Newspapers - English for different levels of audiences

[ibanker]

theres a reason why you see cheap crap electronics and hyundai and chevy adds in the metro

and theres a reason why you see mercedes and bmw and bose adds in the globe and mail

[ur_funneh]

I'm still in the majority group of people who would not prefer the newspaper. Time will tell, paper is literally killing millions of trees per year, and frankly saving a tree is more important than any pollution with the use of modern technology.

[Bazooka Joe]

I'm still in the majority group of people who would not prefer the newspaper. Time will tell, paper is literally killing millions of trees per year, and frankly saving a tree is more important than any pollution with the use of modern technology.

There's no way you're for real. So which banned member were you before?

[ur_funneh]

I don't even own any PDA devices, I just think the newspaper wont be long till its out of circulation.

[Sepiraph]

I remember reading something along the lines of...

Toronto Star - High School
National Post - Post-Secondary
Globe and Mail - Postgraduate

What do you think? And where's the logic behind it?

RFD Off-topic is where it is at... it is over 9000

(Personally I prefer http://slashdot.org)

[rabbit]

> I had been a bookworm for more than 30 years; however, I have not read a printed book in the last 7 years, and rarely put my hands on a printed newspaper. Things HAVE already changed. But yes, I agree that for some people, changing itself is hard.

It isn't always about "changing itself is hard", and just because someone likes having newspapers around doesn't mean that they don't get news from the internet. It's not always just about one or the other.



> Time will tell, paper is literally killing millions of trees per year, and frankly saving a tree is more important than any pollution with the use of modern technology.

... until a nuclear power plant blows .

[googoo]

While I love the thought of all those trees being saved, and yes I know they're using sustainable forest, what I love more sitting on a picnic table at the park reading the "wheels" section from the Toronto Star on a Sunday cool spring day. I couldn't see giving that up

Brent

[slowtyper]

I'm a fan of moving away from newspapers but until e-ink readers (larger sized ones like kindle) are cheap enough and have enough material on them, newspapers are where its at. A smartphone is NOT a solution to moving away from newspapers at all. You're an idiot if you think they are.

[nufan]

Oh and one last thing, since you seem to be in love with newspapers, I'm sure you read somewhere along the lines of TTC having the subway lines accessible to wifi in the near distant future.

MrDisco already touched on this, but had to quote it again, brilliant stuff.

[Tinted]

as someone said, it's all in the marketing.

[VorteC]

Since you don't see the math, here's a break down in the secnario if my BB or newspaper gets lost or stolen:
cost of a weekday edition: $1-$1.50
cost of a new BB: ~$200-$800

What was your point again?

If you buy a paper a day, for a year, it's gonna be at least $300, which is the price of a phone.


I'm taking about the huge inconvenience of having to charge the device every night. i can grab a paper anytime/anywhere and know that it works. using my iphone i can see the battery meter tick away every minute that i'm using it.

It's a huge inconvenience to plug in a cable? What are you? Texan?
go use your smartphone outdoors and compare against a paper. sunwash makes it unusable for reading any length of text (not exactly the same issue if all you have to do is tap out a few numbers to make a call).

How often do you walk and read outdoors? I walk/take the bus/and walk some more to work. Walking and reading is dizzying and with a huge page spread out I wouldn't be able to see where I'm going. On the bus, it's a) usually too crowded to spread the paper, b) no sunwash so I can use the phone. I read the news on my phone, or on the internet. I read the paper when I'm eating or on the crapper.

You totally missed the point. Every article I want to read - click a link. That takes time to load and display. heaven forbid if you enter a weak 3g area or move outside of your free wifi zone (a point which you've conveniently ignored).



Last time I checked a newspaper doesn't go 'crunch' if something heavy is accidentally placed on top of it.

What are you accidentally "placing" on top of your phone? A concrete slab? I'm pretty sure my iPhone isn't the most durable phone out there but I'm sure itll survive say.. a few textbooks being placed on top of it. I've dropped my phone before, the screen cracked. I bought a new screen and digitizer for $50 and fixed it myself.

if you're going to focus only a train ride i'll give you that. but if i'm at home why would i want to stare at a miniscule screen when i can stretch out?

You're right on this one. I wouldn't read news on my phone if I'm at home. I would watch the news, or read the paper.


complete exaggeration. really reading one page and you're getting ink?

