Put Subhead HERE
The L.A. Times has always considered itself the cream of the newspaper crop in the Western U.S., the height of the industry. It is supposed to represent the best in newspaper professionalism. Papers like the L.A. Times are also held up as an example of what we don't want to lose when supporters talk of instituting newspaper industry bailouts in the halls of Congress. Well, our friends at lies.com aren't fooled!
With all the grave warnings of that excellence of newspapers that might be lost echoing in your ears, I offer an amusing example of that "excellence" for you today. Take a closer look at the accompanying photos of one of the pages in Friday's print edition of the L.A. Times. Notice that the L.A. Times rushed to press before they even tipped in the subheads and photo captions and left the dummy type in its place.
Hail the professionalism of the L.A. Times.
Sure would be terrible to miss all that expertise, eh?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
....and then......
March 28, 2009 - 01:32 ET by LoosMoose... if you had made it into the text, you would have seen such words but have GOTTEN USED TO....
one word that doesn't exist, the twisting of Texas slang "yoost" into USED, and ending a sentence with a preposition.
yeah sure.... we need that... The only loss I can see from the failing papers is the fish mongers will have to find a new suitable material, and the birdcage liner business will soar.
I had a nightmare that Keith Olberman was run over by a bus,....... and lived.
Don't worry...
March 28, 2009 - 01:43 ET by Mother0bama will take over the newspapers too.
ALL 0BAMA ALL THE TIME.
Slippery slope on dope here we come.
I asked and...
March 28, 2009 - 02:02 ET by TeamcheeserMy parrot doesn't care.
The LA Times' message board
March 28, 2009 - 02:46 ET by RR GOPThe LA Times' message board is pretty interesting in that there are quite a few Conservatives who post on there, so it's not just Communists and Liberals as one would expect...at least that's what I remember from going there during the elections last year.
Still no sign of the Obama/Khalidi going-away-party video, eh?
How come no thread here on the New York Times 5% pay cut?
One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 61% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory (yep...approval for Congress now at 39%...do you believe that!?).
It's hard to find good help nowdays............
March 28, 2009 - 03:31 ET by old croespecially when your "immigrant" editor doesn't speak english.
Matthew Modine - the very
March 28, 2009 - 05:44 ET by Gat New YorkMatthew Modine - the very liberal actor - was on O'Reilly and in response to all these bail outs, he questioned why they are being done.
He told the story of his father who was the manager of a drive-in movie theatre and lost his job when the drive-ins went out of business because of progress.
If a liberal like modine gets it, then why is it so hard for over paid politicians to get it?
What do they say?
March 28, 2009 - 05:53 ET by sevenAll they do is repeat what they read on the blogs. No original work in the LAT rag.
Does 'tipped' in mean
March 28, 2009 - 08:12 ET by eaglewingz08Does 'tipped' in mean 'replaced' or 'typed'?
Sorry for my old tymie speak
March 28, 2009 - 09:07 ET by Warner Todd HustonSorry for my old tymie speak there. "Tipped in" was pasteup worker's talk for taking a slug of type on a piece of paper and pasting it into place on the art board that would become a page of a newspaper. That art board was then photographed, made into a negative and used to make a printing plate to print the newspaper with.
I have been in publishing and printing since 1979, so sometimes I revert to old printer's vernacular.
~Warner
March 28, 2009 - 09:11 ET by choselife3xThank you for not saying 'revert back'. You have no idea how much I appreciate it.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
LOL
March 28, 2009 - 09:38 ET by Warner Todd HustonAmusingly enough, I've never given thought to the fact that "revert" and "back" are the same thing, so "revert back" would be redundant! I don't recall that I've ever said "revert back" myself, but maybe I have? One thing is sure, I know I've heard others say it that way.
The one that drives me nuts is irregardless. There is NO such word. It's just regardless or it isn't.
→ Warner
March 28, 2009 - 09:41 ET by Cool ArrowIf you saw the John Denver/George Burns movie "Oh God" Burns makes the same observation of "pull back"
LYDSEXICS UNTIE!
~You don't want to get me started
March 28, 2009 - 10:43 ET by choselife3xOn that subject!
