Comments on: Paper is the main problem of traditional media — and a moral issue

By: Ash

Ash — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 12:56:59 +0000

Also, wouldn’t you prefer that thousands of trees were planted, left for a minimum of 10 years as required, made a wonderful resource and re-planted on rotation in your country (not someone elses?).
Think about it- all that healthy carbon, planted on rotation, as well as the thousands of jobs for people in your country. We will always need timber- for houses, furniture, to print a book on or to paint a picture on- think about the effects if it did not come from your country (jobs, importing, not knowing where the timber came from – not knowing if it was handled the correct way).
And then, worse, think about if we did not use timber at all- the steel manufacturing, pollution, no-one planting and maintaining the same amount of forests… etc.
And then after all that… think about everything becoming electronic.
Take me back! Give me sun, grass, trees, resourceful products and jobs… I’m not looking forward to what will become.

By: Ash

Ash — Sun, 09 Dec 2012 12:46:30 +0000

Yes, I agree.
If products (for example, steel) replace a healthy resource like timber, the manufacturing of those products cause much more harm to our environment (manufacturing of steel causes much more pollution and it is more expensive- where is the logic?). Similarly, on another note, foresters are in a way helping our climate through tree plantations. (Don’t get me wrong there have been issues with native forests and animals inhabiting trees- though, thinking about the whole, it is the best resource for keeping the world alive and unpolluted http://www.goodwoodguide.org.au/faqs.php).

Lastly, technology is too much sometimes and its taking away the authenticity of things! I will certainly miss reading a magazine or news paper if everything in the fast approaching future is on a screen. Goodbye printing – hello technology… tell us activists, which would you prefer?

By: Cybernettr

Cybernettr — Sat, 26 May 2012 02:38:21 +0000

“Jonah Peretti, who has “a moral issue” with print publishing and its environmental impact”

Actually, I’ve heard the environmental impact of NOT having paper could be far worse. As long as paper and wood products are needed, then there is an incentive to keep the lumber forests in existence. If paper and wood are no longer needed, there will be nothing to stop the wholesale paving over of timberlands. There’s your environmental disaster.

By: Graham Rounce

Graham Rounce — Fri, 25 May 2012 20:56:11 +0000

It would be better if our houses were filled to the rafters with paper, and were made of wood, too. The more carbon we capture, the better? Let’s make everything possible out of long-lasting wood. It might give us a breathing space, anyway.

By: Peter Simmons

Peter Simmons — Fri, 25 May 2012 14:41:53 +0000

‘honestly wonder what tree was cut down that could have gone to good elsewhere in the world’ or even be left to absorb carbon dioxide and exude oxygen? We do after all depend on the latter to stay alive, and the former is threatening to bake our world dry.

By: Vin

Vin — Tue, 22 May 2012 01:45:36 +0000

I remember a cute youtube video in which a little baby girl was flicking through a magazine and being puzzled while trying to scroll it as per her ipad habit.

By: Bob Vasquez

Bob Vasquez — Mon, 21 May 2012 22:52:32 +0000

No, I do not feel guilty reading the newspaper because I don’t read second- and third-hand corporate spin. Newspapers are, at best, used to wrap fish.

By: GatorALLin

GatorALLin — Mon, 21 May 2012 17:41:30 +0000

I hate the black ink on my fingers…..and I do honestly wonder what tree was cut down that could have gone to good elsewhere in the world. I normally never read from paper anymore…everything is app download or by email now… but at a hotel, train or flight I do get to read them from time to time…. so this is that thing you call a newspaper…ahh..I heard of these…LOL. Nothing worse than double tapping the page to remember there is no click on link with more info…. ha!