The Guardian needs a Guardian... in the meantime, they beg YOU for money

At one time, we were all told, "It's ok if newspapers and magazines disappear. Hell, why should we have printers? Paper mills? Ink companies? Newsstands? It's MUCH better if the news is available on a website, and if any typos and mistakes are caught by average people (let's forget about paying for proofreaders)."

The "new paradigm" was that The Internet Uber Alles, and aside from thousands of thousands of people, nobody would lose their jobs in the switch from "reality" (boo, hiss) to "digital" (hoooooooooo-rayyyyyyyyyyy and woooohooo!)

Just how in the name of Jesus Christ would this MIRACLE happen? "Banner ads!" Oh, and not only THAT, but hot links to Jeff Bezos' personal Jesus, AMAZON. See, if you read an article and it mentions there was a car wreck, the word CAR is hot linked, and if you accidentally touch it, ZOOOOOOOM, off you go to AMAZON to look at new cars you should buy, and "other things you will like" like models of cars, books about cars, CARtoons, etc. etc.

So how is this working out, as even Jesus Christ's "Christian Science Monitor" went digital with NO corporeal copy (not even the Holy Ghost of one)? Some newspapers, such as The Guardian and the NY Daily News etc. have slim editions sold at existing newsstands run by increasingly emaciated immigrants. But the prices have gone up. And on the websites, you see BEGGING BOWLS in square shapes:

The problem for The Guardian is...why pay them? As every pirate will tell you, "Writers and editors and everyone in the entertainment business is rich. They don't need money. "Buy it if you LIKE it," is the Internet law. After all, money has to be saved for the real world, where you can't walk into Applebees sit down, and order stuff and tell the waitress, "if I like it, I'll pay for it." Or, better yet, "Food should be free." You know, like newspapers are educational, therefore they have an obligation to give it away.

The Guardian finds itself needing a guardian. It finds itself praying to Jesus. Or to Allah, depending on how deeply sincere they are about "diversity" on their staff.

The Guardian, like so many writers, photographers, singers, artists, buskers, actors, actresses, etc. is on its knees, begging. Pass the hat. Please give us...a DOLLAR...please. PLEASE. We admit it, YOU have us over a barrel and are fucking us up the arse. You've got the DMCA laws on your side, the politicians in your pocket, and anonymous servers and Russian websites where Putin and his friends give free downloads of just about ANYTHING the Western world has by way of entertainment and information. So HAVE PITY. GIVE US...a DOLLAR.

What's next? The New York Times, known affectionately as The Gray Lady, will have to get down on her knees and prostitute herself? For a DOLLAR? Sorry whore, the sluts are giving it away. Newser and Decider and Huffity Puffity take any news that The Guardian or the New York Times generates, re-writes it, and presents it as their own. Photos taken at any scene of news are usually taken by some jerk with a cellphone, and uploaded to Facebook or a blog. All you need to do is give 'em a photo credit and they're happy. If it's a photo of Kardashian doing one of her zillion "wardrobe malfunctions" maybe THAT gets sold to pervy Harvey's TMZ website, and Harvey will have a gay old time snickering about it with his Fagin-army of moronic teenboys, and YOU'll see it with a ghosty "TMZ" logo on it. (They don't beg for dollars.)

You might think that Jeff Bezos, the Mussolini of the Internet, the dickhead of the world, the ruler of Amazon, and more of a billionaire than The Donald, might be a bit upset about all this, because he owns The Washington Post. No. He's not. Like some other rich bastards, he bought the newspaper for power and prestige, and is willing to lose money when he can make it up via his other bastardly business games.

The future of journalism is compromise and begging. Wise editors and publishers will refrain from upsetting wide-eyed power-mad scum like Jeff Bezos, and others who can make politicians loosen DMCA laws to the point where copyright actually IS copy wrong, and "fair use" can be taking someone's entire creative work and simply giving them a "credit" as a source.

Putin, who rigged an election through Facebook, is destroying American and British power houses...television, music and publishing...by giving safe haven to websites that ignore DMCA laws. Happily, he is aided and abetted by the RIAA, by the morons who run Doubleday-Dell-Penguin and other publishing houses, and by hapless and impotent beggers such as the staff of The Guardian, who can't do anything about the rampant plagiarism all over the Net and the ease by which people get their news without paying for it.

Why pay The Guardian a dollar? The rationalization to NOT do it, is that a dollar won't keep them in business anyway. As for ten or twenty dollars, hell, you might want to give that as a Paypal "tip" to a blogger who has given you every Beach Boys album ever made. Or maybe you feel kindlier to that torrent that asks you for a bitcoin donation for saving you all that money by giving you downloads of everything Netflix and Hulu have. And the bottom line...it's easy for writers to write. They should do it free on a blog and go have some thankless job of some kind that helps pay the rent. That $20 that could be donated to The Guardian should instead go towards a few six packs of beer. Kick back and watch free sports on the Internet and have beer. Maybe some chips. That's the life...Life is GOOD...just not for journalists, editors photographers, singers....