That’s what I saying. Laypeople just don’t understand how long it takes to go from print to delivery. No reason they should, but the explanation here has been clear and hasn’t stopped the questioning.
People have posted that most newspapers made a mention of the unfortunate timing and Parade put it on their web site. That was the proper course. Having Parade print up 32,000,000 explanations and tried to get them associated with the earlier copies is logistical madness. Of course they wouldn’t do any such thing. No one should expect it either.
Parade did nothing wrong. They were victims of bad timing. It happens. People appear to be looking for someone to blame. Nobody is. I know it’s unAmerican not to have someone to blame, but the world works that way sometimes.
Our local newspaper had a front page article about the death of singer James Brown and a page 2 advertisement for his appearance on December 28 at our local Performing Arts Center. :eek:
Colin McRae, the rally driver, died in a helicopter crash recently. A new automobile magazine called 0-60 printed a blurb on the cover that said “Crashing at Colin McRae’s” and the article held forth on his perceived recklessness behind the controls of his helicopter.
They couldn’t do anything about this because it is a quarterly magazine.
Exapno Mapcase is exactly right. I work on a monthly magazine. We sent our February issue to the printer last Friday; it takes a week to print and then the post office requires a two-week window for bulk mailing. We want it to hit homes the last week of the month, so there you have it.
Of course we’re not a news magazine, but these early deadlines do decrease the timeliness of our information.
There was apparently a New York Times headline announcing that the Martians had completed a new canal, supposedly printed circa 1910. I haven’t been able to find any mention of it online, though. It’s in the book The Experts Speak by Chistopher Cerf and Victor Navasky, which has been proven to be incorrect on other occasions.
