Why newspapers are important

The olden days

Up until three or four decades ago, newspapers were not only vitally important to society, but they were also often sought. Until the late 1960s, newspapers had little competition other than radio when it came to delivering the news to the masses. Newspapers ruled. Then television came along with Walter Cronkite and the Vietnam War. Things began to change.

Over the next 20 to 30 years, newspapers were still pretty strong. Television news truly didn't come into its own until the 1980s and really didn't begin to grow in strength until cable news and CNN began to grow in the early 1990s. About the same time, the Internet sprang to life.

Newspapers cling to life, barely

Since the early 1990s, newspapers have grown less and less useful, less and less powerful as containers of knowledge and less and less needed by the common folk. The death of newspapers has until recent begin gradual. A little circulation drop here. A little advertising dropped there. But over the last couple of years, things have dropped off dramatically for newspapers.

Television has had some affect, but more than anything it has been the Internet that has hit newspapers hard. Information is now readily available, often for free, all over the world at just a few clicks of a mouse. Newspapers can't compete with that. The news in newspapers is almost always at least 12 hours old, and often times older.

The readership and the advertising base for newspapers has slowly been eroded over the years, and it continues to do so. Most importantly, of the last couple of years, corporations that own newspapers have realized they are driving a sinking ship and have been selling off newspapers and cutting staff as fast as possible. It's only business, after all, right?

Also, the media in general has taken hard hits over the last couple of decades of being biased. There is some truth to this. Newspapers are put together by people, and as much as they try not to, people often can't help their own biases. Also, with the growing polarity of politics (especially in the United States), the word "unbiased" has lost much of its meaning, now mainly meaning "whatever I don't agree with."

What's to come?

I don't know. No one does. But as a former newspaper journalist for 20 years, I can make some educated guesses. I believe newspapers will survive, in some form or another, for at least another 50 or so years. More newspapers will shut down, and many newspapers will continue to merge print and Web products with some eventually going completely to the Web. Many of the larger newspapers will survive by jumping on the Internet bandwagon, and possibly by expanding and becoming more regional. Smaller newspapers will possibly survive by focusing more on advertising, by cutting back on news content and basically becoming an advertising vehicle similar to the many automobile and classifieds-type publications that can often be found in racks at the entrance to grocery and department stores.

Why is this bad?

Some could argue that the death of newspapers is no big deal. It's just a natural technological and business trend. Again, this is true to some extent.

Some newspaper editors and publishers will argue that newspapers must not be allowed to die because newspapers are vital to their communities, that newspapers help build a sense of community. Frankly, that's a bunch of bull and just public relations. These people are covering for their own jobs, not that that's not understandable. Once upon a time, newspapers were barometers for their communities, but those days are long gone with the advent of the World Wide Web. Community is everywhere now, not just one particular place (with some exceptions, mostly in remote areas and/or very small towns).

Many of the features once provided by newspapers are now being covered faster and more conveniently by other media, mainly through the Internet. But there is still one very important task that newspapers used to do regularly, something that should be important to society at large.

Coverage

I'm not just talking about those long, 10-piece series articles with lots of photographs that newspapers love so much and often for which they win awards. Some of those are nice. Some of them are boring. But that's not what I'm specifically talking about here.

I'm talking about newspapers spending the time, money and other resources to fully cover and investigate the stories that need to be covered, such as stories about corruption, war, injustices, etc.

Sure, television does this to some extent. But you only get a whole 60 seconds of coverage. Then they're off to the next story about a cute puppy or something (not that I have anything against puppies ... I'm a dog lover myself).

Sure, the Internet provides news for free from all over the world. But much of that is written or photographed by people who are not only inexperienced, but who often have an agenda of their own.

But even taking television and the Internet into consideration, the two of those combined do not have (or will not spend) the proper resources needed for complete, proper coverage of major news stories.

One could argue that newspapers also no longer spend those resources. But I'd argue back that it's only because newspapers no longer have the resources, in finances or people, to do their job properly all the time. Believe me, if newspapers still had those resources, they would still be doing the job.