'Revert back', 'irregardless', 'I could care less', 'lay down' instead of 'lie down' . And have you ever noticed people won't use 'me' properly as in "Dad brought flowers for my sister and me". They always use 'I' even when it isn't grammatically correct. I hear college educated professionals do that all the time. Oops, I got started. 'Scuse me.
That high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
As long as you went there
March 28, 2009 - 10:50 ET by sherylsimsIncorrect use of their, there, they're... its, it's... your, you're... etc. I hate when I see them printed on signs (believe it or not it happens often.) My husband is better than I am at catching the mistakes. Sometimes he proofreads the church bulletin during the sermon. Once he marked all the mistakes and then put it in the offering plate with a prayer request sheet that said "Pray the church will be able to afford a spell checker."
But irregardless, you were talking about word usage, not spelling errors, I could care less. carry on.
~ :-O
March 28, 2009 - 11:00 ET by choselife3xThat high-pitched scream you hear is the troll under my heel.
Re As Long...
March 28, 2009 - 11:19 ET by slickwillie2001It's our broken system of education, and it gets worse every year. Their/there/they're is an old problem. Lately I have noticed that people are confusing 'are' and 'our', and 'sell' and 'sale'. You can see craigslist postings that say 'need to sale are TV this weekend'. I wonder if what passes for teachers in some of our schools know the difference. Part of the problem is also that English is not their first language, -not a new problem for America, but there is little effort to get it right.
Now you're getting ME started
March 28, 2009 - 15:03 ET by Kat Outta the BagThe your/you're thing has always been like nails on a chalkboard to me, but more recently have I noticed the there/they're/their problem as well as "here" being used in place of "hear". Don't you sometimes wonder if you were the only one who paid attention in school?!
<stepping down from soap box>
Save me...save me from tomorrow. I don't want to sail with this ship of fools.
~World Party
Good grief
March 28, 2009 - 18:48 ET by general companyIs there nothing I can say anymore,,,geez. Best thing about being a knucklehead is none of that stuff bothers me.
"Television is a freak show" Bernie Goldberg
I haven't watched Leno in a
March 28, 2009 - 08:31 ET by heartlanderI haven't watched Leno in a while, but he had a section on funny things found in print. This should be submitted to that, if he's still doing it (he is still on the air, isn't he?).
LA Times
March 28, 2009 - 09:09 ET by VinncyGTo comment on some of the posts, it's not so much that conservatives post on the LA Times website, It's the content of the paper that is the reason they and other liberal rags are loosing money. They chose to browbeat and ridicule more than half the population who don't believe in liberalism and its Utopian philosophy.
The New York Times is the leader of this trash and they either fail to see it or their reporters are given their marching orders to claim it's not so.
I hope they sink into the pit they all belong in. They failed this nation miserably by refusing to expose this charlatan of a president for who and what he really is. They kept associations quiet and failed to point out his liberal record.
Unfortunately, they will be begging with their hand out looking for cash and continue the lie that is Obama and his ilk.
This is jernalizm?
March 28, 2009 - 13:00 ET by goldenthroatGoooolly! Maybea eye shold have bekam a jernalizt and goten a joob with a newzpapper - I kould rite like tat befor I wnet tew kollege - and it uzed tew bea that I kouldn't even spel gradiate butt noh eye is won!
"Who am us, anyway?" - Firesign Theatre
Warner, Warner, Warner...
March 28, 2009 - 10:37 ET by BettendorNine times out of 10, I will agree with you guys on liberal bias in the media. I know, I work in it, I read it.
However, this is a tad petty, IMHO. Mistakes happen, though I do wonder where the copy editor was in the examples you've shown.
Please, stick with what you know best: pointing out the bias that is obviously there.
"You just don't get it." - Pa Grape, "Veggietales"
It's the weekend
March 28, 2009 - 20:21 ET by Warner Todd HustonIt's the weekend. Lighten up, Francis.
John Walter article
March 28, 2009 - 11:02 ET by slickwillie2001This is an interesting take on newspapers:
Late Editor Blames Three Key People for Newspapers's Demise: http://poynter.org
More history and nostalgia there than accuracy perhaps.
