use Perl

• There are a couple of sources (Score:1)

  by jinx+ (1681) <fluffy@sedition.com> on 2008.05.22 16:46 (#63000) Homepage

  ...out there but I don't have any handy, sorry. I know someone has blog which publishes 100 year old papers every day, you might be able to Google for it and narrow the search to your range. I offer this though: newspapers have rarely, if ever, reflected reality. What we take for crackpottery in things the Enquirer were at times de rigueur. Go back and read some of what Jefferson had to say on the first US newspapers. To know history: letters, art critics, real figures of real goods and flow are much more relevant. You won't find anyone too upset by 110,000 people put into prison camps for epicanthic folds by the US (and 22,000 by the ever-socially-superior Canadians) in the papers. Seeing the raw number versus the abject lack of risk it was meant to abrogate reflects what was really going on. And you don't even need to look back. History is scratched record.

  --
  -- 120 chars should be all we're allowed for epitaphs as well.

  Reply to This

  • Re: (Score:2)

    by Ovid (2709)

    I know that the quality of information from the media is pretty dubious, but the quality of historical reporting is also pretty dubious. Much of history is written from very biased perspectives. For example, many people are unaware that Neville Chamberlain was greeted as a hero in England after giving away part of Czechoslovakia to Germany (similar reactions existed in France). Not everyone had that reaction, of course -- Churchill was allegedly livid -- but today many people second-guess what happened y