Just an example

About 20 years ago, I started my first newspapers job at a small daily in southern Ohio. Circulation was something like 16,000 in a town of about 21,000 people. At this tiny little newspaper, we sent a photographer off to cover the Gulf War, to keep in touch with troops from our region. The newspaper paid for everything. Travel expenses, hotel rooms, etc. It was all covered.

That would never happen today.

A couple of years ago, I was working for a larger newspaper with a circulation of about 150,000 in a city of about 300,000 people. There was another war in Iraq going on. The newspaper sent a reporter. But this time this much larger newspaper could not afford to pay all the reporter's expenses. The newspaper did pay some, but grants were also sought, and the reporter had to chip in herself.

In closing

Despite what many of us who were in the industry might wish, I don't believe newspapers will be missed. The public no longer needs newspapers for the most part, so there is nothing for them to miss.

That being said, I believe the public is missing out on the true importance of what newspapers used to accomplish. I'm sorry, but your local TV station isn't going to send a reporter to a war to get indepth coverage of what's going on there, and that local blogger you like to check out a couple of times a week can't afford to do such. And even if an Internet or TV news source did send someone to cover something important, they're not going to take the time or utilize their resources to report earnestly. It's not in their blood. It's not how they're made. It's not how those "systems" work. They are fine for what they are, but the days of real news gathering are going, possibly forever.

Has reading become unmanly?

It seems whenever I see someone reading a book in public, it is almost always a woman. The few exceptions to this are when I see a male college professor going over a textbook of some sorts, but I live near a large university.

Perhaps this is just my perception. But as I said, I live near a big college. I also live less than two blocks from my city's main library, and there are at least five books stores within walking distance of my house.

So, is it just me? Or is it just my region? I'm not sure.

I do see men in book stores, mostly in the history sections, or biographies or sports. Every once in a while I'll see a young fellow in the science fiction/fantasy section.

But I see women everywhere in the book stores. And I see women in restaurants with a book at their side or in their hands. I see women on the bus with books.

Again, why is this?

I'm not old enough to know, but I've had older relatives tell me there was a time (maybe 50 or so years) ago when many a blue collar worker would have a beat-up paperback novel stuffed in their back pocket. Usually it would be a western or a crime story, but it often as not was a literary author.

I never, ever see this nowadays. There almost seems to be a segment of U.S. society that is downright against education, learning and reading of any sorts, as if reading a book means you're too uppity or you think you're better than everyone else. I'm sorry if I don't find television all that entertaining or interesting, but I'd much rather sit down with a good read than veg out before the tube. But I realise that's just me.

Why has this happened to reading? Most of the founding fathers of this nation were educated men. True, many of them were farmers of one sort or another, but being a farmer didn't mean they were unlearned (and doesn't today, either).

There are so many elements that come in to play here, from our education system itself to modern technology to even politics and religion, that it's difficult to pinpoint one particular thing that has brought this about. But I will say this, it isn't unmanly to pick up a book. It doesn't mean you think you're better than everyone else if you like Hemingway or Poe or a billion other writers.

It just means you like to read. And in a world that's becoming more and more dependent upon technology, my guess would be that those who read on a regular basis are going to stand a much better chance of success within their communities.

How many actors played Michael Myers in the Halloween movies?

Pale-masked Michael Myers has been the silent serial killer in 9 of the 10 Halloween movies. Halloween III: Season of the Witch is the only film in the series so far not to feature Myers, and that's because that particular movie was not part of any continuity of the other movies in this horror series.

But just how many actors have portrayed Michael Myers? Let's break it down by movie.

Halloween (1978)
For many horror movie buffs, this John Carpenterfilm is the best slasher flick of all time. And it's no easy task to argue against this. Starring Jamie Lee Curtis, the movie has so many things that were original in 1978, but since have become to be staple tropes of the slasher movie genre. Teens doing drugs, having sex, with a killer out to get them. A babysitter at home alone (except for the kids she's babysitting, of course). Creepy music. It's all right there. And who could forget the creepy killer that was Michael Myers? A young Michael Myers was portrayed by Will Sandin, but it was really the older killer, played by Tony Moran and Nick Castle, who kept you up all night after watching the film.

