Rickresource Rickenbacker Forum

There was a segment about the fabs on Entertainment Tonight this evening (I know, one looking for accuracy in reporting need watch elsewhere) but it opened with some clips from Help and accompanying voiceover that said something like "never before seen footage of the Beatles at their height of Beatlemania will be shown"...(can't remember when/ were)..."to kick off the release of Capitol albums blah, blah, blah," and what followed was footage from the first Shea concert. So what gives? Is there really unseen footage they're going to use to promote it or is this just highly misleading hype (or hype written by those with no regard or interest in the fact that this is anything but unseen footage?)

Sounds like misleading hype written by some staff wroter who in 1964 wasn't even a twinkle in his or her daddy's eye and couldn't tell you the difference between a beatle and a beetle.

Reminds me of the "never before heard" Beatle material that came out on cd's in the late 80's and early 90's ... stuff that bootleg record owners had been listening to for 20 years.

Reminds me of a recent on-air call to our local oldies station. The caller wanted to know how to pick-up some free concert tickets he won the day before. He wasn't sure if they were for The Beach Boys or The Beatles...

About 20 years ago my Mom worked for a newspaper in Chgo. The paper had been sold a few times, and there were rounds of layoffs. Finally it got to the point where she said the amount of typos, mistakes and just plain wrong information they printed on a daily basis was staggering. They had fired most of their editors in cost cutting moves. When I read and hear stuff like this I often wonder if it's because the people putting information out are ignorant or they're deliberately being deceptive in a world that tolerates it or just assumes that so many sources are just lying to begin with.

Glen: Newspapers used to be meticulously edited for spelling, grammar, and content. This is no longer true. And news on the internet is even worse. A recent newspaper article listed things we use every day that will obsolete by the end of decade due to newer technologies. Oddly enough they failed to include newspapers in the list. I wonder how they missed that...

I used to work as a writer/columnist and editor at a mid-sized daily newspaper, and in their staffs' defense, I will say that the sheer volume of stuff they contend with daily is overwhelming. That doesn't excuse shoddy spelling and bad grammar, but it can explain how sometimes inaccurate information gets into print. The nature of daily newspaper editing is to throw the important news into the mix at the last possible minute, thus ensuring that it is the latest version of events. For a morning paper, this usually happens sometime around midnight. You have reporters coming back from meetings and writing on the fly, with editors grabbing it and giving it a hasty read before it goes into the final print. It is nuts. The best editors will question any obvious errors or questionable quotes, but sometimes the story runs virtually unedited because the editor trusts the writer. Typos and grammatical mistakes will happen, even with automated spell checking, because the editors just don't have time to read every word. And I have first hand experience that, in proofreading, you sometimes read what you think is there rather than what is really there. It's rather amazing that more mistakes don't get through, especially on small papers with limited staff and less talented writers and editors.

The other thing that happens at many papers is, they take the most talented writers and make them editors, thus removing the best wordsmiths from the daily grind. So the initial product quality goes down, and the editors (who write well) don't have time to fix the story.

I can't blame people for mistrusting news media, especially in America where what passes for news is often the most seedy, lurid, worthless pap. What troubles me more these days is that people mistrust what runs in newspapers, but take as gospel whatever appears on the Internet.

Newspapers probably will always be around, but it probably won't be too long before hardly anyone reads them except for the advertisements, sports and the comics. Today's youth is conditioned to want their information thrown at them in small, digestible bits. They don't want to sit down to read even a short newspaper article, let alone a five-part, in depth series. I doubt that this will ever change.

All I know is, the old Chicago Sun-Times went through the wringer, being bought and sold numerous times by folks looking to wring every last penny out of the cost of running it. And I knew more than my Mom there. I had a friend who was a pressman there and he said the same thing...ludicrous orders were coming down from the top in the name of cost saving. I guess this happens when one business buys another it is unfamiliar with and thinks saving money is as easy as just laying people off. I do know my Mom knew a lot about how that paper ran and they canned a lot of editors...just tried to make every writer their own editor and that was the basis for a lot of mistakes. That, and of course, firing as much local talent as they could and instead just buying as much content as they could from elsewhere. The weird thing about good old printed on paper papers is, when something big happens, a 9/11 and what have you, they can't print enough of them. Because they're irreplaceable as a source of in depth info whereas all CNN does is show the building falling down and shoves a mic into a witness' face (any of us could do that) or shows some twit standing in a hurricane. You're right though, about cheesy show biz or propaganda masquerading as news in the broadcast arena and editorializing in trash rags. Another thing, while I like reading newspapers online, I still enjoy them more in print, and with the suburbs being the rage in America, I think they'll always be a source of relaxation out there.

