2 ms·
Well... yes and no. Not everyone could afford the newspaper on a regular basis, let alone a subscription (Which, where I lived, cost more than it did at the ga
by Broken_Hippo 7y ago
Well... yes and no.
Not everyone could afford the newspaper on a regular basis, let alone a subscription (Which, where I lived, cost more than it did at the gas station). Regular newspapers were a luxury. You might have been lucky enough to read it at work, though. But you might be stuck with a local newspaper, which varies greatly in quality. One local newspaper was once a week, had no national or state-level news, was fraught with editorial mistakes, but was worth it if you wanted school news or yard sales. Many mid-level papers glossed over national and world news, were heavier on ads, and so on. You really needed to buy a major-city newspaper to stay informed. For me, what you could often find was the Indianapolis paper. Less commonly, the New York Times or even less commonly, the Chicago Tribune.
Much more commonly, however, was local news on television. Televisions are one-time purchases after all and weren't that difficult to get with a tax refund check. The local news, if you had it, was definitely paid for by ads. And honestly, you only really got this news if you were able to watch it at the times it was on. Sure, they had 3 times a day with news, all of which coordinated with bankers hours.