Does your "strongly supoort" include funding the organizations you cite at the bottom of your 
message? Even a non-profit must pay its staff, if it wishes to have a staff of PROFESSIONAL 
journalists. Ain't nothin' for free in this universe.

-- Tom Fine

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Chris Bishop" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 6:39 PM
Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The haunting recorded sounds of 19th-century voices

Pay walls shut out millions of people, who have to go to other venues, the
Guardian, the Huffington Post, etc for their news, much of which is
rehashed instead of original reporting. The NY Times recently trumpeted
1,000,000 paid subscribers. But many of those are probably corporate perks,
and even a million is only a fraction of the US reading public, let alone
the world. One could say pay walls are another division between the 1% and
the rest of the people. Besides, pay walls don't cover the cost of
publishing the WSJ, Washington Post etc. These papers all have very wealthy
backers, otherwise they wouldn't exist in the form they are now.

At least most of these pubs allow readers to view a limited amount of
articles for free. Otherwise to view all the good journalism on these,
McClatchy and others, it would take more subscriptions than most people
could afford. Maybe there could be a consortium where one subscription
would pay for a number of publications.

For a strong press, I support ProPublica, Electronic Frontier Foundation,
and Center for Public Integrity.

On Sat, Oct 10, 2015 at 6:12 PM, Tom Fine <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> This is an interesting question. I think under the digital copyright
> whatever act, it is a violation. You can post and distribute a link to the
> page, but you can't copy, paste and broadcast the actual text of the page.
> By the way, we see what the newspapers did to themselves by providing
> their content online at no charge. They deserve their fate because they did
> it to themselves. However, the WSJ, which provides MUCH good journalism and
> is a beacon of the First Amendment has always had a pay wall, and has
> succeeded online due to that pay wall. I always try to respect that pay
> wall, although I have on occasion copied and pasted contents of WSJ
> articles into list-mails. I ask that people take note of the current promo
> of $1 (ONE freakin' DOLLAR) for 3 months digital subscription to the WSJ,
> and consider what value they place on a strong free press and the First
> Amendment.
> -- Tom Fine
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Lou Judson" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Saturday, October 10, 2015 5:10 PM
> Subject: Re: [ARSCLIST] The haunting recorded sounds of 19th-century voices
> With my friends, I like to extract the text with a reader and just send
> the article along. Is there any copyright issue doing this?
> Voices From the Grave
> By
> Terry Teachout
> Oct. 8, 2015 3:39 p.m. ET
> In 1931, Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr., the oldest person to sit on the U.S.
> Supreme Court, turned 90. By then the seemingly ageless judge was widely
> regarded as a national treasure, so CBS marked the occasion with a
> prime-time birthday tribute in which he spoke briefly from his home in
> Washington.
> (photo removed)
> Justice Holmes was the most eloquent jurist this country has yet produced,
> and he rose to the near-final occasion (he retired from the bench 10 months
> later and died in 1935) with characteristic grace, closing by quoting his
> own elegant translation of a passage from a medieval poem in praise of
> wine, women and song that he bent to his own austere purposes. “To live is
> to function,” he said. “That is all there is to living. And so I end with a
> line from a Latin poet who uttered the message more than fifteen hundred
> years ago: ‘Death plucks my ear and says, Live—I am coming.’”
> Three years ago the Harvard Law School Library, where Holmes’s papers are
> housed, launched an online “digital suite”that allows anyone with a
> computer to access its digitized 100,000-document collection of Holmesiana.
> I knew from having read G. Edmund White’s 2006 biography that the 1931
> radio broadcast was recorded off the air and that the Harvard Law School
> Library, where Holmes’s papers are housed, possessed a tape copy of the
> recording. Why, I wondered, wasn’t it possible to use the Holmes Digital
> Suite to listen to that 1931 aircheck?
> I got in touch with Harvard a few months ago and suggested that they post
> the broadcast online, and now they’ve done so here.(You’ll need RealPlayer
> to play the file; it can be downloaded here.) To read what Holmes said on
> that long-ago evening is to be stirred to the marrow. But to actually be
> able to hear it—to listen to the tremulous yet dignified voice of a man who
> met Abraham Lincoln and was wounded three times in the Civil War, then
> spent the better part of three decades sitting on the U.S. Supreme Court—is
> an experience of another order altogether.
> In case you neglected to do the math, Justice Holmes was born in 1841.
> That makes him one of a significant number of notable men and women born in
> the 19th century whose voices were recorded for posterity. So far as is
> known, the earliest-born person to have left behind a sound recording of
> his speaking voice was Alfred Tennyson, who was born in 1809, the same year
> as Lincoln and Felix Mendelssohn. He recorded several of his poems in 1890
> on a machine borrowed from Thomas Edison,and one of them, “The Charge of
> the Light Brigade,” can be easily found on YouTube. So can the voices of,
> among others, Max Beerbohm, Sarah Bernhardt, Robert Browning, G.K.
> Chesterton,Mahatma Gandhi, O. Henry, James Joyce, Rudyard Kipling,Vladimir
> Lenin, H.L. Mencken, Florence Nightingale, Theodore Roosevelt, George
> Bernard Shaw, Leo Tolstoy (speaking in English!), Booker T. Washington,
> Woodrow Wilson and W.B. Yeats. In addition, there are a few fascinating
> counterfeits, including alleged recordings of Walt Whitman (widely regarded
> as a fake) and Oscar Wilde (definitely phony).
> To hear these antique recordings, near-opaque though some of them are, is
> at once mysterious and moving. The pitted wax sputters and crackles
> furiously, and you wonder for an instant what the fuss could possibly be
> about. But then the curtain parts and the 19th century comes to life for a
> few precious seconds, sometimes through a glass darkly, sometimes with the
> near-hallucinatory sharpness of a daguerreotype by Eugène Atget or Mathew
> Brady.
> On occasion they can be unexpectedly funny, as when Browning tries to
> recite “How They Brought the Good News From Ghent to Aix,” comes to an
> abrupt halt, then admits, “I’m terribly sorry, but I can’t remember me own
> verses!” Once in a while the humor is both deliberate and biting. Sir
> Arthur Sullivan, for instance, recorded this grim prophecy when he first
> saw Edison’s phonograph at work in 1888: “For myself, I can only say that I
> am astonished and somewhat terrified at the result of this evening’s
> experiments: astonished at the wonderful power you have developed, and
> terrified at the thought that so much hideous and bad music may be put on
> record forever.” If only he could have known…
> I find it little short of miraculous that these vivid glimpses of the
> fast-receding past have survived into the uncertain present. How wonderful
> that the Web has put so many of them at our fingertips—and how good it is
> to now be reminded by the electronic shade of a very great man that the
> only possible answer to death is life, lived to the hilt.
> Lou Judson
> Intuitive Audio
> 415-883-2689
> On Oct 10, 2015, at 1:39 PM, Steve Ramm <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Some folks couldn't access this. This should work better
>> Steve
>> Here is something from that might interest you: The haunting
>> recorded sounds of 19th-century voices