Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Brokaw: Washington Post Print Paper 'Probably' Dead in 10 Years
Business & Media Institute ^ | 11/20/2007 | Jeff Poor

Posted on 11/20/2007 8:24:27 AM PST by 3AngelaD

hen Tom Brokaw, an old-time mainstream media figure in his own right, says he thinks print newspapers won’t be around in 10 years, that’s probably not a good sign for the industry. The former NBC “Nightly News” anchor appeared at the Sixth & I Synagogue in Washington, D.C. on November 19 to promote his new book..Brokaw said he envisioned a major newspaper going completely digital in 10 years.

“I was at The Washington Post earlier today,” Brokaw said. “And in the lobby they’ve got a wonderful graphic describing how the printing press works and where it is … 75,000 copies an hour it can turn out. Its last run is at 2:15 in the morning and [has] an automatic paper roll that comes when they run out of paper and the ink is recharge and I looked at all that and I thought – ‘Ten years from now, will it be here?’

" I don’t know. Probably … if you would do a hardcore analysis – probably not. It’ll be probably digital 10 years from now.”

Brokaw referred to how the younger generations rely solely on digital forms media to get their information.

“You talk to them about the tactile experience at the newspaper and they look at you, and it’s like ‘Man, what planet were you born on?’” Brokaw quipped.

However, Brokaw said there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information.

“There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

According to Editor & Publisher, daily circulation at The Washington Post was down 3.2 percent to 635,087 and Sunday was down 3.9 percent to 894,428 for the six-month period ending September 2007.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; US: Maryland; US: Virginia
KEYWORDS: birdcageliner; compost; deathwatch; dinosaurmedia; liberalmedia; liberalrag; promisespromises; washingtoncompost; wp
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last
Insert picture of Edvard Munch's "The Scream" here.
1 posted on 11/20/2007 8:24:29 AM PST by 3AngelaD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

Comment #2 Removed by Moderator

To: 3AngelaD
“There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

Geez! When are they going to start doing that?

3 posted on 11/20/2007 8:26:17 AM PST by Rummyfan (Iraq: it's not about Iraq anymore, it's about the USA!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
The ComPost's credibility has been dead for decades.
4 posted on 11/20/2007 8:26:58 AM PST by Zakeet (Be thankful we don't get all the government we pay for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
“There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

Patronizing SOB.
5 posted on 11/20/2007 8:27:01 AM PST by ConorMacNessa (HM/2 USN, 3rd Bn. 5th Marines, RVN 1969. St. Michael the Archangel defend us in battle!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Ten years! That is depressing. I have ten months in the office pool.


6 posted on 11/20/2007 8:27:05 AM PST by heywoodubuzzoff (:-))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Washington Post Print Paper 'Probably' Dead in 10 Years

Party at my house when it happens!

7 posted on 11/20/2007 8:31:56 AM PST by freespirited (I'm voting for the GOP nominee.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
...they look at you, and it’s like ‘Man, what planet were you born on?’” Brokaw quipped.

That's how I always watch TV.

8 posted on 11/20/2007 8:34:02 AM PST by Berlin_Freeper (ETERNAL SHAME on the Treasonous and Immoral Democrats!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConorMacNessa

What did you expect from a NEWSIE doofus, who’s been hawking books lately?


9 posted on 11/20/2007 8:35:51 AM PST by A. Morgan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
“However, Brokaw said there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information.”

Interpret: = make up, spin, withhold, fabricate, counterfeit, extort.

10 posted on 11/20/2007 8:39:01 AM PST by USFRIENDINVICTORIA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Tom, will that be before or after the Goracle says the world ends?


11 posted on 11/20/2007 8:41:34 AM PST by exit82 (I believe Juanita--Hillary enabled Juanita's rapist.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

People said that with the advent of the PC, paperwork would be reduced a lot too. Now it’s so easy to print, that everything has to be printed and copied 100 times.


12 posted on 11/20/2007 8:47:13 AM PST by stuartcr (Everything happens as God wants it to.....otherwise, things would be different.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

All I want ..and will pay for..is who, what, why, where, when and how. Brokaw’s opinion..nada...


