Playing the royal birth

[Dick Whitman]

The NYT had six, and did not even give the royal birth a bottom-of-the-page refer:

Well, the NY Times did put the birth on 1A --- photo only.

Washington Post and LA Times made it 1A centerpiece. The "birth" may not have been on TV, but the reactions were.

Although LA Times' "The Prince of wails has arrived" is a highly questionable headline choice (fine for a Dave Barry column, not so fine for your main news head).

Thank you for actually looking that up.

I "actually look(ed)" it up, too. I just missed the standalone art because I read the Kindle version this morning, then opened the front page online and looked at the teasers.

 

[LongTimeListener]

And where the **** did the Times play the Penelope Cruz-Javier Bardem baby?

http://www.nydailynews.com/entertainment/gossip/penelope-cruz-javier-bardem-baby-girl-report-article-1.1406423

 

[Riptide]

I "actually look(ed)" it up, too. I just missed the standalone art because I read the Kindle version this morning, then opened the front page online and looked at the teasers.

So, you failed.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

 

[93Devil]

It was also teased on the Asian and International versions before the birth.

 

[Dick Whitman]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

 

[93Devil]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_the_United_Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander-in-chief_of_the_British_Armed_Forces

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_the_British_Royal_Family

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Save_the_King


Bump

 

[Dick Whitman]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monarchy_of_the_United_Kingdom

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commander-in-chief_of_the_British_Armed_Forces

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finances_of_the_British_Royal_Family

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Save_the_King


Bump

Yes, they used to be important.

Now they aren't.

 

[BTExpress]

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

That would have been the thinking, IMO. But they did put it out front.

Yes, they used to be important.

Now they aren't.

You really can't justify hardly any sporting event as being important if you ignore the fact that people care. Ergo, there should be no sports section in the newspaper.

But people do care. And that does matter. Which is why there is a sports section.

And why newspapers publish stories and pictures of the royals.

 

[Dick Whitman]

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

That would have been the thinking, IMO. But they did put it out front.

Yes, they used to be important.

Now they aren't.

You really can't justify hardly any sporting event as being important if you ignore the fact that people care. Ergo, there should be no sports section in the newspaper.

But people do care. And that does matter. Which is why there is a sports section.

And why newspapers publish stories and pictures of the royals.

But I understand why people care about sports. It's competition. It's entertainment.

This is just ... people with no real role in society getting married and having children.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

 

[Versatile]

I would have ran the Declaration of Independence in full on A1, had I been making the news decisions.

 

[93Devil]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

This is also about a real princess having a baby. If you have not noticed what the common theme is with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Brave, The Little Mermaid, well there is one, and most women in America have dreamed of being a princess or being treated like a princess.

You might not think it is news, but it is news to a large portion of society, and not just the ones wondering what Kanye West will do next.

 

[RickStain]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

Why do organized games occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their competitions and newspapers feel compelled to give them entire sections of their own?

 

[Dick Whitman]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

I'm not saying they should, I'm saying they do.

People stayed up all night to watch the royal wedding a couple years ago. They stayed up all night to watch Diana's funeral. How many news organizations actually sent people over there to cover the William and Kate's wedding? It sure seemed like a ****load.

This baby will likely one day be the King of England. Is that merely a symbolic title these days? Sure, but that doesn't mean people don't care about it.

This is also about a real princess having a baby. If you have not noticed what the common theme is with Snow White, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Brave, The Little Mermaid, well there is one, and most women in America have dreamed of being a princess or being treated like a princess.

I know. It makes me want to puke. My daughter is being kept far, far away from princess culture. I hate it. It's sickening.

 

[Dick Whitman]

There's no reason not to put it on 1A.

My argument would be that the only reason the NYT did not put it out front is because it went out of its way not to put it out front.

I suppose the better question, then, might be: Why does this family still occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their lives and newspapers feel compelled to give them A1 placement?

Why do organized games occupy a place in the culture such that the public feels compelled to follow their competitions and newspapers feel compelled to give them entire sections of their own?

Oh, it's a fair question.

But I asked mine first!

 

[Versatile]

Why would any obituary of a famous person who has outlived his or her cultural relevance deserve prominent placement?

 

[Riptide]

Why would any obituary of a famous person who has outlived his or her cultural relevance deserve prominent placement?

It's to **** with the 30-year-olds.

 

[buckweaver]

Who's Sammy Baugh? [/angola]

 

[dooley_womack1]

Ha!