There have been massive lay-offs and firings in newsrooms all over the country.

Marketwatch.com reports:

Daily publications ranging from the San Jose Mercury News in the San Francisco Bay Area to the venerable New York Times have axed reporters and editors -- more than 750 -- in little more than a month, as competition from the online world has joined forces with financial pressures to put on the squeeze.

The readers chime in with reasons why newspapers are dying. The first culprit is the internet:

Hey it is not all good in cyberland. Reading 200,000 words of obscenities on political blogs ain't going to make you any smarter. Not to mention the decay of academic standards over the years. The internet has been enabling a whole generation that believes cheating is ok; and making up stories out of whole cloth is journalism. The focus is now solely on the answer rather than building thought processes and experimenting. Innovation will surely suffer.

Not to metion all of the fat asmatic anti-social children being raised in high-tech bedrooms.

But maybe there is more to it, as one reader notes:

One rarely sees stated a very obvious reason to me why these newspapers are fading. Most of them are old school liberals. They lie and print half of the truth. Educated people know this and stop buying their rags. Many of the people that agree with their biased and ignorant point of view are not well educated and don't read the paper. Why did Ron Paul do so well on the internet but get ignored by the liberal media? People who are paying attention now have an alternative. It is the same reason that Rush and others like him do well on the radio, and liberal talk shows aren't as popular. Now if we can only do something about network TV.

Ring, ring - 2003 called and wants their POV back.