What IF the Oklahoman Went Away?

[CuatrodeMayo]

I'd have to change my homepage address...that is about it.

[jmarkross]

I really enjoy reading The Oklahoman although I read it on my Kindle. Personally the Kindle is a better experience than the real newspaper but that's just me. I'd miss seeing the real paper if it suddenly were missing and hope it stays around.

I suspect some institutions might do well if they offered a low-cost Kindle-type device (a simple machine--really) with subscription services. It is much wiser than a ton of useless pulp thrown around yards and doorsteps and would offer many explorable possibilities. The same device might be a poor-man's (or disinterested man's) laptop and advertising vehicle to shop or absorb ads on the run. Lots of things it could do--weather reports--you name it. It is the future--there is **zero** vision in hauling an 8-pound Sunday paper around and having to cram landfills with it later...you want to ride a horse to work? There are those who will fight it tooth and nail--to no avail. Printing is a specialty and boutique industry in today's world.

[flintysooner]

I suspect some institutions might do well if they offered a low-cost Kindle-type device (a simple machine--really) with subscription services. It is much wiser than a ton of useless pulp thrown around yards and doorsteps and would offer many explorable possibilities. The same device might be a poor-man's (or disinterested man's) laptop and advertising vehicle to shop or absorb ads on the run. Lots of things it could do--weather reports--you name it. It is the future--there is **zero** vision in hauling an 8-pound Sunday paper around and having to cram landfills with it later...you want to ride a horse to work? There are those who will fight it tooth and nail--to no avail. Printing is a specialty and boutique industry in today's world.

The wifi version now is $139 and the wifi + 3G is $189. At that price I'll probably buy one of each and give my old one to someone else.

[jmarkross]

The wifi version now is $139 and the wifi + 3G is $189. At that price I'll probably buy one of each and give my old one to someone else.

As an old techno-geek who is retired and has time to spare...I have still not be-Kindled myself. Have waited for the right device (a futile effort--I know--since they change eternally) but I have been looking for a device that is portable that could offer publications...not books really...but it would be nice to have magazines available, like on the internet, but without the hassle of of laptop to wrangle around. It will be fascinating to see what crops up...

[flintysooner]

As an old techno-geek who is retired and has time to spare...I have still not be-Kindled myself. Have waited for the right device (a futile effort--I know--since they change eternally) but I have been looking for a device that is portable that could offer publications...not books really...but it would be nice to have magazines available, like on the internet, but without the hassle of of laptop to wrangle around. It will be fascinating to see what crops up...

I like my Kindle for novels primarily. For me it is just the right size and it works so well that I become lost in the story I'm reading and I'm actually unaware of the medium.

It isn't as good for me for non-fiction although I have read a lot of titles. But for stuff I actually have to study it is not useful at all but thankfully I have very little of that.

I've tried some magazines on it and didn't much like it. Right now I only read Business Week on it and that publication has been made better for the Kindle since I first subscribed. The Oklahoman is the only newspaper I read on it and they've done a pretty good job with it.

I gauge how good my Kindle copy of The Oklahoma is by how much I can discuss with my mother-in-law who reads the conventional paper in great detail. So far I do pretty well.

By the time the Nook came out I already too large a library to consider switching. I never saw any reason to have the Sony.

The iPad seems like it might be a decent device but for me it is just too large for my normal reading and for my laptop work it doesn't seem comfortable to me and besides I have too many of them anyway. And then it just seems too expensive right now.

But that's pretty much my experience.

[ljbab728]

The only way that the Oklahoman can remove that J is by reporting news without the slant, agenda or spin that they try to put on their stories. Whatever happened to reporting the facts and facts only and letting the readers draw their own conclusions and not the ones the newspaper want you to draw. I quit taking the Oklahoman almost 20 years ago and have came across from one from time to time. The stories now are far worse than they were 20 years ago. I am confident that we have good even great journalist in this city. Let those journalist do their jobs, lets not butcher their stories to have a spin to one side or the other. Until this happens, the Oklahoman reputation will not change....its sad sad sad for oklahomans wanting fair and impartial news coverage.
I would love to see a newspaper come about that would put the Oklahoman out of business, but we know the likelihood of that happening is slim to none.

You obviously remember the paper differently than I do. The amount of slanted articles now don't compare to what we used to see 30 or 40 years ago when the Gaylords were very actively involved.

