Commentary by Ann Snuggs

The last Friday of February was a sad day for many, and not just residents of Denver. The last edition of the Rocky Mountain News was printed. Most of the world does not live in Denver so the rest of us won’t be directly affected. It’s what that death symbolizes and foretells that saddens lovers of the printed word.

Denverites are lucky. The Denver Post is still extant but the increasing demise of print newspapers is disturbing to those of us who grew up with a daily newspaper – or sometimes two or three.

That same week I read an article about the failing financial position of the San Francisco Chronicle - or more accurately expressed, the corporation that owns it. The report said that San Francisco would be left without a print newspaper if/when The Chronicle goes. Scary.

As Bob Dylan said, “the times they are a-changin’ ” and change IS the only constant. I recently saw it phrased: “Change alone is eternal, perpetual, immortal.” Truer words were never spoken but, however ubiquitous change may be, it’s not always welcome.

The Internet was already making inroads on the print market but the deadly blow for many is the economy plunging into the toilet. Unfortunately, recovery is going to be a slow process. It’s impossible to fix overnight a crisis that was created over years. By the time the economy turns around — and it will; history says so — I fear many print outlets will be a thing of the past.

Truth is: Newspapers — and magazines — are not what they once were. I often get more from electronic reports than from the print media but I miss the newsprint on my fingers. Just the other day I bought an area daily — no daily in my small town — just to have the tactile experience of newspaper-reading, but it offered me very little. A sign of the times.

One of my cousins lives in San Antonio and the newspaper there is decent. I read it when I visit with her. One of the local columnists for the Express-News is quite good. I enjoy reading Cary Clack and keep meaning to e-mail and tell him so. Did you catch that? Not write him snail mail but e-mail him. I’m as quick to make the tech shift as many.

Newspapers won’t disappear totally; they just won’t be in print form. In the same article that reported the San Francisco problem, a Seattle paper adaptation was mentioned. The statement was made that the Post-Intelligencer would soon only be available online, not in print form.

The big problem here is that not everyone is connected. Yes, there were plans years ago for cities to make wireless networks available to their residents but it just hasn’t happened. Even had it worked, technology is not cheap and people who are barely able to feed their kids are not likely to spend food dollars on Internet access. What disturbs me most is that I see a disenfranchised group of people, chiefly the poor, who are denied information that should be public. Information is power. Ask any despot, whose first act is to shut down the education system – or take it over for propaganda purposes.

The argument can be made that people in poverty wouldn’t buy papers either but newspapers are cheaper than computers. And that is a definite “duh” statement. I can’t list the large number of young marrieds of previous generations who made it a point — and a point of pride — to manage to subscribe to the local paper. More importantly — they READ it.

As a child in grade school I remember sitting on the front steps waiting for the Pine Bluff Commercial to be thrown. It was an afternoon paper then and chock full of local stories as well as ones from the wire services. Movie theaters ran ads that included posters with credits. And — then as now — my first stop was the comics page. When editorial columns were local, those were always high on my priority list, too.

The second argument I can hear concerning news availability is using the computer at the office to check the news. Easy rebuttal for that one. The same people who can’t afford Net access are the ones whose jobs do not involve computers. No independent news gathering ability there.

The best argument against my position is television news. Of course, my argument against TV news is that the network powers determine which stories will be aired and which will be ignored and they only have 30 minutes, less commercials. One of the main benefits of newspapers in the past is that they offered more selection. Of course, these days, as fewer and fewer pages are printed, the choice in print is more limited, too.

I do have the ability to step back from all this and appreciate the irony of bemoaning the demise of print media in an online article. I can also admit that – because I have no daily local paper — I get most of my news electronically. I even have a browser on my phone and check “top 40, news, weather and sports” — seriously usually headlines and weather — on my cell phone every morning. (Those who caught the “top 40, news, weather and sports” are obviously old enough to remember those good old newspapers of which I speak. Those who aren’t, search song lyrics.)

Still, the times are a-changing and like Dylan said, if you can’t keep up, you’ll be left behind. I’m far from left behind at this point. My mind, though not necessarily my strained eyesight, is adjusting to the new, techy reality. Circumstances have pushed me closer to the cutting edge than my comfort level allows so I will adjust to cybernews, I’m sure.

It’s just extremely hard to see something that has been so treasured and important to my life fade away. Sigh!