4 ms·
Newspapers-- it was once considered a professional requirement to read them daily. Beyond local news-- you were really on your information game if you read the
by JSeymourATL 11y ago
Newspapers-- it was once considered a professional requirement to read them daily. Beyond local news-- you were really on your information game if you read the NY Times or Wall Street Journal.
The printed paper format seems to lend itself more easily to tripping over interesting articles that you might not normally seek out. Versus mindless, repetitive web surfing.
And of course, if you wanted to share a news item with someone-- it meant cutting it out and mailing via the postal service. Usually, accompanied with a brief handwritten note. Always nice to receive. Now a lost art form.
- outericky 11y agoI disagree. In college (1995-99) I had to subscribe to WSJ for my business courses, and I hated it. I would have much rather had a digital subscription; I'd read it when I could, I could easily share it. Instead, I got a disdain for paper subscriptions.
- DrScump 11y agoThey had digital subscriptions. In fact, I'd guess that WSJ.com was the first successful paid-online-subscription newspaper that still endures as paid subscription. (The San Jose Mercury was earlier, but they went free later for a number of years.) Back in the 90s, WSJ Op-Ed content was free, but the rest was paywalled.
- outericky 11y agoYes, but the class requirement was the paper subscription. Pretty sure the professor was just an WSJ paperboy.