Incidental Takings

Republic Editor John D'Anna has posted a funny blog entry that takes a light-hearted jab at the recent Gannett layoffs.   D'Anna considers the current state of journalism and points out the "diminishing numbers, hostile environmental elements, including dangerous predators and inability to adapt to shifting landscape" and concludes that journalists actually meet the definition of "Endangered Species."   He concludes that if listing is good enough for polar bears, by golly it should be good enough for journalists.

Wow, if journalists were protected by the Endangered Species Act, Espresso Pundit would be shut down.  After all, the ESA makes is illegal to "take" a member of a listed species.  The definition of “take” includes to harass, harm, hunt, shoot, wound, kill,trap, capture, or collect, or attempt to engage in any such conduct.  Icouldn't even harass journalists if they wander on to my property.  Dang.

Fortunately section 10 "Incidental Takings" lets me file for an exemption. 

Comments

[Travis]

The only way the danger of extinction of newspapers can be compared to the danger of extinction of polar bears is if polar bears were actually committing suicide.

The death and destruction of print media is all self inflicted. The internet and alternative news did not intend to kill newspapers. Bloggers and the new media were filling a need. When the newspapers were threatened, they chose to jump out the window in a suicidal panic rather than stay the course or make the necessary changes to stay relevant.

I am concerned that newspapers will begin the campaign to save print media and start demanding government protection. Then the only place people will be reading newspapers will be while riding on Amtrak.