Talk:The Pantagraph

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

agree with merge Thatcher131 04:40, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Editorial comments

Found the following in the history section, removed it and put it here for all to enjoy - Wisekwai 02:34, 11 July 2006 (UTC)

Who is the watchdog of the Pantagraph ? Not just the news. But the quality of the paper from advertising, photos, printing, inserting and content . Would not Jesse Fell be ashamed of the Pantagraph over at least the last 5 - 10 years ?

Seems that the motto "independent in everything, neutral in nothing" should longer should be the motto.

Maybe it should be “money is everything”

The Pantagraph is just now soy ink on recycled paper ? ? Allegations are that the content is now completely about the bottom line for a corporation. This is not all Lee Enterprises fault. The lead was poured for this linotype at least as far back as the previous two owners. The Chronicle and Pulitzer. Little of the overall profits were put back into the improvements to the paper. Allegations that the downturn comes down to two - three long term members of the business and operations management group. That never had any vision for the paper. Just as it is alleged they only would react to problems and did not be plan ahead. No real vision and some have said that the same individuals did not care about even important problems and did not truly ever correct them. It is alleged that a cross marketing plan was approved (owned by Pulitzer at the time) with and for the proposed coliseum. Allegedly the Pantagraph agreed to purchase of seats, cross marketing plans and much more before the citizens voted. In which that vote ended up just an opinion that was discarded by elected officials. Has the real estate market value of any of the Pantagraph property been impacted by the coliseum ? Did these marketing plans impact choices in stories, photos and editorails ? So much for independence and an advocate of Mc Lean County by The Pantagraph. The problems with the paper have existed for many years. With no local ownership for so long it has drifted away from the very subscribers, advertisers, voters, citizens, students, scholars and the communities is it is not serving.

I sort of agree with it, the pantagraph has declined over the past few years, I think because of the constant change of ownership. The pantagraph online, however, is better than it used to be at least. I'm suggesting a section about criticism. --Donutey 22:32, 25 July 2006 (UTC)

What would be the source of the criticism? I'd be interested in seeing that. It's been a long time since I've read the paper. - Wisekwai 03:39, 26 July 2006 (UTC)

I think the paper itself, the frontpage often has special interest stories, without any real news, and they've gotten in the habit of publishing "special" sections such as Relish that are non-locally written and have zero news content.--Donutey 02:54, 5 October 2006 (UTC)

The current issue has a hard news story on how "Satan" has conviced america that he dosn't Phsyicaly exists, and that this si a sign that america is on the path to hell. This is a hard news story for this paper? perhaps it has finaly fallen to the weekly world news level.

No comment on the above article, but one fault I've recently found with the pantagraph is that they've cited the about.com mirror of wikipedia, rather than wikipedia itself as a source on the back page of the 12/14/06 frontpage. --Donutey 04:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)