In London: the Telegraph, and the Guardian.
In Boston: the Globe.
From Pittsfield: the Berkshire Eagle.
In SRQ: the Herald Tribune.
I also read the B.B.C. on line.
I listen to a bit of news on National Public Radio.
Since I am interested in the near and middle East regions, I try to broaden my news sources by, on occasion, reading http://english.aljazeera.net/ or http://www.dailystar.com.lb/default.asp or http://www.haaretz.com/
In most of my reading I have discovered that Susan Boyle has had her day. She is off the front pages.
It’s all very depressing, but my varied news sources are, momentarily, obsessed with just two “stories” – President Obama’s first 100 days, and the Swine Flu scare.
But, to put the “Swine Flu” story in perspective I quote my St. Louis colleague Mike Kinman. He writes:
Deaths this year from swine flu worldwide: 200. Deaths this year from malaria in sub-Saharan Africa: 410,000.
That information has not been on any front page that I have read.
Instead, in my five or six daily sources, (with their “news” gathered from two or three weary sources), I read the same two or three dreary stories, ad-infinitum and ad-nauseum.
But there truly is a different affect between reading newspapers on-line, and reading the print editions.
I need to subscribe to a print paper.
In thinking about this, my guess is that we have but two worthwhile newspapers in the USA - the Washington Post and the New York Times.
When I get back from my May vacation I must try to bite my tight-wad bullet and subscribe to the print edition of the New York Times, which will be delivered here each morning.
(The Washington Post is not available here in a print edition).