- WARNING TIGHT-ASSED LIBS: IF YOU CAN'T TAKE A JOKE, DON'T READ THIS BLOG!
- JOHN F. KERRY'S COMMENTS REFLECT WHAT THE DEMOCRATS TRULY THINK ABOUT OUR TROOPS
- WE ARE "pro-America" "pro-Wal-Mart" & "pro-Israel" BLOGGERS
- HOW MANY DAYS UNTIL THE LIBERAL MEDIA REPORTS ON LIBERAL SENATOR "DINGY" HARRY REID AND HIS LAND SCANDAL AND ILLEGAL USE OF CAMPAIGN FUNDS?
Wednesday, May 10, 2006
Attacking Non-UH liberalism 'Liberal Houston Chronicle loses 3.6% more circulation' (Expect more Black/Hispanic layoffs; white liberals to keep jobs)
Thankfully, the San Fransisco Chronicle lost another 15% or 16%, and they are talking layoffs and early retirements in their Opinion section, and as with Houston, the Black, Hispanic, and probably even Asian workers who handle the papers will soon experience layoffs as well. But it won't affect their liberal journalism, which will surely bring on another round of 15% loses in the next rating period.
The chief liberals at the Houston Chronicle building which have tried to move the slightest move to the right, still had another episode of Chronarrhea and felt the sting of a 3.6% drop in their circulation.
The liberals at the Chronicle still believe its Houstonians that are stupid and not their stinking journalism at the HC. Their efforts to revamp have failed, less people are subscribing to the Chronicle but who is to suffer -- the Blacks and Hispanics of course, and not the white liberals on the top floor who never ask the questions of themselves "what's wrong with us in not meeting the needs of a Houston readership."
With the Chronicle down to a circulation of 513,387, we can expect more Chronicle dumping in the future, but when will the next round of minority layoffs be annouced?
I have refused to subscribe to the Chronicle for years now, and when they do call I always say, "sorry, I don't need anymore paper for my birdcage" or something to that effect. The loss of another ten thousand or so readers to the average weekday circulation of the Chronicle cements their future. The question is how much longer can they afford to be liberally biased, when they break into the 350's?
We can all be assured that if a paper changes it attitude they can gain readership, but as for the Chronicle's sake, in another 6 months there will be another post on the Chronicle losing another big chunk of its readership and its circulation dipping under 500,000.
Screw the libs!
May 10, 2006, 6:01AM
Most in poll here see a hard road ahead for U.S.
But Houstonians interviewed at random express optimism about their personal life
But yesterday's stock rally by newspaper chains - despite yet another decline in print circulation - shows that newspaper publishers are doing a better job convincing investors that their business isn't dying, but moving online, raising hopes that advertisers' dollars may follow.
The Audit Bureau of Circulations reported yesterday that newspaper circulation fell 1.2 million, to 45.4 million daily, during the six months ended March 31, compared with a year earlier.
... The Newspaper Association of America reported viewership at online Web sites jumped more than 5 million, to 56 million in March, compared with a year earlier. However, it was unclear how much a change in Web data-collection methods may have contributed to that gain.
Source: Joseph N. DiStefano, The Philadelphia Inquirer
In the last year, the SF Chron has lost 30% of its circulation. Not all of that could be switching to reading online sources.
I believe for the most part that people are fed up with liberal opinion columnists and publishers trying to push their tripe on the unassuming public.
The SF as well as the H-Town Chronicle always will print doom and gloom, news that portrays America as bad.
You won't see the Chronicle printing news that internal al-Qaeda documents show that they feel they are losing the War on Terror.
You will read all bad news against the President, even if its just made up as with a poll.
Has the media ever ran an approval poll on themselves and how they report the news.
They even ran a poll on Tony Snow recently, which I though was crazy.
What are the poll numbers on the democratic congress?
If the President wants less criticism from the media, there is a simple solution -- do a great job!
This President has been weaker than his predecessor and that's saying alot.
This country hasn't had an exceptional President in a long time.
How many times did Clinton do a non-response to a terrorist attack. Who did we attack after the Cole or the embassies in Africa?
I know Clinton was busy with Monica at the time and that may have distracted him, but that's Clinton's legacy -- ORAL SEX. Now's he's got the kids doing it in droves.
What is your definition of an exceptional President? For sure it wasn't Clinton.
Bush ain't perfect. No President is, but he for sure is not being treated the same by the same liberal media. You know that as well as I do.
The efforts to keep Bush's poll numbers low, hail from the same efforts to keep Clinton's poll numbers artifically high.
I'm not worried about Bush's poll numbers. Truman's polls were in the low 20's before he left office, and is now treated well by history.
Future historians really write the history around here, and I'm confident Bush will much more popular that 'ol Der Schlick Meister was.
If Kennedy, Truman, or even FDR came back today, they would be running from democratic party for they would be impeached.
FDR was the biggest domestic spyer ever, Truman nuked Japan twice, and Kennedy nearly blew us up, but you herald those guys.
No matter what President Bush does, he will never be seen by the liberals as doing "a great job!" Never.
Anon, your efforts to falsely propel Clinton's legacy with spin will continue to fail. America thankfully is growing smarter and come the November elections you will learn.
Links to this post: