Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- From: "Count 1" <omnipitus2002@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 03:34:07 GMT
"kuff (Isaac Adams)" <kuff00@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:1124762208.217128.247040@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Count 1 wrote:
> > > > I can see why the LA Times readership is sucking canal water lately.
> >
> > > Other than that's how they get their water for the most part, why
would
> > > you say this?
> >
> > I never shy from <cue angelic choir> 'The Truth'.
> >
> > Does Professor Mokhtari write lots of opinion pieces for
> > > them (assuming you are disagreeing with the Prof - hard to tell)?
> >
> > It was?
> >
> > The evidence of the statement was attached to the post submitted.
>
> One guy submits something you don't like and that's evidence.
> Please...
Yes - the commentary was the 'evidence'. An outward sign or indication, or
something that furnishes proof. In this case of the abysmal content of the
LA Times.
> > The proof
> > of the statement comes from looking at their decline in subscriptions.
(18%
> > from March 04 - March 05)
>
> Most traditional mass media is in trouble. See TV networks, newspapers
> and Hollywood. Only proves they are in the newspaper industry.
LA Times numbers are the largest drop - beating the average by almost 3
times as much. Overall major market newspaper declines were soemthing like
1.9%, and the LA Times was down almost 6%.
And - considering the evidence, its not hard to see why. :-)
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- From: kuff (Isaac Adams)
- Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- References:
- But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- From: Count 1
- Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- From: kuff (Isaac Adams)
- Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- From: Count 1
- Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- From: kuff (Isaac Adams)
- But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- Prev by Date: Re: OT: Parrot Grasps Concept of Zero
- Next by Date: Re: OT: Parrot Grasps Concept of Zero
- Previous by thread: Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- Next by thread: Re: But...but...but...I thought it was just for electricity?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|