Rediscovering newsprint

I'm definitely part of the e-generation. I don't text very often, nor do I IM all my friends, but I get the majority of my news from websites and TV, rarely reading a physical newspaper.

Last night DH had CNN and MSNBC on, watching the results of the Iowa caucuses. I generally can't stand politics anyway, since I live with the results of politician's decisions everyday at work, but in particular I can't stand the tone and tenor of the mainstream media's coverage of politics. The screechy voices, the ridiculous cliches and analogies and transparent pandering and biases. It makes me want to jump off a cliff or stab my eardrums out with a pencil.

This morning, I was interested in learning about what happened in Iowa without the annoying TV over-dramatization and hullabaloo. So I picked up a Washington Post before getting on the train this morning to read their coverage. It had been so long since I had bought a physical newspaper that I didn't even realize that the price had increased from 35 to 50 cents a paper.

During my 30 minute train ride I only managed to get through about 3-4 actual pages of the first section - but it was such a refreshing change. No loud screaming, no endless commentary disguised as a question, no crosstalk or interruption or immediate reinterpretation of what was said. Just an in-depth observational review of the events. It was actually a peaceful moment in politics. I felt more educated and informed about what had happened, what it meant, and what the ramifications were likely to be. Exactly what a newspaper should do.

I doubt that I can become a daily paper reader - I can't stand the newsprint on my fingers, and there's rarely enough news that I care to read in depth that doesn't get captured ably enough by the Economist. But for all the proclamations that the old fashioned newspaper is dead, well, I just rediscovered their value.

Go ahead, read a paper at least once a week. But remember, except on Sunday, it'll cost you two quarters now.