Pacifica Tribune, 7/30/13, "Wandering and Wondering" column by John Maybury
| Other than that, it was a good day in Pacifica |
Posted by Kathy Meeh
Thursday, August 1, 2013
John's view of Pacifica's news and blogosphere
Pacifica Tribune, 7/30/13, "Wandering and Wondering" column by John Maybury
Posted by Kathy Meeh
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
38 comments:
You know what I don't get? John Mayburro says horrible things about: Women, Republicans, Pres Bush and is never punished. His blog is very controlled by him. During the 2008 elections he allowed horrible things to be said about Sarah Palin but if you wanted to post factual information about Barack he would not allow it. Now we have journalists being fired for doing the same thing John gets away with on a daily basis. How does he feel about that? So much privilege and protection from the progressives who think their way is the only way. Sick people. Read this.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/08/02/editor-fired-for-anti-obama-headline-says-bosses-responded-to-pressure/?cmpid=NL_politics
Read this. Fox News=Faux News.
That is pretty funny and pretty false. I have sat there talking to Mayburrito many times and I have never heard him bad mouth anyone. Just cause people post stuff does that mean John, believes it? No. Me and John, don't see eye to eye on a lot of issues, and I think he leans a bit over towards the hippies, noobees, and Nimby's but I respect him and his opinion.
You my friend sound like an angry jackass.
People on this blog say far worse and false statements all the time.
Most of them wouldn't answer a question if their life depended on it.
Pretty shameless and pathetic if you ask me.
I agree with big banker on this one. John seems to get along with everyone, even those of us who have differences of opinion on some issues.
Sure, John will get along with you. But he will also sometimes edit or delete your post on his blog if it goes against the NIMBY's.
The things he says are "personal attacks" don't hold true if one of his people are saying it. I remember one time Loeb told me I was uneducated. That was ok, but when I made a mild come back John refused to post it.
Oh well, it is his board. WYSIWYG.
John, also has good old fashioned common sense. He knows Pacifica, has a revenue problem. He knows that the noobees, hippies, and Nimbys that ran city council bankrupted and crippled the city financially.
That's funny John, reminds me from time to time to stick to the local issues.
I am sure he thinks some of the hippies, noobees, and nimby's are idiots at times.
John is completely entitled to his opinions, but he has never met a NIMBY issue that he didn't agree with that I've seen. I was extremely disappointed when he started supporting and advertising for Plater.
That doesn't make him a bad person, and what I admire about him is that, unlike just about anyone who posts on any of these blogs except for Sinai, Ian, Fogel, and a few others, he is able to disagree with people without turning it into a personal "you're a bad person because you disagree with me" kind of thing. This community and this nation could use much more of that kind of attitude.
What a bunch of brownnosers. John is the reason why no one reads the trib. He is so far left he fell off the cliff. No place for people like him in a struggling economy. He and his ilk are what is wrong with this world. He is a public person that runs a newspaper column and a blog. If he is going to be putting his opinions (many that are false) out in the public he is open to ridicule and a public debate, which he refuses to participate.
It takes all kinds. All kinds.
I have to agree.
RIPTUDE is full of mutual admiration brown nosers who are proud of a totally f'd up Pacifica.
Want to share an article or opinion? Unlike some other Pacifica blogs, Fix Pacifica won't bury viewpoints we disagree with.
Well, if Maybury didn't run his blog with a heavy editorial hand, there probably would have been no Fix Pacifica. Can't get your comment posted over there? You know who loves ya, baby!
The previous comments are exactly what I meant @9:45.
I disagree with Maybury, but he's entitled to his opinion. The dumbing down of all discourse by people who are unable to have discussions outside of their silly Fox News echo chamber is what's wrong with this country. Intellectually, people are fat and lazy.
In other news of the city today:
The new Chamber phone book came out today. Nice to know only chamber members get placed in the city phone book. The last one was a community directory. This is just about pimping the chamber members. I will consider not using them in protest!
You and the other three people who don't know how to use Google will really show them!
The fact that they even waste money on a paper directory shows how out of touch the chamber is.
@ Anon 742, You like many falsely believe print is no longer relevant. Safeway, Lowes, Sears, Macy's and many more fortune 500 companies spend millions studying what works best and they all choose to spend most of their advertising dollars in print.
Those Pacifica directories WERE still relevant. It was a easy quick way to find a local business. Now that they made the mistake of only listing chamber members they are much less relevant.
Never considered those chamber directories to be advertising. In 10 years the only thing I ever looked up was the drycleaners to find out what time they closed. I'd agree with Hutch that print advertising still has a place in retail and grocery, but the chamber directory is a waste of paper and money.
Hutch
Do you mean that stuff I line the bird cage with, or wrap fish in?
I guess you missed the memo 15 years ago. The Newspaper in Print form is dead.
Hutch, those decisions are made by advertising firms that are just trying to extract as much money from Safeway, Lowes, Sears, Macy's and many more fortune 500 companies as they can.
Granted, there is small minority of people who don't own a computer or smart phone, but the demographic curve means that they are just getting smaller. The fact that they waste such a disproportionate amount of the chamber's budget on this audience is a telling measure of their incompetence.
hmmm, you're sadly misinformed 10:04. I've worked in marketing over 20 years in both online and print.