13 posted on 11/20/2007 8:47:59 AM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information.
No there won’t and no there isn’t
14 posted on 11/20/2007 8:49:40 AM PST by SF Republican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

can I get a digital countdown counter to that day to put on my FR profile page???


15 posted on 11/20/2007 8:51:21 AM PST by weegee (End the Bush-Bush-Bush-Clinton/Clinton-Clinton/Clinton-Bush-Bush-Clinton/Clinton Oligarchy 1980-2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rummyfan
“There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

Because without the newsreaders, how would I ever understand that forest fires, hurricanes, war, AIDS, crime and the flu is all Bush's fault? /hand wringing

16 posted on 11/20/2007 8:52:22 AM PST by meowmeow (In Loving Memory of Our Dear Viking Kitty (1987-2006))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
“However, Brokaw said there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information.”

Huh. Whaddya know? Journalists are supposed to do that? Silly me, I thought that was a commentator's job, not a journalist!

17 posted on 11/20/2007 8:56:01 AM PST by COBOL2Java (The Democrat Party: radical Islam's last hope)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: ConorMacNessa
"Patronizing SOB."

That was my reaction, too.

Carolyn

18 posted on 11/20/2007 8:57:07 AM PST by CDHart ("It's too late to work within the system and too early to shoot the b@#$%^&s."--Claire Wolfe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: weegee
"In other news, the Washington Post is still dead."


19 posted on 11/20/2007 8:58:16 AM PST by COBOL2Java (The Democrat Party: radical Islam's last hope)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: ConorMacNessa

I believe he is correct. People in general have neither the time nor the training to collect raw information, determine what pieces of information are related and which aren’t, and the ability to do that and put the results in words the average person can understand is still needed today.

News isn’t going out of style because nobody needs it, it’s because they have lost credibility.


20 posted on 11/20/2007 8:59:41 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Brokaw said there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information.

Journalists "interpret information"? Why don't they just give us the information and let us "interpret" it? Maybe that's the reason newspapers are dying, Brokaw.

21 posted on 11/20/2007 9:01:57 AM PST by hsalaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Dear WP

SO DAMN LONG????????

Can I do anything more to speed up the demise of your lefty rag.... other than just throwing your mail with subscription offers straigh in the trash?

Have a nice day :)

22 posted on 11/20/2007 9:02:02 AM PST by ElPatriota (Duncan Hunter 08 & Let's not forget, we are all still friends, basically :) despite our differences)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: freespirited

Bigger party at the Nixon Library!


23 posted on 11/20/2007 9:05:09 AM PST by Dahoser (America's great untapped alternative energy source: The Founding Fathers spinning in their graves.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
“There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

There will never not be the desire, on the part of viewers and readers, to choose for themselves which professional people they want to take complicated information and put it into a form that viewers and readers want to know.

24 posted on 11/20/2007 9:16:01 AM PST by Steely Tom (Steely's First Law of the Main Stream Media: if it doesn't advance the agenda, it's not news.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JackRyanCIA
Until the internet connections don't require electricity, this notion is crap.

The first takedown of the internet during an enemy attack or government action will see newspapers being printed and sold on every corner...like they were 90 years ago.

A smart man like Murdoch understands this, I'm sure.

25 posted on 11/20/2007 9:18:19 AM PST by DCPatriot ("It aint what you don't know that kills you. It's what you know that aint so" Theodore Sturgeon))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
“There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

How about the need for a journalist who can present an idea without using a double negative?

26 posted on 11/20/2007 9:18:30 AM PST by 50sDad (Liberals: Never Happy, Never Grateful, Never Right.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ConorMacNessa
Patronizing SOB

There has been a huge void in my life since Tom Brokaw left the airwaves, because I don't have anybody to process complicated information and tell me what I need to know and what I want to understand...

He also used to cut my meat for me and pre-chew my food...

