Why is this page writen in such a positive light for it's topic, and why are we allowed real life examples on New Media Are Evil and NOT this page? I smell bias editing. Really.
Hide / Show RepliesReal Life examples aren't discouraged; if there's an example of someone prominent on the Internet railing about newspapers, by all means, slap it down (while remaining aware of the Rule Of Cautious Editing Judgment). What are discouraged are Truth in Television examples, i.e., those examples where the troper uses the page as an excuse to say something along the lines of, "Old media really are evil. Look at this bad thing over there."
Part of the reason that's discouraged is because we have pages like New Media Are Evil and any of a dozen others where editors can note how poorly major news outlets treat the Internet or other forms of new media. If there's an example of a newspaper pouring scorn on Twitter or videogamers, it goes on one of those pages, not this one.
Why is Scott Kurtz and Newspaper Comics listed? Could someone elaborate?
Removed:
All of these examples are about media that was current at the time. The trope is about how, in the age of new media, old media is bad.