🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <2736@gryphon.CTS.COM> edk@gryphon.CTS.COM (Ed Kaulakis) writes:
>
>	1) Each issue since the takeover has been slimmer than the last...
>	2) Stupid advertising.
>	3) Now T&A.
>
>	I've been reading Sci Am since I was 11 (28 years), and it is 
>	probably the source of 80% of what I know outside my field. Its
>	loss would be a catastrophe! SUBSCRIBE! NOW!

Agreed, Sci Am is an institution whose loss would be most regrettable!

Over the last several years it has been getting harder and harder for them to
find advertisers, accounting for much page loss and some content loss.
Hopefully, they can broaden the base of their readership and thus their appeal
to advertisers without too much obvious pandering.

And keep in mind also it could have been even worse.  Not so long ago they
were denying rumours, in a way that implied they might in fact be true and
that they were seeking a white knight to rescue them, that they were about
to be bought by none other than the press lord of sleaze ...

	Rupert Murdoch!
-=-
Lum Johnson				lum[%osu-20]@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
"You got it kid -- the large print giveth and the small print taketh away."