Reading yet another post-mortem of dead-tree newspapers, on a newspaper website, no less

I usually try to ignore my own witticisms, but this one may be worth recording because it captures a moment in time. It started with an email from one of my graduating students at Benedictine ...

>Doc,
> I'm sure you've seen this but I thought I'd
> send you a link just in case:
>
> http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2009/05/08/DI2009050803038.html?hpid=discussions
>
> Funny in a variety of ways, primarily because I found the
> article through a link Rich Miller put up on Twitter which
> he affectionately titled "Kurtz is full of crap"

And I replied:

Thanks, _____. I hadn't seen it. I like Kurtz' columns (I like Rich, too, but they're very different breeds of cat). Anyway, I love the lede to his story in The Post this morning, the one they were keying off on in the forum you linked to. I'll quote it:

Lack of Vision To Blame for Newspaper Woes
By Howard Kurtz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Monday, May 11, 2009

Is this it?

Is the product you are accustomed to holding in your hands a relic, soon to go the way of silent movies and manual typewriters?

I have been one of the industry's most fervent optimists, convinced that somehow, some way, newspapers would find a path to survival. But the last few weeks have shaken my belief, suggesting that what I find indispensable -- a daily compendium delivered to your doorstep -- may be left behind by history and public indifference.

... and so on. Great lede, isn't it?

But ... how's this for irony? I'm reading it on line, and the only product I'm holding in my hand is a mouse. I'm part of the problem Kurtz is complaining about.

-- Doc