Re: Getting attention the old-fashioned way

[Rich Graves <rcgraves@ix.netcom.com>]

C Matthew Curtin wrote:
> 
> >>>>> "Tim" == Timothy C May <tcmay@got.net> writes:
> 
> Tim> Sad that journalists cater to this kind of thing. I guess
> Tim> "personality pieces" are ever so much more popular than technical
> Tim> pieces, or even careful explications of things like crypto
> Tim> anarchy and the real implications of the tecnologies we are
> Tim> involved with.
> 
> Sad, yes; surprising, no. It's been my experience that such things are
> often dependant on the journalist's audience (i.e., is it a trade rag
> like InfoWorld or the National Enquirier?)

Or for that matter, the Netly News,
http://pathfinder.com/Netly/daily/961112.html

> In any event, journalists
> (and/or their publishers) aren't usually noted for doing things that
> are interesting or important. Rather, they seem to have a preference
> for writing and publishing what will sell. (Just as is the case with
> TV talk shows, etc.)
> 
> What's worrysome is that the degenerates who concern themselves with
> nonsense are numerous enough to make sufficient demand to keep the
> mainstream press focused on such trivial matters, allowing more
> significant things to go unreported outside of the small circles from
> which they've originated.

I couldn't agree more.

Maybe I should have helped Lewis Koch out. At least he isn't a fucking 
hypocrite.

-rich