Halloween II (1981)
This sequel continues the night of terror that began in the original movie. Michael is at it again, chasing after and trying to kill the young Laurie Strode who is still played by Jamie Lee Curtis. Tony Moran makes a brief appearance in some archive footage at the beginning of this film, but stuntman Dick Warlock takes over as our masked killer, portraying Michael as he rampages through a hospital after Strode. At the end of this movie, it appeared Michael Myers had been killed. But we know better.

Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Myers (1988)
After not appearing in Halloween III: Season of the Witch, Michael Myers is back. Myers survived the events ending Halloween II, but apparently the Laurie Strode character has been killed in an automobile accident. Figures, doesn't it? Poor Laurie survives a deranged killer in two films, then she's killed in an car crash. Well, Laurie apparently left behind a young daughter, Jamie. And Michael has found out and is now on the hunt for Jamie. A bunch more people get killed along the way and Michael once more is eventually killed. But not really, of course, because there has to be more Halloween movies. So, who had the honor of portraying our killer in this movie? George P. Wilbur, one of only two actors who have portrayed Michael Myers in more than one film.

Halloween 5: The Revenge of Michael Myers (1989)
Yes, Michael is back. And he's still after poor little Jamie. This time our murderer is played by stuntman Don Shanks as George P. Wilbur supposedly was not interested in the role. At the end of this film, Michael isn't killed. Instead, he's imprisoned but soon broken out by a mysterious stranger.

Halloween: The Curse of Michael Myers (1995)
This might be the most controversial of all the Halloween movies, but not because of any gore or bloody scenes. What has upset some fans of the series (and, to be fair, has pleased others), is that a mystical background of sorts is given to Michael Myers. Here it i discovered Michael has upon him the fabled "Curse of Thorn" which means he must slaughter his entire family to save the world from a demon. Or something like that. In my opinion, the whole plot line was confusing and silly. But that's just me. Still, who was Michael in this film? It was George P. Wilbur. Apparently Wilbur got over whatever caused him to turn down the Myers role inHalloween 5, and here he's behind the white mask once more. As for the "Curse of Thorn," this plotline would be ignored by the rest of the movies in the series.

Halloween H20: 20 Years Later (1998)
This film brought back Jamie Lee Curtis as Laurie Strode. It seems Strode hadn't been killed, but was just in hiding from Michael. But oops! Michael has found her once more and he's on the prowl to kill his sister. At yet again, Michael is apparently killed in he end. Chris Durand was the lucky stuntman who was Michael Myers for this movie.

Halloween: Resurrection (2002)
Michael is back. Laurie is back. But not for long. Michael finally kills off his sister in this movie. But what's a killer to do after he's wiped out his family? He goes home. Only to find some twentysomethings are there shooting an Internet show. He kills a bunch of them. Then he's apparently killed by electricity and fire. Michael Myers is finally dead. And it was stuntman Brad Loree who got to portray Michael in his last appearance of the original continuity.

Halloween (2007)
Director and musician Rob Zombiestarted things all over again with this remake of the original John Carpenter classic movie. The plot here is basically the same as the original, though more of Michael Myers' background is show early in the movie. Daeg Faerch portrays a 10-year-old Michael and Tyler Mane got to play the masked Michael we all know and fear.

Halloween II (2009)
Another remake, this one of the Halloween II flick from 1981. Tyler Mane returns once more as Michael Myers, making him only the second actor after George P. Wilbur to be Myers in more than one movie. Also, Chase Wright Vanek portrays a young Michael in flashback scenes.

The final count?

By my count, 11 actors have portrayed mass killer Michael Myers. Another Halloween movie is supposedly in the works, but director Rob Zombie has bowed out of taking part in the next one. But who knows? Maybe there will be more Halloween movies, maybe not. Maybe Rob Zombie will return, maybe not. My guess? Eventually, though it might take a few years, Michael Myers will stalk he silver screen once again.

