<html><body> <DIV>Politically correct tabloid?  Surely not the New York Post or, here in San Francisco, the freebie Examiner.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I am no fan of big newspapers given their sordid history in this country (e.g., the Hearst and Pullitzer press getting the US into the Spanish American war) but the fact that so few people younger than 50 actually seem to read them is distressing, not so much because of "dumbing down" per se but because the sources of news they rely on - Fox News, talk radio, e-mail lists- only kidding on that last one - are likely much worse.  It is this ignorance of current events that enables many in the US to believe that weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. SR </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; BORDER-LEFT: #1010ff 2px solid">-------------- Original message -------------- <BR>From: "Wojtek Sokolowski" <sokol@jhu.edu> <BR><BR>> Joanna: <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> Politically, it's not necessarily bad cause, at least around here, all <BR>> the local free papers are way to the left of the major dailies. <BR>> <BR>> <BR>> [WS:] It's bad, Joanna, pretty bad, because it signifies further dumbing <BR>> down of the US society. The trend is only among more respectable <BR>> newspapers, while tabloids are on the rise. I do not know about you, but <BR>> I'd rather have a serious, respectable newspaper expressing views that I <BR>> find disagreeable than a "politically correct" tabloid. Tabloids (and <BR>> pictorial media in general) tend to appeal mainly to ignorant and indolent <BR>> people who are easily manipulated by sensationalism and demagoguery. <BR>> <BR>> It looks like this s ociety is heading toward a medieval model with a few <BR>> highly educated and literate monks or Brahmins and illiterate masses whose <BR>> main if not only means of written communication is pictures. <BR>> <BR>> Wojtek <BR>> <BR>> ___________________________________ <BR>> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk </BLOCKQUOTE></body></html>