but mind control(!).
You tell me: if you had to write for this kind of audience, wouldn't you secretly be trying to wreck your industry from the inside, too?