[Larry OKC]

OU, Journalism 101: first day of class. "There is no such thing as objective journalism as long as people are involved." There is the bias of the owner, the publisher, the editors, those that make the story assignments, the reporters...

That doesn't mean that they shouldn't try to be objective (presenting "just the facts" but even that is subjective as to which set of facts are used). The best one can hope for is a balanced view (all sides equally represented) and the facts supporting each side also be presented. When facts are obviously erroneous, the media needs to call them on it. Unfortunately, what we often get is the quotable sound bite and no follow up questions are asked. The reporter needs to press for actual answers to the questions asked, instead of the non-answers that often appear (spin, half-truths etc).

In the recent primary, the Oklahoman asked the same set of questions to the candidates for Governor. Some gave non-answers (they sounded good but didn't mean diddly) and others actually went on record, stating their position.

As someone else mentioned, as long as you realize that every media outlet (newspaper, broadcast TV, cable, internet etc etc) has a bias if they realize it them selves or not, you do your best to run the information they present thru that filter.

[ljbab728]

As someone else mentioned, as long as you realize that every media outlet (newspaper, broadcast TV, cable, internet etc etc) has a bias if they realize it them selves or not, you do your best to run the information they present thru that filter.

That's a very good point. When I read the paper I just skim over opinion or slanted pieces that I know I'm going to disagree with and focus on what is really relevant to me and interests me.

[jmarkross]

OU, Journalism 101: first day of class. "There is no such thing as objective journalism as long as people are involved." There is the bias of the owner, the publisher, the editors, those that make the story assignments, the reporters...

That doesn't mean that they shouldn't try to be objective (presenting "just the facts" but even that is subjective as to which set of facts are used). The best one can hope for is a balanced view (all sides equally represented) and the facts supporting each side also be presented. When facts are obviously erroneous, the media needs to call them on it. Unfortunately, what we often get is the quotable sound bite and no follow up questions are asked. The reporter needs to press for actual answers to the questions asked, instead of the non-answers that often appear (spin, half-truths etc).

In the recent primary, the Oklahoman asked the same set of questions to the candidates for Governor. Some gave non-answers (they sounded good but didn't mean diddly) and others actually went on record, stating their position.

As someone else mentioned, as long as you realize that every media outlet (newspaper, broadcast TV, cable, internet etc etc) has a bias if they realize it them selves or not, you do your best to run the information they present thru that filter.

Though the methods communication have changed some...the news is not unlike it always has been. There are probably too many facets to any discussion to have any one source to inform you. Your only hope is to have a very keen ability to "sift" the info and 'reconstruct' the 'truth' from your own perspective. Triangulation is essential. The whole of historical records is the same way. It is then further subject to interpretation...the only thing that can please many is dogma...cut and dried...and they seek it out and then cleave unto it as holy-writ. I think the weakness is the desire to have absolutes--games with set rules, with scoring and penalties...a nice thought--foolish in the extreme though. Fortunately, today we do have many sources to cobble together ideas from...but they lead to most people's greatest enemy--"sensory overload" that fries their minds and they retreat into oblivion--or become "college students". That is what occurs in Washington, D.C. Mindless prattle about this and that, none of it making any sense.

[BOBTHEBUILDER]

You obviously remember the paper differently than I do. The amount of slanted articles now don't compare to what we used to see 30 or 40 years ago when the Gaylords were very actively involved.

Unless you were alive and reading these articles 30 or 40 years ago, how do you know that they were slanted or not? We can agree to disagree, but you need to remember that those have the power and influence in the media are going to support and further their own agendas. To insinuate that these media related persons dont have an agenda is absolutely naive on your part. It would be nice the read or listen to media that doesnt have a predetermined agenda, spin or angle.

[flintysooner]

So it seems several of you would be delighted for The Oklahoman to go away.

[Spartan]

So it seems several of you would be delighted for The Oklahoman to go away.

It's a wish that seems to be predicated on the assumption that the city would support journalism either way. Support for journalism would go on, is what anti-Oklahoman people would say. If you're not supporting bad journalism I guess you might be more likely to support good journalism.

[kevinpate]

... It would be nice the read or listen to media that doesnt have a predetermined agenda, spin or angle.

That it would. Can't think of anywhere off the top of my noggin' where that would be possible, but yeah, it would be interesting, at least for a while.
However, I do wonder whether, if it was all presented 100% spin free, we wouldn't in turn spin it when we discussed it amongst friends and fam over drinks, dinner, water coolers, fish-n-chips, burgers, pasta, etc.

