« Republic Circulation Falls...Yadda Yadda Yadda. | Main | WSJ on Napolitano's Tax Increase »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

This article is pretty snarky. Gotta take the edge off buddy.

I think the assumption has to be that Dangit did not live here when Kevin Wiley was with the Rag.

As Greg so gleefully points out, newspaper circulation is plummeting across the industry.

Blaming the problems on Dallas is kinda myopic, and beyond snarky.

PS - I never thought Keven was the greatest columnist, but I miss her leadership of the Republic's editorial page.

Falling revenue at the papers means fewer
reporters to write snarky material.

If naming the illegal immigrant "Texan of the Year" doesn't merit a snarky remark, I don't know what does.

Funny no one who is so terribly offended by snarky doesn't mention Keven's snarky remark about the immaterial nature of her own subscribers - I mean former subscribers.

WARNING: You'll probably have to remove your Snarky Filter before you can read this entire post.

Snark away Greg!

"Texans are very proud of their state and are very quick to point out that you don't become a Texan by simply moving to Texas. Your Grandchildren may end up being Texans, but you aren't."

Exactly right, Greg.

Thank you for explaining why George W. Bush is not a Texan.

Yadda Yadda Yadda....

Journalists seems to have this idea that any skill is transferable because they are journalists.

Thus, they believe someone can hop from sports to news or from business to religion -- because they're journalists, man! There must be some kind of instant wisdom and multi-faceted talents that are imparted when they walk into the building.

C'mon -- you don't need actual expertise in something. Just start talking about it. If you botch the facts or get greasy in your leanings, the paper will start a blog so you can mock your critics there.

And if you get tired of writing about something, just decide to run the whole place instead. Nothing different about those skills.

It's the same kind of hubris that leads news CEO's to give speeches.

Sam: Yopu are, obviously, right that almost all papers have declining circs (of the top 20, only USA Today and WSJ had very slight increases in the most recent report).

However, of the top 20, Dallas Morning News had the largest decrease by a fair margin. Is it all Willey's fault? Of course not. Did "Texan of the Year" contribute? Unproveable, but certainly a possibility.

Boy, Keven must have really pissed you off at some point. Why don't you tell us the whole story?

It's a long leap from that selection being panned and causing people to cancel subscriptions to it being largely responsible for the decline. Greg has tried to ride that horse before, and it seems a great stretch. You might not like Wiley, but I highly doubt that selection caused much of that decline. There's not a shred of evidence to support that position. I suppose, as BobH points out, it's possible, but it is unproveable and it doesn't pass the smell test.

I also find it interesting that we find it so offensive. Time magazine often has made man of the year choices on the basis not of popularity but effect on the scene. Illegal immigrants certainly aren't popular, but look at the scope of our national debate. It's hard to argue that illegal immigrants haven't had a large impact on the American (and presumably Texan) scene, whether you consider that impact positive or, as most people do, negative.


"Time magazine often has made man of the year choices on the basis not of popularity but effect on the scene."

Not anymore. Not since their craven, gutless selection of Giuliani over OBL in 2001.

jdleslie1 makes some well-reasoned points. Unfortunately, the anti-illegal immigrant fanatics aren't really motivated by reason and wish to blame just about every social ill on illegal (and even non-illegal) immigration. Suggesting the issue may be a little more complicated than that simply can't be tolerated.

Sure looks like a pattern to me. Everywhere Keven Willey works and shows here influence, readers are angered and subscriptions decline. In this case, it appears that the decline was at a rate higher than other newspapers. Statistically inaccurate? I think not.

The comments to this entry are closed.