Ah. Another crook. Another Democrat supporter?
March 28, 2009 - 11:35 ET by Gary HallAh. Just another crook.
Wonder if the "Subhead" would have disclosed this:
On the list for Salander for the 2008 cycle? None other than Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd. And, no others.
Oh, did I leave off the (D) label?
(;~> gary
[ALL CAPS WISE-ASS HEADING]
March 28, 2009 - 12:07 ET by gopcongress[Sentence case standard idiotic liberal critique here]
______________________
[Signature Line]
Let them die
March 28, 2009 - 12:25 ET by SlyrrOnce again, I say let the newspapers die, and good riddance to bad rubbish. If I saw any evidence that any of the major newspapers were publishing anything that could be construed as 'news' then I might be in their corner.
Alas, almost all newspapers have abandoned their stewardships for rabid leftist propoganda, and thrown in their lot with communists.
I have no doubt at all that the leftist communist media made a calculated decision in the 08 campaign. They're not stupid. They knew, and KNOW that the american people have turned against them. They're bleeding money like a terrorist after he's set off his bomb vest and they know it's only a matter of time before they're finished - because the people are abandoning them left and right, being totally able to see through their lies.
So, they thought - "What can we do to 'save' ourselves? Tell the truth and do our jobs - then hope our customers forgive us? No, no, no... We can't trust our customers - and we're not giving up our communist propaganda!" So they knew thier pig-headedness would result in the free market killing them.
But along comes Obama - their communist black knight. They look with jealous eyes on NPR, which is a failed radio station by all accounts. Yet it stays in existence and it's employees are still well paid - all at taxpayer expense.
Yeah - they want in on THAT action. So they throw in their lot with Obama and abandon all pretense to get him elected. Hoping that when their businesses fail, Obama will keep them in business, pilfering money from taxpayer pockets and transforming all newspapers, networks and magazines into the 'Obama Communist Media Concern'. They they can sigh, relax and post their lies and propaganda and live in luxury using YOUR tax dollars just like NPR does.
That's the scheme as I see it. They've put all their eggs in the Obama Communist basket, because they know it's the only sure-fire way to save themselves. Sure, they'll chuckle and sputter and agree to sign an agreement to 'not endorse' any political candidate. They know it's a lie - they know they'll be under the direct control of Obama and take their marching orders directly from him. And they won't HAVE to print any stories about 'truth' or 'liberty' ever again. Whatever rules they're asked to live by under Communist control, they know they'll never have to worry about obeying, because they're all in the Obama Communist camp with him, pulling for the same thing.
Well, I for one am NOT afraid to call 'socialism' what it really is - communism. You who flinch at the label, consider. Whenever any government comes along and says they want to take everything from everybody with the promise, 'Don't worry, we'll distribute it FAIRLY' - then that's COMMUNISM.
Mark my words - this talk of 'bailing out' the failed left-wing media - it'll end in the media coming under total communist control. Chris Matthews has already declared to the world that he's nothing but Obama's hireling/slave. And it looks like every newspaper is going the same road. What unfavorable news will any communist newspaper dare to print about Obama - once he's the one signing their paychecks?
And once the newspapers fall under communist control, and the magazines and networks see the sweet plum deal they can get by taking taxpayer money, they'll stampede to sign on as the next members of the Obama Communist Media Concern.
Come on LA Times, your
March 28, 2009 - 21:00 ET by midnight cowboyCome on LA Times, your dropping the ball. The ALL-CAPS LEDE-IN: is all wrong
It should be ALL-CAPS - SMEAR CONSERVATIVES HERE:
That's more like it.
shovel ready
March 29, 2009 - 12:52 ET by justathotIf the lefty rags get bailed out, I have a "shovel ready" project for them. We take away all the bathroom tissue on Capital Hill and recycle the lat, nyt, san fran chron, ect. to be used for wiping all their pompous a**es. From there it gets sent over to Obama's compost pile to fertilize the WH garden. Mmmmm. Fresh Arugula. Yummy.
Just read a story today about the effort to re-green the WH. Think how happy the eco-maniacs will be. It's a win-win situation for all.