27 posted on 11/20/2007 9:37:23 AM PST by gridlock (Recycling is the new Religion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
Strange how they ignore the transfer of the add delivery to the USPS. This was caused by the inability of the papers to provide coverage. When the car dealers complete the transition to the Internet and the home sales people stop they will no longer be able to support the staff.
28 posted on 11/20/2007 9:41:42 AM PST by Domangart (editor and publisher)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: gridlock

Broke-jaw is a tool...he is the younger version of Cronkite, in 10 years his beady little soul will be as dried up as Walter’s is today!


29 posted on 11/20/2007 9:42:23 AM PST by iopscusa (El Vaquero. (SC Lowcountry Cowboy))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: COBOL2Java
"In other news, the Washington Post is still dead."

I'm Chevy Chase and you're not!
30 posted on 11/20/2007 9:43:00 AM PST by Proverbs 3-5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD; abb; Milhous; george76; BOBTHENAILER; SierraWasp; Liz; martin_fierro

“When Tom Brokaw, an old-time mainstream media figure in his own right, says he thinks print newspapers won’t be around in 10 years, that’s probably not a good sign for the industry.”

Tom, you are probably correct.

Of course PRAVDABCNNBCBS will slide into the Liberal Cesspool before 10 years.


31 posted on 11/20/2007 9:44:23 AM PST by Grampa Dave (("Ron Paul and his flaming antiwar spam monkeys can Kiss my Ass!!"- Jim Robinson, Sept, 30, 2007))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

The greatest casualty of the Information Age is journalism and journalists — because we don’t need the “interpreters,” but the world’s foremost experts on their subject matter are capable of transmitting their information directly to people capable of understanding.

Not everybody will be receptive to great insights and understanding — which is the first task of communications — identifying the proper audience, and not just (broad-)casting pearls before swine, thinking that is an intelligent thing to do.

That’s the first task in effective communications — and not simply ranting to the world, thinking one’s message will be heard and understood by the proper recipients of that message. There are thousands of people broadcasting their messages on the street corners of the world everyday — and nobody is listening to them either.

And that is the problem of what the random, broadcast message has become in today’s world of communications and information — in which, the first thing done, is to identify the right audience for that information — rather than demanding the acknowledgment of their superiority of understanding that enables them to reduce the complicated to a simpler form.

Instead, most journalists make a simple matter complicated, to prove the superiority of their understanding — which is the ONLY thing they are communicating anymore, and why they are turning people off (and vice-versa).


32 posted on 11/20/2007 9:44:32 AM PST by MikeHu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

With the bias liberal left slant the Post displays, the death knell watch has started. When the NY Slimes completely disintegrates, the Post will follow.


33 posted on 11/20/2007 10:18:54 AM PST by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeHu

I’m thinking about the mundane, “what happened” type of journalism. It’s not an expert issue, it’s an issue of someone having the job of finding out “what happened”, figuring out if “what happened” is related to other things that did or did not happen, and presenting that without bias in a way we can understand.

Plus, we need objective arbiters of the truth. I know we conservatives are sure we have the truth on our side, and the liberals seem to feel the same way. But truth isn’t a pliable commodity, and our country will not survive if we have two sets of truth coming from two sets of sources. If we can’t get the truth in common, we can’t do anything.

We need an unbiased media to filter out the fiction from the fact. We get too much of a “he-said/she-said”, “two-side” to the story today. No matter how stupid the idea, the talk shows can present one person for each side, making it look like genuine competing stories.

This is why more people today seem to firmly believe the truth of things that are absurdly false, even conservatives fall for it. Because we are NOT smart enough to be able to tell who can be trusted, and who can’t, we don’t have the time to thoroughly research a story, or the money to do it right, or the access we need to get all the details.

The internet provides easy access, but that’s only part — it’s WHAT we have easy access to that’s important.

Sure, if there is a film of something, we don’t need someone to tell us what we are looking at. But most of the time we need someone to do the grunt work and collect the facts on the ground, so we can use OUR time deciding what those facts MEAN.


34 posted on 11/20/2007 10:25:58 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Did Tom mention how long he thought that television news would be around?


35 posted on 11/20/2007 10:29:01 AM PST by curmudgeonII
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Depth of understanding communicates itself — and not just one’s protestations that they are “objective” when they are obviously not.