I get dirty fingers after a few pages, not a big deal if I'm at home and I can wash my hands, but really annoying if I'm outside and I have to find a washroom.

that's the only valid point i'll agree on.
however i read the paper for the commentators they employ and the investigative work they carry out.
but if you're really concerned about getting instant news you would be arguing for AM radio which consistently beats out web sources in my experience. again another technology which is cheap and imminently reliable

The only place I can get AM radio is in my car, or in my house. I don't want to carry around a radio.. I did that in grade 3 but not anymore lol.


ha! i'll see your green rhetoric and raise you.
-how much energy is wasted across North America going into charging these gadgets daily? it's not an insignificant figure and is a concern amongst governements.
-how much pollution do foreign companies emit in the production of these devices? (let's not even get into the contentious issue of wages and working conditions)
-how much pollution is emitted in shipping these devices here? cargo ships are horrendously bad for the particulate matter they emit, more so than cars.
-how much energy goes into server farms to keep news sites running? what about the energy to pump out the wifi/3g signals?
-what about the toxic materials that go into the devices? millions of batteries tossed out into landfills only to leech out into water tables.
-speaking of landfills, the disposable, 'must have it', nature of the gadget industry ensures that people are constantly tossing out thousands of devices. hmm i wonder where they end up.
-what about the ongoing debate over cell phone radiation?

Let's not forget a smartphone has more function than a copy of today's Star. It does about 4000 other things with the push of a button(s), with the convenience of fitting in your pocket.

This is a pretty stupid argument to begin with.. comparing newspapers and phones is like apples and oranges. Sure it causes environmental hazards but the cell phone has revolutionized society and communication. If you have a problem with cellphone technology, argue that.. but there's no point trying to convince people to purchase newspapers instead of cellphones.

[Tinted]

Since you don't see the math, here's a break down in the secnario if my BB or newspaper gets lost or stolen:
cost of a weekday edition: $1-$1.50
cost of a new BB: ~$200-$800

What was your point again?

If you buy a paper a day, for a year, it's gonna be at least $300, which is the price of a phone.


I'm taking about the huge inconvenience of having to charge the device every night. i can grab a paper anytime/anywhere and know that it works. using my iphone i can see the battery meter tick away every minute that i'm using it.

It's a huge inconvenience to plug in a cable? What are you? Texan?
go use your smartphone outdoors and compare against a paper. sunwash makes it unusable for reading any length of text (not exactly the same issue if all you have to do is tap out a few numbers to make a call).

How often do you walk and read outdoors? I walk/take the bus/and walk some more to work. Walking and reading is dizzying and with a huge page spread out I wouldn't be able to see where I'm going. On the bus, it's a) usually too crowded to spread the paper, b) no sunwash so I can use the phone. I read the news on my phone, or on the internet. I read the paper when I'm eating or on the crapper.

You totally missed the point. Every article I want to read - click a link. That takes time to load and display. heaven forbid if you enter a weak 3g area or move outside of your free wifi zone (a point which you've conveniently ignored).



Last time I checked a newspaper doesn't go 'crunch' if something heavy is accidentally placed on top of it.

What are you accidentally "placing" on top of your phone? A concrete slab? I'm pretty sure my iPhone isn't the most durable phone out there but I'm sure itll survive say.. a few textbooks being placed on top of it. I've dropped my phone before, the screen cracked. I bought a new screen and digitizer for $50 and fixed it myself.

if you're going to focus only a train ride i'll give you that. but if i'm at home why would i want to stare at a miniscule screen when i can stretch out?

You're right on this one. I wouldn't read news on my phone if I'm at home. I would watch the news, or read the paper.


complete exaggeration. really reading one page and you're getting ink?

I get dirty fingers after a few pages, not a big deal if I'm at home and I can wash my hands, but really annoying if I'm outside and I have to find a washroom.

that's the only valid point i'll agree on.
however i read the paper for the commentators they employ and the investigative work they carry out.
but if you're really concerned about getting instant news you would be arguing for AM radio which consistently beats out web sources in my experience. again another technology which is cheap and imminently reliable

The only place I can get AM radio is in my car, or in my house. I don't want to carry around a radio.. I did that in grade 3 but not anymore lol.


ha! i'll see your green rhetoric and raise you.
-how much energy is wasted across North America going into charging these gadgets daily? it's not an insignificant figure and is a concern amongst governements.
-how much pollution do foreign companies emit in the production of these devices? (let's not even get into the contentious issue of wages and working conditions)
-how much pollution is emitted in shipping these devices here? cargo ships are horrendously bad for the particulate matter they emit, more so than cars.
-how much energy goes into server farms to keep news sites running? what about the energy to pump out the wifi/3g signals?
-what about the toxic materials that go into the devices? millions of batteries tossed out into landfills only to leech out into water tables.
-speaking of landfills, the disposable, 'must have it', nature of the gadget industry ensures that people are constantly tossing out thousands of devices. hmm i wonder where they end up.
-what about the ongoing debate over cell phone radiation?

Let's not forget a smartphone has more function than a copy of today's Star. It does about 4000 other things with the push of a button(s), with the convenience of fitting in your pocket.

This is a pretty stupid argument to begin with.. comparing newspapers and phones is like apples and oranges. Sure it causes environmental hazards but the cell phone has revolutionized society and communication. If you have a problem with cellphone technology, argue that.. but there's no point trying to convince people to purchase newspapers instead of cellphones.

your points are so vague it's not even funny, all of them. they could be applied to just about a million things, including that very same thing/point you are trying to defend using these arguements.

I think you out-educated yourself.