All the big players spend most of their money on print because it is still PROVEN the most used by consumers to check ads. They don't spend billions on print without verifying results every year.
The internet is extremely important and gaining ground every year, but print still dominates. Yes newspapers are struggling but they have gained ground in the past couple of years.
I think as young people realize the internet isn't always the best place to find up to date accurate data many will move to print for some of their needs.
Hutch
Are you over 80?
Newspapers are dead.
Take a look at the Boston Globe, it just sold for 93% less then the previous sale price.
Why? The internet and Amazon.com killed the newspaper and most of the brick and mortar stores.
Hutch
The SF Examiner was a major newspaper 25 years ago. Look at it now. A freebie newspaper.
Thus I just gave you a case and point arguement.
The newspaper industry is dead!
Well, every industry is in transition. Times change.
But with the realization that "print still dominates" and that's where advertisers put the bulk of their advertising monies (Hutch 10:59 AM), I'm on my way upstairs to read the two Sunday newspapers you suggest are dead, (Anonymous 11:26 AM, 11:32 AM). And, if only 80+ year olds are reading these dead newspapers, the print should be larger, and there should be more geriatric advertising. Why isn't that happening?
Kathy
Are you 80. Everything in your Sunday paper is online.
Google can be your best friend if you use it wisely
TV ads take up most large and medium-sized firm's advertising dollars. Magazines live or die by their ads. The ongoing struggles and, often, failure of newspapers starts with their inability to sell advertising space. A few will survive and as long as one of them is the NYTimes, life is good.
Seriously are you people in a time warp. Who reads magazines any more, its all online.
"Everything in your Sunday paper is online." BS Anonymous, 1:11 PM.
Wrong, not everything is the same, or available, variations between on-line and print exist. That's reality. Examples, placement of articles, edited writing, titles, current content, ads may all be different. And, for you, no funny papers on line locally. Summary: the style of reading is different, and the content varies.
Readership trends are a separate issue, which you have yet to prove through reliable statistics. As you suggested, try google.
Wild age guessing has what to do with google search? But do continue to think me (and others in you imagination) as age 80, even 120, how about 140? Meantime, without statistical evidence backing up your opinion, I'll continue to think of you as age 10.
That's right Kathy. And a lot of what is online is old or outdated. In the paper most everything is current. How many time have you done a Google search and articles 5 or 10 years old come up?
People assume a lot. Like the internet is where most people shop. Fact is most retail purchases are made in person.
Even teens prefer to shop in person. "78% of girls and 75% of boys said they’d rather go to actual stores." http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/06/10/teens-shop-with-clicks-but-prefer-bricks/
Things aren't always what they seem.
There's a lot more going on with how we read or shop than just the gathering of goods and info. It's about more than just the mechanics. It's cultural and societal and it's personal. There are always outliers perfectly comfortable at one extreme or the other--and age has little to do with it. To misinterpret an extreme as the norm is, uh, pretty extreme and myopic. Even self-absorbed. The printed word and image won't be disappearing any time soon.
LOL. Where are you geniuses conducting this argument? On paper?
Paper is so 1990.
Anon 559 must be a salesperson for Google ad words. Pay for clicks hasn't panned out so he's bitter.
5:59 is just stating the obvious. We're having this discussion online, not on paper. I read the SF Chronicle online, and the NY Times online, and the Tribune online. I subscribe to several magazines because I started the subscriptions years ago before they were the internet. But I could dispense with those paper copies and read all those magazines online if I just got around to doing that. I'm lazy, so the print magazines keep getting renewed and keep arriving in my mailbox. I'm only 1 step away from going all digital and saying goodbye to print forever. And people in their teens, 20's, 30's 40's don't use print much at all. Look around. They're all on their smartphones. It's the future, dude. Next comes Google glass.
Hutch said "a lot of what is online is old or outdated. In the paper most everything is current. How many time have you done a Google search and articles 5 or 10 years old come up?" Never. I limit my search to the last hour or 24 hours or last week or month or year. Learn how to use Google.
"Learn how to use Google", Anonymous 10:17 PM.
Really, where are those statistics that support your 11:32 AM theory that "the newspaper industry is dead"? Bet you could find them if you looked into ancient web history, more than "last hour or 24 hours or last week or month or year."
Meantime, here's a thoughtful NPR newspaper survival article, 3/5/12.
Kathy
The SF Examiner is a dead newspaper. It was once a powerhouse afternoon Paper. Now it is given away for free.
The Chronicle is a shell of what it used to be 20 years ago.
The Tribune, well I wonder why it exists.
I never google. FB is better. When you like all news outlets you get updates on your page. Latest breaking news updates. Awesome and time saving.
Jeff Bezos, the Amazon billionaire, just bought the venerable Washington Post for $250 million. Unexpected. End of an era for the Graham family who owned and operated the paper for 80 years. Played a key role in Watergate.
The NY Times very recently sold the Boston Globe to the guy who owns the Red Sox.
Post a Comment