In the new age of understanding, we have to look beyond what someone is telling us is the truth — into their understanding of what is the truth, as their basis of credibility and integrity, and then there is some validity in relying on that source for information. But if everything that person says is untrustworthy, we need to locate sources that are trustworthy — rather than engaging in futile and frustrating arguments about what is truth — when they obviously have no idea what that is about while their whole objective is to convince you of whatever they tell you — as their ego/power-trip in life.

That’s what is being taught in the media and journalism schools — just as the education schools teach how one is to “appear” credible rather than truly having a mastery of a subject matter, which is far more important than a person claiming to be fair and impartial while having no understanding of what they are really talking about. So one needs to have that depth of understanding and insight that communicates itself — rather than merely pretending to be a credible source — that is contradicted with everything they say, and everything they reveal, is arbitrary with no substantiation or connection to any other reality.

That is uniquely the problem of “mediated” reality — in a world of increasing authenticity.


36 posted on 11/20/2007 10:40:47 AM PST by MikeHu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

BrokenJaw has the credibility of toejam.


37 posted on 11/20/2007 10:45:40 AM PST by DustyMoment (FloriDUH - proud inventors of pregnant/hanging chads and judicide!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MikeHu

I agree that today’s media is largely failing in the task we need them to do. But that doesn’t obviate the need for that task to be done.

However, it’s been so long since it was done correctly that most people have lost the ability to believe it COULD be done. So when they are confronted with a truth they don’t like, they simply dismiss the message by dismissing the messenger.


38 posted on 11/20/2007 10:46:15 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

Remember Joe Friday’s demand: “The facts, maam, just the facts.”


39 posted on 11/20/2007 10:50:50 AM PST by 3AngelaD (They screwed up their own countries so bad they had to leave, and now they're here screwing up ours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave; SierraWasp

Agree. Ten years is a stretch. It would mean hanging on by bleeding fingernails, massive newsStar pay cuts (ain’t gonna happen), sale of assets, whoring out add dollars (already happening) and big changes in format designed to attract audience/buyers, which will never happen because they are incapable of changing a decades old, liberal mindset.


40 posted on 11/20/2007 10:57:25 AM PST by BOBTHENAILER (One by one, in small groups or in whole armies, we don't care how we do it, but we're gonna getcha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT

There was a time in which most people couldn’t write their own truth, because they weren’t good enough typists to produce the exacting standards required for a proper reading by others. Those who did that, were typists and journalists, the modern-day “scribes,” whose major function is not to determine truth but replicate a readable copy, that they eventually co-opted to say what they wanted to say, and not what the original author intended.

But now, because of the miracle of word-processors, many more people are capable of composing their own message (thesis) in the manner uniquely authentic to their understanding — which is not the old mediated message of before, which makes everything uniform and seem the same — losing the most important information of those discoveries and insights, which is the manner in which they came to decide upon the truth. That is the most helpful information in thinking about anything — “how” to think and not “what” to think, which is the mass media style of information transmission — but now there is the possibility of an even higher truth.

In the old media way of seeing the world, truth is just what the authority says it is — which can turn out to be entirely arbitrary unless one can trace the methodology by which one came upon their truth. That is the value of original writing — as is being produced by the countless truth-seekerrs in the world today — and not just by one self-designated group of people claiming to be exclusively “objective.”

That has to be determined by each source on a case by case basis, and not simply as a class, because somebody says, “Trust me, I’m a professional manipulator.”


41 posted on 11/20/2007 11:04:32 AM PST by MikeHu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: MikeHu

The question is, do you think a person CAN be an objective observer of an event, and objectively report it?

If not, it doesn’t really matter where the information comes from. If yes, then the question is can anybody do it, or does it require a skill and time and effort which is best obtained by paying someone to do the job?

I believe that if I was sent to an event, I could satisfactorily provide the objective truth of the occurances at that event. But if nobody else would believe me unless “they were there themselves”, it doesn’t matter if I could do so or not.