Related horror links
How many actors played Jason in the Friday the 13th movies?
10 of the Greatest Horror Comedy Movies
10 Classic Movies Every Fan of Horror Should See

25 albums that defined the 1980s and beyond

Thriller - by Michael Jackson (1982)

Starting off with the big one, the Number One Selling Album of All Time. Everywhere. That's right, throughout the whole world, this is the best-selling album ever. Yes, Thriller even beat out the likes of Elvis Presley and The Beatles. But even if Michael Jackson wasn't a favorite of yours, if you were around back in the early 1980s, you have to admit this album was everywhere. On the radio. On TV (especially MTV). In magazines. Just all over the place. There was, obviously, some great songs here. Who could forget "Thriller" and "Billie Jean?"

Asia - Asia (1982)

Asia isn't the best-known band out there, though they had a string of hits in this album with "Only Time Will Tell," "Heat of the Moment" and "Only Time Will Tell." What I find so influential about the band Asia is they were the first of several similar bands (such as The Outfield) that weren't quite hard rock, but were a little more than true soft rock. This seemed to be a trend throughout the '80s. And in my opinion, it was a decent album ... not a favorite, but worth listening to.

The Lexicon of Love - ABC (1982)

British. New Wave. Pop. Sure, there were bigger bands than ABC (like Flock of Seagulls and Duran Duran), but this album was one of the first that really helped kick off what's come to be known as the Second British Invasion, which was basically a bunch of English pop musicians. It's arguable what's true New Wave and which bands should be included in the Second British Invasion, but for the MTV generation I'd kick things off with The Lexicon of Love and ABC. Those other bands (even including The Police) were big on the radio, but they had yet to master the music video, though they soon would. This album included the popular "Poison Arrow" and "The Look of Love (Part One)."

The Number of The Beast - Iron Maiden (1982)

This wasn't Iron Maiden's first album, but it was the band's first really big album with such songs as "Run to the Hills" and "The Number of the Beast." Maybe you don't think heavy metal music is mainstream enough, but it doesn't matter. This band and this album might be the most influential heavy metal album of all time (sorry, Black Sabbath). The rest of the '80s was filled with metal and hard rock bands, some mainstream and some underground, who learned their stuff from The Number of the Beast.

Synchronicity - The Police (1983)

The band's last studio album together, and that's a shame in my opinion. This album produced the iconic, simple song "Every Breath You Take" and also included great songs like "Synchronicity II" and "King of Pain." The '80s, especially the early and mid-80s just wouldn't have been the same without The Police and Synchronicity.

Eliminator - ZZTop (1983)

Come on. Who could forget chart toppers like "Legs" and "Sharp Dressed Man?" ZZTop was a '70s holdover band that really made it big, and into the mainstream, with this top album. And the videos? They were some of the best of early MTV.

She’s So Unusual - Cyndi Lauper (1983)

"Girls Just Want to Have Fun." "Time After Time." "She Bop." All of these and more were big hits off this recording. Earning 5 Grammy nominations, She's So Unusual shot Lauper to the top of the charts and ensconced her as an '80s pop icon. She also had some pretty funny videos.

Sports - Huey Lewis and the News (1983)

1982's Picture This was a pretty big album for Huey Lewis and the News, but it was Sports that shot this band to music royalty. Okay, at least music royalty for the mid-1980s. But who could argue with great songs like "I Want A New Drug," "Walking on a Thin Line" and "The Heart of Rock & Roll?" The band's next album, Fore, was nearly as good as Sports and had its own share of hits.

Purple Rain - Prince (1984)

Prince had had several hit songs before Purple Rain was released, but even today I'd guess most people would think this is his best album (though I'm not sure how Prince would feel about that). Purple Rain had a perfect mix of pop, ballads and even some hard-rock guitar solos. Heck, there's even just a touch of a gospel feel in a couple of songs. This album really had everything. Just a few of the amazing songs here were "Purple Rain," "Let's Go Crazy" and "When Doves Cry." But overall, just an awesome album.

1984 - Van Halen (1984)

It's no easy task to pick a Van Halen album for this list. For one thing, there are so many great albums to pick from. For another, fans of the band always seem to be split between David Lee Roth and Sammy Hagar, the two best-known lead singers of the band. 1984 was the last album to feature Roth at the lead, but the reason I decided to include it instead of any of the other albums is because Van Halen's only No. 1 hit, "Jump," can be found on this record. Hope that satisfies some folks as to my reasoning. Other great songs here include "Panama" and "Hot for Teacher."

