All the Syrian TV year were disapointed . Nothing new and you can’t see any real improvement in the TV tools . We still watch the same techniques used before 6 years without a real normal development.

Mustafa Hamido

Nothing is more entertaining than reading newspapers after a a long period of its publishing. Reading the archives of newspapers telling you how we are dealing with our world on the basis of rumors and lies. Who claim themselves as political analysts, you will discover their truth after a period of their articles. These articles might be the features at the time of its publishing, however, it becomes useless and valueless after two or three years of its publishing. We are talking here about the daily newspapers articles and magazines articles which are touching the daily political issues and which a lot of strategies are built on it.

We still remember the feature articles, which were preparing for the American invasion of Iraq. Those articles had been published in what it is called the world leading daily newspaper in Washington, New York and London.

We were believing that all what they claimed facts, it was in fact lies. The US administration used those articles to persuade the world that Iraq is danger on world peace. Full of lies were crowded in those articles. No body account those newspapers and try to boycott  it.

The two best print newspapers in the United States – the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, and the Christian Science Monitor – have just died. The New York Times is nearly bankrupt, and the Los Angeles Times is already there. In beds all around them in the Emergency Room, the world’s newspapers are being fed ink on a drip, as ashen relatives stand and stare. How many of them will survive this depression? And what would a world with drastically fewer people gathering and sifting the news look like?

Newspapers are in a bizarre position. More people are reading the stories we write than ever before: via the web, we have a higher readership than in the most inky-fingered Golden Age. But we are withering. Why?

Since the mid-19th century, newspaper readers haven’t had to pick up the full tab for putting the paper together and delivering it to your breakfast table. First they were subsidised by governments or political parties. Then they were paid for primarily by advertisers who want to sell you stuff. The price on the cover is only a small fraction of the money it takes to pay for gathering the news.

This model is ailing now because, as Professor Paul Starr of Princeton explains: “Until recently, the internet seemed primarily to be additive, vastly enlarging the opportunities for self-expression and public debate, while newspapers and other old media continued serving their old functions, such as financing the bulk of original reporting for the general public.” You increasingly read it online, but the bill was picked up by print readers and print advertising.

But this could only ever last for a transitional decade. As more and more readers begin to click rather than flick, it is almost over. The problem is that an online reader is worth 10 per cent of a print reader to advertisers. So for every reader you lose on the page, you need to gain 10 on the screen. The sums don’t add up – so the newspapers are sickening and shedding staff.

Does it matter? There are some reasons to scorn newspapers in the US, where the press is unusually pompous and proud and protective of the interests of the powerful while bragging about its “balance.” Yes, advertising-funded newspapers are a fractured lens on the world, unconsciously under-reporting anything that threatens the interests of their paymasters. The recently reissued book Manufacturing Consent by Noam Chomsky shows this brilliantly: it’s why almost all newspapers failed on Iraq, on the disastrous effects of deregulation, and now on the climate crisis. But today, we are facing the possibility of replacing this fractured lens with no lens at all.

When I last wrote about the need to save newspapers, one reader snapped: “Why don’t you launch a campaign to save CB radios too?” But CB radios don’t play a crucial role in a democracy. It has been put best by Joe Matthews, a former reporter for the Los Angeles Times, who says: “With fewer watchdogs, you get less barking: corruption undiscovered, events not witnessed, tips about problems that never reach anyone’s ears because those ears have left the newsroom. How can we know what we’ll never know?”

A recent study in The Journal of Law, Economics and Organisation found that one of the biggest single factors in reducing corruption in a country is “the free circulation of daily newspapers per person.” Go to any country, and you’ll find that the lower the newspaper circulation, the higher the corruption. If nobody’s watching, anything goes.

As inky news-gatherers vanish, there is a vacuum that online journalists are not able to fill. With less advertising cash and no upfront payments from the readers at all, they have far less money to send out foreign correspondents, assign people to tricky investigations, or do the long slog that journalism so often requires. Look at the best political site, the Huffington Post, for which – in the interests of full disclosure – I should point out I write. As they are the first to admit, HufPo pays nothing to its contributors, and it knows what is happening in the world only because newspapers send out correspondents. If they vanish, blogs will be left in an airless cabin, talking only about themselves.

This doesn’t have to happen. Many people in the increasingly frantic newspaper industry whisper about potential techno-solutions. Some say an easy system of online micro-payments – an i-Tunes for the news – will save us. Others invest hope in the Kindle, the hand-held device on which you can buy a newspaper. But we can’t afford to wait for them to go mainstream: journalism’s accumulated structures, brands and wisdom could be lost forever by then.

There is a better way. In an age of bailouts, several European governments are experimenting with ways to support the world of news-gathering so it will survive for the 21st century. The best plan has come from French President Nicolas Sarkozy. He has launched a programme where every French citizen, on her 18th birthday, will be given a year’s free subscription to a newspaper of her choice. The effects are subtle. Many young readers will develop a newspaper habit. In turn, newspapers will compete harder to capture this lucrative guaranteed market, and make their product accessible and fresh. A benevolent whirl replaces the current death-spiral.

Of course there is a terrible danger in making newspapers dependent on the government’s actions. Nobody wants that. But there are ways to avoid this trap. In 1971, the Swedish government set up a system of subsidies to newspapers allocated by an independent body on the basis of circulation and revenue data. Intriguingly, the Swedish press became more adversarial and critical after it was introduced, not less.

As the thud of falling newspapers echoes across the Atlantic, we can’t afford to dawdle. Good newspapers – for all their flaws and selective vision – are the sinews of representative government. In 1787, Thomas Jefferson wrote: “Were it left to me to decide whether we should have a government without newspapers or newspapers without a government, I should not hesitate to prefer the latter.” Unless we act now, fast, we may be left with the opposite: a government, but no newspapers left to monitor them.

j.hari@independent.co.uk

Following the launch of an English-language paper recently launched by the Chinese government, a monthly newspaper for English-speaking expatriates in France is due to launch in June. Nicki Wade aims to make The French Post a paper that will enlighten expats with “what’s being debated around French dinner tables.” The ex-Emap publishing director has chosen Michael Streeter, a former news editor of the Independent on Sunday and other UK dailies, to edit the new paper.

They estimate about 200,000 expatriates are living in France, which includes workers, retirees, young families and vacation homeowners. The number has risen in the last 10 years, partly due to high real estate prices in the UK.

New English Newspaper in China

The Communist Party of China launched an English-language paper in an effort to bridge a gap between them and the international community. The first English edition of the Global Times was published , Monday April 20 in print and online.

The paper will run daily from Monday to Friday and will be distributed nationwide. The Xinhua News Agency reported that the paper will “cover the world from a Chinese perspective, and reflects the standpoints and opinions of Chinese people on significant international issues.”

The French Post

According to The Guardian, the French Post will be launched at a time when English-language papers are “healthy” compared to traditional daily papers in the midst of a financial crisis.  Nervertheless, many argue that there’s not much point in it considering most people can get their news online or continue subscribing to English papers from abroad.

What Wade’s plan is, however, is to have an English paper on French news and opinions, creating a more nichy and local feel to the paper. She said, “the French Post will not inhabit a parallel universe or be separate from France, we want it to be part of the very fabric of French society.

“Readers will not only find the views and opinions of expats, but of French contributors too. It is only by listening to French commentators, friends, neighbors and colleagues that we start to understand what really makes France tick.” Wade also adds that the paper is a good target for advertisers aiming at expat communities in France. For some, it is hard to imagine the market is very large.