And yet, the article has this: > Dodd also mentions that “one of the great traditions [in the composing room] was banging people out.” This was the long-establ

And yet, the article has this: > Dodd also mentions that “one of the great traditions [in the composing room] was banging people out.” This was the long-established send-off for retiring printers and involved everyone grabbing the nearest piece of metal and banging the stone ( itself in fact made of metal) rhythmically for five to 10 minutes. This symbolic ceremony also took place for the coffin, to bid farewell to lead-setting. > Dodd and Postance talk about the camaraderie within the composing room. While Dodd says that “being on the stone was often a battle,” Postance says that he enjoyed the close contact with journalists: “you were talking to them across the stone on a sort of one-to-one basis […] you knew the people who wrote the yarns and you could relate to them.” Dodd remembers that the whole of editorial came down to observe the funeral on 11 May; “there were grown men crying” he says. I would argue that the way the news is produced has and does change the nature of news reporting. I’ve seen it at the company I work for now. The old-timers talk about the fact that it was always a high pressure environment, it it’s a great deal more unpleasant to work in these days, and that has changed how news is reported. If you are going to quote me, how about quoting the full paragraph? I’m curious though, did you not read the whole article?