Comments on: Notes on the new Worcester Magazine http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2008/09/04/notes-on-the-new-worcester-magazine/ "When things speed up hierarchy disappears and global theater sets in." --Marshall McLuhan Thu, 09 Feb 2012 21:46:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Jeffhttp://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2008/09/04/notes-on-the-new-worcester-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-280140 Jeff Sat, 06 Sep 2008 00:03:55 +0000 http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/?p=1201#comment-280140 The unsigned noosepaper editorial is a format that I can get very snarky about, but only when the subject matter is hardly a matter that might involve necessity. Necessity involves taking a position wherein retribution for the opinion could be directed at the individual who wrote the opinion. For instance, if the paper is willing to take a stand against some powerful public figure, not merely to malign them, but to call attention to serious matters of public interest, and the public figure has the power to make life difficult for the individual, or worse, then the anonymous nature of the editorial lends the stronger power of the press to the opinion. It would be, in other words, in the public interest. To merely forward propaganda for the powers that be, and hide behind the anonymous editorial format... that's the work of sniveling sycophants, and I've posted what I think about this crap when I see it in the T&G. If the T&G was owned by someone locally, it would make a huge difference to me, but they're a chain. Publishing lopsided propaganda regarding local matters under the anonymous editorial format goes quite a ways beyond the tradition, and deep into bullshit territory, as far as I'm concerned. In the case of the unsigned editorial in this week's WoMag, though, it's really of no consequence, one way or the other. The unsigned noosepaper editorial is a format that I can get very snarky about, but only when the subject matter is hardly a matter that might involve necessity. Necessity involves taking a position wherein retribution for the opinion could be directed at the individual who wrote the opinion. For instance, if the paper is willing to take a stand against some powerful public figure, not merely to malign them, but to call attention to serious matters of public interest, and the public figure has the power to make life difficult for the individual, or worse, then the anonymous nature of the editorial lends the stronger power of the press to the opinion. It would be, in other words, in the public interest.

To merely forward propaganda for the powers that be, and hide behind the anonymous editorial format… that’s the work of sniveling sycophants, and I’ve posted what I think about this crap when I see it in the T&G. If the T&G was owned by someone locally, it would make a huge difference to me, but they’re a chain. Publishing lopsided propaganda regarding local matters under the anonymous editorial format goes quite a ways beyond the tradition, and deep into bullshit territory, as far as I’m concerned.

In the case of the unsigned editorial in this week’s WoMag, though, it’s really of no consequence, one way or the other.

]]> By: Tracyhttp://www.PieAndCoffee.org/2008/09/04/notes-on-the-new-worcester-magazine/comment-page-1/#comment-280047 Tracy Fri, 05 Sep 2008 20:58:43 +0000 http://www.PieAndCoffee.org/?p=1201#comment-280047 Good job on the byline count. Now, as long as they don't kill Scott... (and I'm pretty sure the pseudonyms are discrete persons, and the same ones as before) Good job on the byline count. Now, as long as they don’t kill Scott…
(and I’m pretty sure the pseudonyms are discrete persons, and the same ones as before)

]]>