Thursday, May 7, 2009

Election Season

I need to address a few issues concerning elections and advertising.
If a written piece, regardless of it’s basis on fact, has opinion or conjecture regarding a measure or issue concerning a taxing entity, it is a political ad.
Being that there are at least two sides to most issues - this newspaper makes space available for all sides of an issue or election. It is up to the individual or group to either express their side or not. It is against this newspaper’s policy to run political ads for free nor can we discount them.
Newspapers can endorse one side of an issue or even an individual candidate. Some newspapers do so frequently, some do not.
In all of my years in journalism, my publications have only endorsed two candidates and that was for statewide office.
Elections are emotional. When you do something for one side, you had best be ready to do the same thing for the other or you’re not playing by the rules.
Candidates, those on one side of a contentious issue, etc... you have a choice whether to advertise or not. But rest assured, opposition to your stance has the same right as you.
Producing newspapers is expensive. The cost of newsprint, ink, mail, etc... have climbed steadily over the past two decades.
It is nearly impossible for Mom and Pop to make a decent living at a newspaper in smaller towns which is why you see so many closing.
When you have a situation where you can offer small businesses a terrific rate to advertise their merchandise or services in several area newspapers, you’d be a fool not to. It’s a winner for the businesses.
I have marketing consultants which are contacting area businesses so that we can do our best to fulfill your needs and get you traffic. If you have not been contacted, you soon will be. And if you wish to get before 15,000-30,000 readers at a greatly reduced rate, give us a call.
Meantime, please consider that your newspaper is an evolution in progress. I am not happy with it and I won’t be until it is exactly how I want it.
Just know that we are working very hard and we’ll continue to strive to improve your newspaper.
Pakistan has between 60 and 100 nuclear weapons.
Why should you care? The Taliban may be getting close to taking over that country and with it, it’s nuclear arsenal.
Can you imagine the Taliban - and Al Qaeda having nuclear weapons at their fingertips?
According to news sources, U.S. officials are worried militants could take possession of the arms during transport or by infiltrating atomic laboratories or fuel-production plants.
The Taliban has recently occupied Buner, a key region 60 miles from the capital, Islamabad. That news increased global fears as to the whereabouts of all of Pakistan’s nuclear sites is unknown.
Something must be done now, even if that means U.S. intervention. I would think the entire world would be interested in getting this situation rectified before it’s too late.
Obviously, the Pakistan government is in jeopardy and judging by how porous their border is, their military are either very weak or simply have not been ordered to do much about it.
You have to think Israel, India, Russia ... just about everyone in the region is watching the situation real carefully.
For the record, Pakistan dropped the ball when they insisted on using negotiations when tackling violent extremism within its borders.
Taliban and Al Qaeda fighters already have strongholds along Pakistan’s border regions from which to plan attacks on U.S. and NATO forces in neighboring Afghanistan.
Of all of the potential threats to U.S. and world security, this one should now be at the top of the list.
The world cannot afford to let these terrorists get their hands on even one of these weapons. Because if they do, they’ll use it on us or Israel and World War III will most assuredly be underway
Copyright Christopher Blackburn 2009

No comments: