Who Cares What's in the Paper Anymore?

Chicago Tribune TV critic Maureen Dowd is leaving the Tribune.

She says it's because of a diminished interest on the part of management in what she does, ie: watches and comments on a lot of television programs. She doesn't think she'll be replaced.

((Note to Randy Michaels: I'd be happy to take half her salary and work from home...))

C'mon. Who cares what a local critic thinks about what's on TV? Or what's good/bad about the movies? For that matter, who gives a rat's butt about a local critic's review of local theatre or books by local authors or, for that matter again, new cars?

And seriously, why do we need to have all those sports commentators taking up space? I don't care about the nitwits in the front office of the Cubs and how they choose players. Or all the stupid trades the Bears or the Blackhawks make. What's that to me?

Frankly, I'm not really interested in the opinions of a bunch of people who used to cover the news and now sit back in their suspenders and drink coffee all day and write stupid editorials, either. What difference do they make, huh? It's not like politicians get elected, or not, or policies/laws get enacted, or not, based on what some silly newspaper has to say.

Frankly all that mostly biased political coverage could go, too. For example, how many people in Illinois really care that Blago tried to sell a Senate seat? Huh? And those stupid "sidebars" and "soft features?" Bah! Columnists? I never agree with them anyway.

I just read the paper for hard news. Oh wait. I don't read the actual "paper" any more at all. Just look online.

Then you have to consider those stupid advertisements, too. I don't read 'em. Don't use 'em. Don't buy crap based on them. Do you really need them?

So what the heck, Randy Michaels and Sam Zell, get rid of all the extras and save yourselves some money.

When you think about it, all those big rolls of paper have got to be mucho expensivo.