Originally Posted by Halfcan:
After all the biased shit they pulled over the summer- I was not buying their $5.00 SuperBowl paper. They only jumped on the bandwagon to make money.
KC Star is the worst now.
Yep, I had no interest in their SB paper or their book. [Reply]
I am still a KC Star online subscriber (mostly because I am too lazy to cancel the subscription), and their Chiefs playoffs/Super Bowl content was a joke.
Their weekly content for regular season games 20 years ago (with Whitlock, Posnanski, Greg Hall, etc.) was 100 times better than the shit they were producing for arguably one the most historic events in Chiefs/KC history. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Bill Brasky:
My parents still get the rag and to my surprise, it's like $1200 per year. Like WTF? You could take the New York Times for that much money.
Yeah what a shock they're going into bankruptcy. Deliberately create an unsustainable price point designed to rob people who couldn't quite quit their paper habit, as you shrink the actual content down to pamphlet-sized. So you're pretty much guaranteed of a death spiral at this point even if your month-over-month revenues get a temporary goose when you raise the price.
Even my parents quit when it went up to $80/month. And they would have been happy paper readers for life at a sane price.
This is the vulture capitalist model. Squeeze every last drop of life out of a business then sell it off for parts - lining your pockets the whole way. [Reply]
Regardless of what you think about their Tyreek Hill coverage - local papers are about the only thing that bring attention to local problems and local corruption and hold politicians accountable. It's very bad for the community when they fold up.
The shell companies who own them and drive them into the ground don't mind this outcome at all. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
Regardless of what you think about their Tyreek Hill coverage - local papers are about the only thing that bring attention to local problems and local corruption and hold politicians accountable. It's very bad for the community when they fold up.
The shell companies who own them and drive them into the ground don't mind this outcome at all.
Our local paper has been 95% AP stories for the past 25 years. What local stories there are drop 2 days after because a couple of years ago they shut down most of the local office and moved typesetting/printing 2,5 hours away Little Rock.n
Thankfully we have a couple of online only publications that are filling the void. [Reply]
Originally Posted by suzzer99:
Regardless of what you think about their Tyreek Hill coverage - local papers are about the only thing that bring attention to local problems and local corruption and hold politicians accountable. It's very bad for the community when they fold up.
The shell companies who own them and drive them into the ground don't mind this outcome at all.
Our local papers refuse to cover any political corruption if it furthers the Dem narrative. Indep. City hall including the corrupt mayor has only been covered by a local news channel. The papers have been deathly silent even when the FBI was questioning the Mayor and Councilmen. Our City hall does whatever they want on taxpayer's dime and have no fear of the Examiner posting a word about it. [Reply]
Originally Posted by Halfcan:
Our local papers refuse to cover any political corruption if it furthers the Dem narrative. Indep. City hall including the corrupt mayor has only been covered by a local news channel. The papers have been deathly silent even when the FBI was questioning the Mayor and Councilmen. Our City hall does whatever they want on taxpayer's dime and have no fear of the Examiner posting a word about it.
Losing newspapers in this day and age isn't going to change anything. The ability to disseminate information through other more cost effective measures is there.
As for your particular claim:
From what I read it seems the FBI as of 02/19 wasn't interested in talking to the mayor? But did question CC members.
Losing newspapers in this day and age isn't going to change anything. The ability to disseminate information through other more cost effective measures is there.
As for your particular claim:
From what I read it seems the FBI as of 02/19 wasn't interested in talking to the mayor? But did question CC members.
So yea, they covered it.
Yeah, an amazing scoop covering something that has been on the news multiple times.
Where were they when the shady deals like Rockwood were going down? Nothing. But I guess after several tv special stories on the corruption along with a year of FB and social media covering it, they decided to chime in. Nice work. Real gumshoes! :-)
The Star really nailed the Reek story they made up too!! [Reply]
Originally Posted by Halfcan:
Yeah, an amazing scoop covering something that has been on the news multiple times.
Where were they when the shady deals like Rockwood were going down? Nothing. But I guess after several tv special stories on the corruption along with a year of FB and social media covering it, they decided to chime in. Nice work. Real gumshoes! :-)
The Star really nailed the Reek story they made up too!!
Don't know anything about Rockwood. Don't live in the area and so it doesn't interest me. But you're known for not being informed on much of anything and this shows that to be true. Again.
I'm not defending the Reek story or the examiner. Although I understand your need to move the goalposts.