[jmarkross]

Unless you were alive and reading these articles 30 or 40 years ago, how do you know that they were slanted or not? We can agree to disagree, but you need to remember that those have the power and influence in the media are going to support and further their own agendas. To insinuate that these media related persons dont have an agenda is absolutely naive on your part. It would be nice the read or listen to media that doesnt have a predetermined agenda, spin or angle.

I remember the Oklahoman quite well from the 1960's--in fact, I worked there in the composing room in 1967. It was a pretty fair-minded paper in the news area--and all opinion was STRICTLY on the editorial page--where it belongs. E.K. ran things that way.

[Spartan]

I remember the Oklahoman quite well from the 1960's--in fact, I worked there in the composing room in 1967. It was a pretty fair-minded paper in the news area

Hey, wait a minute.. Weren't they still using the "n-word" back then?

E.K. ran things that way.

Oh, I don't doubt that... (roll eyes)

[jmarkross]

Hey, wait a minute.. Weren't they still using the "n-word" back then?



Oh, I don't doubt that... (roll eyes)

Poor dear child...no they did not use the n-word--as you call it. Or deprecations of any other kind. This was the pre-Saul Alinsky, pre-Post Viet Nam War era BEFORE snotty nosed left-wingers, SDS members, so-called "liberals" (ha) worthless J-school hacks, genetically plastered with drugs and attitude existed. And--don't presume to correct me on these things...I was a student at OU and working at the Oklahoman at night in those salad days of hippiedom. This was before Pell grants--when you worked your way through college if they folks did not cough up the dough. Today's press is the product of precisely what I saw happening at that time--and the sheer lunacy of the blithering idiot Obama and the inexperienced crowd he has dragged with him to destroy the nation is the product of these scum. They were not journalists then--they are not now. They are universally know-it-alls, smarty-panted worthless fops who talk a lot about nothing and know even less. They are so brilliant--they can SOLVE poverty! Just give poor people MONEY! How wise! Of course--then comes the problem...WHOSE MONEY! Wake up.

[skyrick]

Ha, I disagree.. Morning News makes the LA Times look like Pravda.

I have to agree with you Spartan. I've had the opportunity to be exposed to several newspapers over the years; from 3 months of the LA Times on an extended visit to lala land, Boston Globe 2 weeks at a time about a dozen times in the last 20 years, Tulsa World for about 6 years, the Oklahoman for 30 years and the Dallas Morning News for the last 22 years.

DMN is, hands down, the best of the lot. The best Sports section in the country, too.

[Spartan]

That's what I'm talking about. I definitely agree about the sports section. Maybe I'd say the Denver Post is tied for sports. I've also always liked the Houston Chronicle, a very good newspaper for everything except sports it seems, which is a little lame.

A smaller newspaper that's well-known for some good investigative journalism might be the St Petersburg Times (Fla), ironic for its name I guess. The Tulsa Whirled is actually the only newspaper I can think of that is worse than the Daily Oklahoman.

Throw out the Wall Street Journal, NY Times, Washington Post, USA Today, etc..

[ljbab728]

Unless you were alive and reading these articles 30 or 40 years ago, how do you know that they were slanted or not? We can agree to disagree, but you need to remember that those have the power and influence in the media are going to support and further their own agendas. To insinuate that these media related persons dont have an agenda is absolutely naive on your part. It would be nice the read or listen to media that doesnt have a predetermined agenda, spin or angle.

I assure you I was alive and reading those articles 30 or 40 years ago. I made no assertion about anyone in the media and their agendas so why would I be naive about that.

[ljbab728]

I remember the Oklahoman quite well from the 1960's--in fact, I worked there in the composing room in 1967. It was a pretty fair-minded paper in the news area--and all opinion was STRICTLY on the editorial page--where it belongs. E.K. ran things that way.

You seemed to forget that front page editorials were not unusual. I remember them well. They never appeared to be written quite as well as the ones on the editorial page which always led me to believe that Gaylord wrote them himself. Maybe not, it just seemed that way.

[Prunepicker]

I believe the Oklahoman has gone too far left.

Look at the front page. The focal point is nothing but touchy,
feely and idiotic human interest crap. Who in the world wants to
read touchy, feely human interest crap?

I don't!

I want to read "The illusion of a president, BO, Stinks!" I want
to read NEWS. Not human interest BS.

