Replies

I only took a short look at the first page, and right away I could see the difference in reporting styles from today.
They were very detailed back then, and supported each statement by a chronological sequence of events.
Today, most communication is via sight, with copy serving only as a cursory caption or summary.
Of course, back then, there were no tv’s and the available cameras were huge, heavy, cumbersome and conspicuous.

I had to get records from a surgery I had 47 years ago. I was stunned. It was a major surgery and the hand typed surgical notes were only one half of a page. Things were so much simpler back then

I only took a short look at the first page, and right away I could see the difference in reporting styles from today.

Also notice how they gave out the address of every person mentioned.

These days, to find out even the name of a principle party in a random news story, I find myself in Google Street View scoping out the house and its number, then finding the local deeds registrar's website, looking up the owner, and then doing some cross-checks (e.g., Twitter search) to find out more.

I remember the Kobe Bryant case. They weren't giving out the name of the accuser. But the OC Register interviewed the neighbors on each side. So, it was a matter of looking up the owner of the house in between, then searching the student directory at the accuser's school for someone with the same last name. Bingo!