Like a Virgin - Madonna (1984)

Love her or hate her, any child of the '80s would have to admit Madonna had a huge influence on the music of the generation, especially with this album. Such hits as "Material Girl," "Like a Virgin" and "Love Don't Live Here Anymore" can be found here. This was Madonna's second album, and while her first album did very well, I've always felt Like a Virgin was the first album to sort of cement her into music history.

The Smiths - The Smiths (1984)

This is probably the least-known band and least-known group on this least, but they still deserve to be here. The Smiths, with lead vocalist Morrisey, were a gigantic influence on the indie, alternative and underground music scenes of this period, and even later. Heck, it's possible that if there had never been The Smiths, grunge might not have even taken off if the early '90s (maybe). This was the band's first album, and it did much better on the UK charts than it did in the United States. A few songs from here are "Suffer Little Children," "The Charming Man" and "Hand in Glove."

Born in the U.S.A. - Bruce Springsteen (1984)

If you are an American living or born any time after 1984, you just about have to know this album. The title song, "Born in the U.S.A.," has been played over and over and over on radios and TV for years. But that doesn't mean it's not a good song. In fact, it's a pretty good song, though it suffers from overplay. Other great songs on this album from The Boss include "Glory Days" and "My Hometown."

Heartbeat City - The Cars (1984)

The Cars was one of those bands that had been around a little while, since the late '70s, but really took advantage of the video revolution and increased their potential and their profits. Heartbeat City was the result, a pretty good album that had some big hits with songs like "Drive," "Magic" and "You Might Think." Unfortunately, The Cars wasn't a band that had longevity, but they still put out some goods albums in the '80s.

No Jacket Required - Phil Collins (1985)

Phil Collins was not an unknown when this album came out. He was the lead singer of Genesis at the time, and had had two solo albums before. But No Jacket Required shot Collins (and subsequently Genesis) into the big, big, big time. Songs included "One More Night," "Sussudio" and "Take Me Home."

Scarecrow - John Cougar Mellencamp (1985)

In my opinion, John Cougar Mellencamp's last really big album and his best. Not only was this a solid album with songs like "Scarecrow" and "Small Town," but it also helped to the show the plight of the American farmer at that time.

Whitney Houston - Whitney Houston (1986)

I'm not the biggest Whitney Houston fan, but even I'm familiar with this album's hits, like "You Give Good Love," "Saving All My Love for You" and "Greatest Love of All." There's no doubt, Whitney Houston has had a large influence on R&B and pop music ever since.

Raising Hell - Run-D.M.C. (1986)

This one album did so many things. It boosted rap music into acceptance by mainstream audiences, it brought back the career '70s music icons Aerosmith, and it had some darn fine tunes. As well as fun and funny videos. "It's Tricky" and "Walk This Way" were the biggest hits from Raising Hell, but there were plenty of other catchy songs, like "My Adidas."

Slippery When Wet - Bon Jovi (1986)

Bon Jovi's album after this one, New Jersey, has actually been a bigger seller over the years. But I always felt Jon and the boys really hit there stride here, with Slippery When Wet. "Wanted Dead or Alive" is still to this day my all-time favorite Bon Jovi song, but I also like "You Give Love a Bad Name" and "Never Say Goodbye."

Appetite for Destruction - Guns ’N Roses (1987)

For hard rock fans, this album was like a breath of fresh air. Guns 'N Roses got back to the bluesy roots of hard music and not only rocked with the best of them, but lead the pack. One of the best hard rock albums of all time, keeping hard rock at the top of the charts another 5 or so years until grunge came along. "Welcome to the Jungle" was the first big MTV and radio hit, but it was followed up by songs like "Paradise City" and "Nightrain."

Document - REM (1987)

REM was around before Document was released, and they had a few decent MTV hit videos and plenty of airtime on college radio stations, but it was really this album that shot the band up into superstardom. Breakthrough songs like "The One I Love" and "It's The End of The World As We Know It (And I Feel Fine)" were all over MTV and the radio at the time.

