The real reason newspapers are dying

Newspapers seem to be the last media to understand something. I wish this was a joke but there is currently an article in the New York Times (The Gray Lady) that posits the idea that porn movies lack plot.

The article opens:

The actress known as Savanna Samson once relished preparing for a role. “I couldn’t wait to get my next script,” she said.

There’s no reason to look at them anymore, she said, because her movies now call almost exclusively for action. Specifically, sex.

You can read the full article here:Lights, Camera, Lots of Action. Forget the Script.


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

headline about the media dying is misleading's not the Times(media) that disputes the need for a script, it's the 'actress', Savanna Sampson. And she oughta know...

Headline and description don't make sense

I agree that the headline does not make sense. I don't think that THE Real Reason that newspapers are dying is because the NY Times posted an article about pornography. However, did Bibliofuture have a different reason in mind? If so, they should have been more clear. In addition to the headline being misleading, saying that the article states that no pornography has scripts is incorrect, as the author states that "current" pornography doesn't have scripts. Pornography has had its ups and downs (pun intended) but they are trying to survive and I think that is what the article is about. I can't see how that means that this is the real reason that newspapers are dying.

If I missed something, please explain, because I just don't think this piece made sense.

Reason newspapers are dying

Correction. The real reason newspapers are dying is that people are morons. I marked this story as humor.

For those that did not get it put three things together and see if you can figure it out. Look at how I titled the article and my comment and then factor in that I listed this with the subject humor.

I have faith that Blake and Walt got the joke. The rest of you I cannot help.

I can't speak for Blake

But, yeah, it didn't take too much of my early-morning brain to figure out that you weren't being 100% serious. (So the NYT has to try that hard to legitimize running pictures of porn stars?)

I can't speak for Walt

I got it.

I guess

I'm the alleged moron!


I think between you and the anonymous poster I was more focused on their comment.

truer words have never been spoken:

“On the Internet, the average attention span is three to five minutes,” said Steven Hirsch, co-chairman of Vivid Entertainment. “We have to cater to that.”

who ever needs to see more than 5 minutes of a porn film?


Pace yourself. Think about gardening or something.

oh, now I know why you posted this story...

In lieu of plot, there are themes. Among the new releases from New Sensations, a studio that makes 24 movies a month, is “Girls ’n Glasses,” made up of scenes of women having sex while wearing glasses.

girls wearing glasses... you dirty librarian, you.

and did anyone notice that about half of this article is just mentions of porn films and companies?? it's like porn product placement.

Syndicate content