Newspapers are the department stores of media. They try to deliver too much to an indifferent audience - indifferent not only to the overwhelming volume of information, but to the environment in which they present it. Theirs is an austere, demagogic voice with which readers can only disagree (or agree) silently. I think blogs (and honestly, my experience with my own site) have shown us that well-crafted language and presentation isn't anywhere near as important as us writers pretend it is - the intellectual superiority that media relied on (I include TV vs YouTube here) is dissolving. THATS the model that has changed, and that's where readers are going. They want digestible, accessible ideas that they can converse about, or at least lurk near. Would the way Mark posed this question be acceptable in a newspaper? Nope. Could Joe six-pack ask this question? Yep. So why pay for a paper? It's a different story online. Papers really have a chance to innovate into portals and leverage their brands before networks like B5 mature and overtake them. But they don't. They are still run by people who live offline and think that controlling the message is how they retain power and audience. The best example I can give is Canadian Business' website. No, it isn't a newspaper, but they are a shining example of people who just don't get it. Christ I'm ranting! Sorry about that. What the hell do I know.