I hope it's not too late for publishers and editors to discover that green weddings, green funerals, recycling bins, windmills, and global warming doom and gloom just doesn't sell papers.

Is it a serprise? 3-4 days of Tiger Wood on the front page of the "Boregonian" is enough to make me lose interest!

Aggh! I need a proof reader for "surprise"!!!

It is yesterday's news tomorrow.

This is sad. The R-G historically has been an excellent mid-sized newspaper with great local coverage and usually damn good reporting on what goes on in Salem. I haven't seen it in years, though. When I lived there, the R-G got fresh kids from the UO's journalism school, which was one of the best in the country. I don't think it has that status anymore, though, as the university has become somewhat of an afterthought for the Nike football program.

I've been wondering about this for awhile. We do need a source for reliable facts about what is going on in the world, and so far, the most reliable sources have been mainstream newspapers that still try to be objective. And as much as that word is snickered at these days, there is some value in actually trying to just report what happened and not attempt to analyze it to death.

In the Oregonian's case, the only reason I buy it once in awhile is to get any public notices, sports, classifieds, arts & entertainment. Otherwise, they could turn over the rest of the paper to local government to issue its ongoing communal propaganda press releases.

The only time I read a newspaper is when I pick one up outside a restaurant and want something to read while I'm waiting for my food. Any other time, the Internet gives me all the news I want.

Most newspapers are dying due to lower advertising revenue. Of course, they could always lower their ad rates - but most of the publishers seem to be clueless about that. There is also no reason they can't charge for access to their websites. The Wall Street Journal has been doing that for a number of years, and unlike most newspapers, they are growing their subscriber base. Of course, newspapers like the BOREGONIAN would actually have to publish something people want to read to charge for access. And that obviously isn't happening as their subscriber base shrinks every year.

The Oregonian has an interesting technique for retaining their subscriber base:

they'll keep delivering to you after you've canceled.

I've received the Oregonian on my doorstep for more than a year without paying a dime for it. When I initially called them to cancel my subscription, I told them that I wanted to see if I could get by with the online edition. They talked me out of it by offering me one month of free delivery so I could reconsider my decision.

I said "OK" and have been receiving for free ever since. I've spoken with several other people (in all parts of Portland) with similar stories so it's possible that we are all just the lucky beneficiaries of some glitch in their circulation billing system.

But my guess is that this is/was unofficial policy at the Oregonian. They've finally reached the point where maintaining their circulation numbers (at a level sufficient to continue selling ad revenue) is more important than charging every customer.

Whatever the case, I'm much less disappointed with the Oregonian nowadays. It is now finally worth more than what I pay for it.

I have no problem with the RG tank'n. Anytime a liberal entity the continues to pump out half-truths like the RG does then falls it's a win for the people.

I dumped my subscription with them along time ago when they continued to label "illegal immigration" as "immigration rights".

Hope their liberal doors shut for good - then I'll party!