newspapers are apparently miffed at google and other news aggregators for redistributing their content.
(actually, that's probably not quite true - truth to be told, they're probably just glad no one has turned out the lights yet - but they are ticked that no one is paying them.)
excuse me? isn't this a conversation that should have happened 15 years ago?
now, of course, it's too late: there are countless sources of free news, and newspapers everywhere are trying to fit dutch boys into dikes long after the levees have failed. they could have jumped on the kindle and other ebooks sooner (the cost of paper being one part of the lossy equation), they might have partnered with e-ink to create digital newspapers, they might have addressed their ridiculously overcalc'd circulations and ad rates long before the web showed us all that the emperor has no clothes, and and and...
ah, well. think of all the trees their demise will spare. which probably means it's a good time to get out of the logging business.
