Interesting how you seemed to ignore much of the thread you linked, in favor of that one phrase.
So, lets look at the rest of it...
Quote:To begin with, we have endured nearly seven years of the most press-phobic government in a couple of generations. I don't intend to blame the plight of the newspaper business on George Bush. He did not invent our great disrupter, the internet. (That, you recall, was Al Gore.) The Bush administration has merely fed a current of public antipathy that has been running against us for a long time, a consequence of our own failings and, perhaps, a tendency to blame the messenger when news is bad. But Mr Bush has contributed to that unwelcoming environment in at least two significant ways.
So, Bush is not responsible for the sad shape newspaperes are in today.
Isnt that interesting.
Quote:And then there is the business of our business. As has been widely reported, many daily newspapers are staggering from an exodus of subscribers, a migration of advertisers to the web, and the rising costs of just about everything. Newspapers are closing bureaus and hollowing out their reporting staffs.
Tell us again how this is Bush's fault?
Quote:A journalism professor at the University of North Carolina, named Philip Meyer, has done some studies about the decline of American newspaper readership. His extrapolation of the data shows that, if newspapers do nothing to change their ways, they will lose their very last reader in the year 2044. In October, if you want to mark your calendars.
So,newspapers must fix themselves?
How is this Bush's responsibility?
Quote:When Saddam Hussein fell, there were more than 1,000 western reporters in Iraq. Today, at any given time, there are about 50.
Tell us all how the Bush admin is stopping newspapers from sending reporters to Iraq?
And then tell us how its Bush's responsibility to gaurantee their safety?
So while it was an interesting speech, I fail to see how you can honestly blame Bush for the woes of journalism that the speaker is talking about.