The Joshua Tree - U2 (1987)

Sure, U2 had lots of hits and good albums before The Joshua Tree, but this was the album that ensured the band would be around for a long, long time as superstars. And this is one of the biggest mainstream albums that could be called "political" for its time. "With or Without You," "I Still Haven't Found What I'm Looking For" and "Bullet the Blue Sky" are just a sampling of the fantastic tunes found here.

Faith - George Michael (1987)

How could this album have not had an influence on pop music, and even R&B to some extent? With hits like "Faith," "Father Figure" and "I Want Your Sex (Parts I & II)" that are still catchy more than 20 years later, this has to be one of the most fun albums ever. No? Not your thing? Don't worry. Millions of others will disagree. And this was back when George Michael was still a hearthrob for teen girls.

Don’t Be Cruel - Bobby Brown (1989)

This album came at the end of the '80s, but it was still influential then and continued to be so into the 1990s. Bobby Brown, a former member of New Edition, helped to fuse R&B and hip hop together on this album, and many other performers attempted to follow him or improve upon him in the coming years, some successful and some not. This album had a really huge song. Do you remember what it was? "My Prerogative." There were some other cool songs, too, like "Don't Be Cruel" and "Roni."

Garth Brooks - Garth Brooks (1989)

With this album, Garth Brooks really paved the future of country music. Even if you don't like country music or Garth Brooks, you'd have to admit this one album has influenced nearly all of country since. "Much Too Young (To Feel This Damn Old)" was always one of my favorites from this record, but "The Dance" was the really big hit and it's still remembered today.

5 cigars that will make you look like Clint Eastwood

Backwoods

These are probably the easiest to find of the cigars listed here, as they're usually available at most grocery and convenience stores. They also come in a variety of flavors, some a little sweeter than others. Backwoods were introduced to the market in 1973 and have been a steady seller since. They're made from all-natural tobacco, and tend to be somewhat sweet. They're not a very stiff cigar, but that can make them nice for storing in a back pocket.

Roughneck

Made in Honduras, these cigars come in the cheroot size, mainly a long, thin cigar that's been cut at both ends. This one also comes in a variety of flavors, vanilla being a favorite, and tends to be on the sweeter side. Not all that easy to find, but is growing in the U.S. market. Also, these aren't overly strong cigars, though they're not bad. They kind of remind me of Backwoods, though Roughneck is a little stronger, in my opinion.

Kentucky Cheroots

Though the Avanti cigar company that makes these cheroots is in Pennsylvania, but the tobacco comes from Kentucky. These are fine cigars, and they don't cost much. They're not easy to find, but some tobacco shops will carry them, or you can ask for them to be ordered at one of your local tobacco shops. These cheroots have a nice, caramel, almost-bourbon flavor to them. But I've found them a little tough to burn and puff on. Maybe I've just never had a good one, because Avanti also makes my favorite cheroot cigar, which is the ...

Ram Rod

Without a doubt, these are my favorite of the cheroots. They have a smooth, bourbon flavor to them, and they burn with excellence. The price is usually really cheap, and these things taste and puff as well as any $20 cigar I've ever had. Pictured below is a box of the full-size Ram Rod, but you can also buy what's labeled as the Ram Rod Deputy, a shorter version of the regular Ram Rod, and this is what I usually smoke. Again, these aren't the easiest cigars to find, but you can get them or order them from most tobacco shops. Also made by the Avanti company.

De Nobili Toscani

This is yet another fine cheroot-style cigar from the Avanti folks. They seem to have most of the U.S. market for cheroot cigars, and that's fine with me since they make such good ones. This is another great cigar. It costs just a little more than several other Avanti cigars, but that few extra dollars is worth it. These things burn smooth, and they've got a strong (but not too strong) tobacco flair to their taste. I recommend. There has been some Internet rumor these were the actual brand of cigars used by Clint Eastwood in the Dollars Trilogy movies, but I tend to doubt it, though Clint has said he bought the cigars in the U.S. Who knows? Maybe so.