Glenn: I agree that newspapers are the best source of in-depth coverage. The problem is that the kids who are now 15-18 don't have the newspaper reading habit, so they will not pass it on to their kids. The same can be said about why classical music has such a hard time attracting younger audiences. Todays parents were not raised with a tradition of going to see orchestras, so they don't take their kids, either. It's even hard these days to find parents in their 20s and 30s who know about the Beatles. There's a real lack of diversity being fostered, not only in music but in education -- people know what they like and don't seek out anything different. A "Renaissance Man" is a very rare thing these days. Too many specialists. I'm a big fan of colleges who require that freshman take a broad spectrum of classes for two years, then declare a major.

Dave: Here's how I broadened my college experience. Although I scored a prefect 800/800 on my verbal SAT and only 450/800 on math, I decided to major in electrical engineering. This would require me to take more math courses than anyone on campus except math majors. My advisors, friends and family thought that I had doomed myself to failure. They advised that I major in journalism or architecture, because it better suited my aptitude and interests. After my first semester, I switched to mechanical engineering and struggled scholastically until graduation (only one semester late). For electives, I mostly took experimental composition classes from the music department. I have been successfully employed as an engineer by the same company for 22 years. Being an engineer with excellent communication skills is very rare.

Randy: right you are. I worked as a magazine editor for the Society of Automotive Engineers, and it was our job to help engineers communicate. It was hard work at times. But I would rather be an engineer who has to learn to write effectively than an English major who has to learn engineering. It's just a shame that contemporary society seems to be moving even further away from an environment where knowing a good bit about everything is valued.

I saw some quick clips of that footage. Is it going to be released?

Dave and Randy, I agree with a lot of what you're saying but only time will tell.

When the web came on the scene ten years ago people were saying the same thing about books. But in that time there's been Harry Potter, etc. Though I agree, people today, compared to the past, are unliterate.

They can read, but many chose not to. We don't hear as much about dumbed down things as we did a few years back, but the trend continues relentlessly.

For that matter, I'm miffed by the whole "jobs Americans don't want to do" we keep hearing about. It seems to me these jobs are, traditionally, jobs Americans can't afford to do, or jobs other Americans don't want to pay anything for.

A more recent trend is, a few months back I toured my old suburban neighborhood in the midwest, with a lifelong friend who grew up in the house next door to me. When we were 12, our first jobs were cutting neighborhood lawns for hire.

The lady who lives in my friend's former house now informed us that none of the kinds in the neighborhood cut lawns anymore. In fact, she was hard pressed to say if any of them hustled to make any money on their own.

To me, this kind of work is "the work Americans are teaching their children is beneath them." And we wonder why we keep hearing about obese kids. Do humans no longer need exercise? If so, I missed the paper that day.

Still, I think papers just may survive. They may have to make changes, but all these kids that grew up with the web, many of them have parents who take papers, and many people will want to check out the business section on real paper.

Far as the footage goes, the only clips I saw were oft seen ones from Shea and Help.

Glenn: I've made some of the same observations. When I was teenager in the 1970's, we all cut yards, washed cars, and delivered newspapers to make our money. No adults took these jobs. When we got old enough, we took jobs pumping gas or working in a store or restaurant. Today, I'm probably the only guy on my street who doesn't use a lawn service (a truck full of undocumented workers pulling an equipment trailer). The newspapers are delivered by adults in trucks who handle large sections of the city. Most of the restaurant kitchens are staffed by high school drop-outs and undocumented workers. I don't have any solutions. Our economy has become dependent upon undocumented workers for cheap labor. These workers live in abject poverty, drive-up crime rates, consume a lot of social services, and contribute to a general state of lawlessness in certain neighborhoods. Here in Texas, many industries including construction, manufacturing, hospitality, and agriculture would collapse without these workers. Like I said, I don't have any answers, but the situation is troubling on many levels. I wish our government could come up with a plan, but apparently drafting or enforcing immigration laws is also a job that no American will do!

Well, Randy, my Aunt lives and TX and is frustrated, too. I just kind of look at it as, we have to pay for something one way or another. If one gets a house built or a lawn mowed for peanuts, we're going to have to pickup the the cost of someone's health care and education costs somewhere down the line for it. In this respect, it's not that different from Wal-Mart. If you like their ultra cheap prices, chances are you're also picking up someone's health care because Wal-Mart's not. Otherwise, people can't be here to do the jobs without living here and being human. Far as the kids seemingly being steered away from the traditional teenage jobs, I don't know. There's always been something noble in all work to me and it doesn't hurt to have kids learn that, long as they're not in sweatshops. But I think we've gone some this way (every generation says this about the next, though, that's for sure.) Far as newspapers go, I think they may also remain liked by commuters on trains (and with all the traffic in this country I think rail commuting will see a renaissance.)

Only this morning there was a blurb on the news with George Martin, saying he had some previously unreleased songs by the fabs he was going to be putting out.