Whenever I pick up the Friday Star-Telegram, I immediately pull out the tabloid Go! section. I am not interested in movies and music and eats so much, but more along the lines of how much the S-T weekly entertainment guide is based in Dallas. They usually list far more music shows from Dallas clubs than shows here in the Fort.
I also check on which restaurants they review. This week they did their usual three, and all with Dallas addresses. But what caught my eye was the reviewer for two of the Dallas eateries. That would be Dallas Morning News restaurant critic Leslie Brenner. Here is her review of the Urbano Café, and here is the review of Hattie’s. Both of these ran in the DMN a few weeks ago.
It’s bad enough that the S-T can’t find a restaurant over here to review, but then to use the DMN head critic to fill the space? Like I’ve said all along, this shared content between the two papers may have started with some sports and music reviews, but that door is now wide open...
Looks like Fort Worth readers are getting shafted by the "content sharing agreement" between the 2 papers.
"It's that darn economy" Melanie Sill.
It's more McClatchy "change and hope".
We changed and we hope you don't notice. Whoops
God, I am so sick of trying to defend this pop stand.
They should just let Barry Shlachter review chili stands.
Can we please change the subject to more important things? Newspapers run syndicated and licensed stories/reviews/opinions from other newspapers and sources all the time and always have. This is nothing new. Most ST readers are not DMN readers so what's the big deal. The restaurant is still around, no?
Can we please change the subject to more important things?
No actually we cannot, no matter how much you wish it. They deserve to be chastised for failing to take proper advantage of their unethical, but authorized anti competitive business practices.
I see you base your whole justification for demanding silence on the subject on the fact that it happens all the time. That is probably the lamest justification one could ever imagine.
Please give another, acceptable reason this topic should be censored and please come up with something truly justifiable.
11:38pm - Censor? My we are sensitive... Since when is asking to change the subject censorship?
I am merely pointing out this is common and acceptable practice in the newspaper business and has been for a long time.
There is no surprise in finding competing papers running the same stories. Many newspapers run NY Times stories WEEKS after the stories appeared in the NY Times. Same for WSJ stories.
Follow your line of thinking and the ST should stop using AP, NY Times or any other source EXCEPT its own reporters. That's not going to happen.
Maddening to local reporters? Likely. Unethical? Hardly. Seems to be smart business as far as I am concerned.
Sorry you're so bothered to the point of accusing me of promoting censorship. That's not the case. The truth about this is simply that, the truth.
I know it hurts, but I can't help that one bit.
11:38 - RIGHT ON!
This is not syndication - this WAS a feature of original content for the FW readers for decades. It's not anymore and syndication is just used to fill the gap of employees let go. The FWST give you less and less reason to pick it up everyday.
Whoever defends this move, still thinks classified will also come back and that circulation will rise with the sun. - get real people. The train has left, the FWST SUCKS.
6:52PM - Feature for decades. Not anymore. THIS is local syndication. You might not like it but it's what the changed environment demands.
Hold on to the past while the train moves forward to the future. I have a betamax for you if you're interested.
While you obviously hold onto a job that will be as valuable as fishing in the Trinity.
539 - PERFECT!!!!!!!!!!
5:39AM/9:34AM - I don't worry about it because I don't write for a newspaper and I have skills other industries value.
Post a Comment