On Monday, the Oregonian ran a commentary* by Peter Laufer, in which he attempts to convince the reader to join the “slow news” movement. Mr. Laufer, I am happy to say I am already a member, as evidenced by the fact I read your column on Wednesday, two days after it was published.
I read the paper; also the aforementioned cooking dinner hour with NPR. Unless some national tragedy is occurring, I can wait to wade into the details.
me. For the entire period the sniper was active, all our local news—morning, noon, evening, late night—spent a substantial amount of time reporting about something that was happening on the other side of the country. Given that
most days there was no new news and given that few non-governmental events occurring in our nation’s capital are local it was a colossal waste of time.
is often inaccurate. Agreed. I would
also add that it tends to be quite hysterical. When the shootings at Columbine High School
occurred, I recall thinking, “I can’t wait until someone writes a book about
this.” I had to wait a decade, but the
book was worth the wait, as it carefully and completely proved that pretty much
everything we “knew” about Columbine after the shootings was not accurate.
*If you want to read the original column, it is titled “It’s OK to read yesterday’s news tomorrow.” and is available, for a time, by clicking here.
**If I had more time, I would also read a weekly news magazine and also renew my subscription to Harpers and the Atlantic Monthly. If I had more time and cable, I would watch the Daily Show and the Cobert Report.