We take the Oklahoman for the shopping coupons. The day that
it doesn't have more coupons that it's worth to subscribe is the
day we end our subscription to the Oklahoman.

BO Stinks. The Oklahoman should announce that on the Front
Page every single morning!

If the Oklahoman returns to being a good newspaper, i.e. isn't
liberal by any stretch of the imagination, then we'll subscribe more
than the Sunday and Wednesday papers. As long as the DO
doesn't say that BO Stinks then you can forget anything else.

[ljbab728]

I believe the Oklahoman has gone too far left.

Look at the front page. The focal point is nothing but touchy,
feely and idiotic human interest crap. Who in the world wants to
read touchy, feely human interest crap?

I don't!

I want to read "The illusion of a president, BO, Stinks!" I want
to read NEWS. Not human interest BS.

We take the Oklahoman for the shopping coupons. The day that
it doesn't have more coupons that it's worth to subscribe is the
day we end our subscription to the Oklahoman.

BO Stinks. The Oklahoman should announce that on the Front
Page every single morning!

If the Oklahoman returns to being a good newspaper, i.e. isn't
liberal by any stretch of the imagination, then we'll subscribe more
than the Sunday and Wednesday papers. As long as the DO
doesn't say that BO Stinks then you can forget anything else.

You can get most of those same coupons on the internet, prunepicker, so feel free to cancel your subscription.

[UnclePete]

Quote:

In Oklahoma, the Tulsa World, a.m. and the Tulsa Tribune, p.m. publish better newspapers than the larger monopoly conbination, The Daily Oklahoman and Oklahoma City Times, due largely to lack of competition, tighter squeeze on news space, complacency, and the sophomoric interest of sub-editors in blood, bootleggers and bistros.

Written by Walter M. Harrison, December 1, 1954.

Recommended reading: "Me and My Big Mouth" by Walter M. Harrison copyright, 1954. Mr. Harrison was E. K. Gaylord's managing editor.

[jmarkross]

You seemed to forget that front page editorials were not unusual. I remember them well. They never appeared to be written quite as well as the ones on the editorial page which always led me to believe that Gaylord wrote them himself. Maybe not, it just seemed that way.

E.K. virtually never wrote any editorials when I was there...now--his son E.K. Jr. may well have, he was an odd duck by any measurement. His connection with the paper was mostly due to DNA, he was in no way the man his Dad was. I had the pleasure of knowing E.K. when I worked at OPUBCO and shortly thereafter when I worked for OCURA and he was on the Board there. He was well over 90 then--but--still pretty together. Newspapers today are worthless almost completely...filled with mindless drivel...a typical front page lead-in..."It was late in the evening when little Kathy heard her mother calling for her weenie dog Sparky--but--he was gone...run down by a uncaring and speeding motorist." If THAT kind of crap passes as journalism--GOD help us. Every story starts by some ignorant brain-dead "journalist" seething to unleash their hopelessly inane opinions onto the world...after they have exhausted their bird-brained attempts at being famous dime-novelists...they graduate at about 24 years old to being world scholars and political geniuses, supporting every liberal cause that someone--whom they follow like good Nazis--tells them to. Why--because then they are self-appointed "good" people who "care" more than anyone else on the planet. They gather in gaggles and coo for helping everyone on Earth with someone else's tax money--whilst keeping their own geetz quite secure for a bag of some kind of drugs to get them wired up--not wasting a dime on anyone but themselves. The hypocrisy is staggering. It is hopeless. I suspect maybe TV programs have driven people mad with preposterous ideas and, after all, they adore anything espoused by Hollywood like it was holy-writ and as intellect has gone into a fatal nose-dive, they have run wildly down the pier and jumped aboard the Titanic, not to be accused of "missing the boat"!

[Laramie]

I renew my subscription ever 26-weeks. I'm use to seeing print and can't imagine reading everything on-line. I spend 60 minutes on the computer a day and as far as I'm concerned that's enough (not good for my eye-sight). Stay away from on-line banking!

Boy, who would have ever thought that the internet would bring down the post office and the daily papers.

As far as the Dallas Morning News or the Fort Worth Star-Telegram let Texas keep their papers; I moved back here to get away from the madness.

I'm keeping the Oklahoman and its few flaws.

That's why Texas is outdoing Oklahoma because they love it when we run down there and spend our money; they're laughing at us all the way to the bank.