Indrajit Gupta wrote: [ on 01:03 PM 9/30/2006 ]
The cumulative result is that the rich are insulated from what the rest go through; in headlines language, we are rich and we can do what we want.
Without taking away from the argument above (which I largely agree with) - my point, which was probably too telegraphically put, was that not every improvement in the status quo needs to save the world in order to be recognised.
Your initial response was
Sorry, did I miss something? It seems that this is the reverse of heartening news.
to the article that Kiran forwarded, which basically made the point that the MSM, as exemplified by _Time_, is re-jiggering its content (*not* its pricing. Not that I can make out, anyway.) to better suit the demographic that advertisers will pay more for.
Both the improvement in terms of content, as well as your comment about how the gap is widening, are emergent phenomena, and not the objective of the move.
Udhay -- ((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