There was a time that we trusted journalists to faithfully report what happened, and to keep opinion and bias in the analysis pieces. Not any more, and I thik that’s a loss because as an opinion columnist, I am dependent on SOMEONE getting the truth and reporting it.

I have LITTLE trust of the internet “reporters”. They aren’t paid, they aren’t edited, they have no checks and balances. They MIGHT be truthful, but if they aren’t there’s nobody to call them on it or fix it.

There was a time when news couldn’t be too biased because if you learned it you’d drop them. Now we seem to ENJOY bias, so long as it’s for our side. I personally fault ANY reporter, right or left, who can’t give me the facts. I hate writing an opinion and finding out the facts I based the opinion on were not accurate or complete.


42 posted on 11/20/2007 11:23:46 AM PST by CharlesWayneCT
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: USFRIENDINVICTORIA
“However, Brokaw said there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information.”

I was at the Mount Rushmore and they had a film there where Brokaw explained that “our country was founded on liberty, tolerance, and social justice”.
43 posted on 11/20/2007 11:26:17 AM PST by PeterPrinciple ( Seeking the truth here folks.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave
"PRAVDABCNNBCBS"

PRAVDABCNNBCBS sucks "BIGTIME!!!" (Just ask Dick Cheney)

44 posted on 11/20/2007 11:27:00 AM PST by SierraWasp (If Dems had brains they'd be Repubs. And when they learned to use 'em, they'd be CONSERVATIVES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: BOBTHENAILER; Grampa Dave

Ping to #44 reply to Grampa Dave’s comment


45 posted on 11/20/2007 11:28:48 AM PST by SierraWasp (If Dems had brains they'd be Repubs. And when they learned to use 'em, they'd be CONSERVATIVES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD
However, Brokaw said there will still be a demand for journalists to interpret information. “There will never not be a need for professional people to take complicated information, put it into a form that viewers and readers will need to know and want to understand,” he said.

Absolutely true. What you're paying for in a good newspaper or magazine is editing.

Since production costs for electronic news sources and magazines will be very low in the future, it will be much more difficult for the MSM to maintain a stranglehold on national news. I can still see small town papers holding monopolies, but not big city and national papers.

46 posted on 11/20/2007 11:31:56 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp; Grampa Dave
Bears repeating:

PRAVDABCNNBCBS sucks "BIGTIME!!!" (Just ask Dick Cheney)

PRAVDABCNNBCBS sucks "BIGTIME!!!" (Just ask Dick Cheney)

PRAVDABCNNBCBS sucks "BIGTIME!!!" (Just ask Dick Cheney)

PRAVDABCNNBCBS sucks "BIGTIME!!!" (Just ask Dick Cheney)

PRAVDABCNNBCBS sucks "BIGTIME!!!" (Just ask Dick Cheney)

47 posted on 11/20/2007 11:34:00 AM PST by BOBTHENAILER (One by one, in small groups or in whole armies, we don't care how we do it, but we're gonna getcha)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: BOBTHENAILER

Well, all they put out anymore is GANG-GREEN puss!!!


48 posted on 11/20/2007 11:35:54 AM PST by SierraWasp (If Dems had brains they'd be Repubs. And when they learned to use 'em, they'd be CONSERVATIVES!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

Brokaw:’Probably’ Dead in 10 Years


49 posted on 11/20/2007 11:36:51 AM PST by toddlintown (Five bullets and Lennon goes down. Yet not one hit Yoko. Discuss.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CharlesWayneCT
We get too much of a “he-said/she-said”, “two-side” to the story today. No matter how stupid the idea, the talk shows can present one person for each side, making it look like genuine competing stories.

I think that's why many people have adopted, to various degrees, the idea that "for each argument there is an equal and opposite argument," and why so many people can seemingly hold two contradictory ideas simultaneously, without any sign of mental discomfort.

This is one of the most pernicious aspects of the modern conception of objective journalism. Like public schooling, the content is worthless, but the methodology is even worse.

50 posted on 11/20/2007 11:41:32 AM PST by Aquinasfan (When you find "Sola Scriptura" in the Bible, let me know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-62 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson