 |
 |
   During a recession, should college presidents face the same pay cuts as CEOs?
 Forty years of writing from Taylor Branch, James Fallows, Katherine Boo, Marjorie Williams, Joshua Micah Marshall, and more.
 With help from Washington, the for-profit college industry is loading up millions of low-income students with debt they'll never pay off.
 The best recent memoir from republican Washington is a hoax. That should tell you something.
|
   |
|
|
October 22, 2006
By: THE J-CONSULTANT MAFIA STRIKES AGAIN....Yesterday the LA Times announced that on Sunday it would unveil a "more dramatic look and new features to make it easier to navigate." You can imagine my excitement. In other words, precisely the changes made to every paper that's hired a design consultant in the past 30 years. And more to the point, exactly the look of the Times' corporate parent, the Chicago Tribune. So now the Times looks like every faceless second-tier metro daily in the country. Yippee. Needless to say, the unavoidable result of this is that the front page has room for only four stories now, not the usual six or seven. Yippee again. And since pages 2 and 3 were given up to "navigational aids" and "briefing" items some time ago, this means that there's now a grand total of four actual pieces of news in the first three pages of the paper. If my navigational needs are catered to any further I'm going to need an LA Times decoder ring just to find anything worth reading. Here's an idea: to make it easier to find the news, devote the first three pages of the paper to news. That's easy! And then assume that anyone with an IQ high enough to be interested in a newspaper in the first place is well aware that they can find sports on the sports page and entertainment on the entertainment pages. I know, I know. I'm a fossil. Don't remind me. But a beige box on the front page of today's paper informs me that "On weekdays, the changes are even more pronounced." Be still, my heart. —Kevin Drum 1:00 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (55)Comments
I still read the Tribune. It is difficult to find news in it. There are only three or four stories that I consider national or international news and about three or four single-paragraph stories. I used to make fun of people who chose their paper based on the sports section. I now understand them completely. It used to be that newspapers were necessary to understand the news. Nowadays, a reliance on newspapers is a guarantee of ignorance. What is happening to newspapers now is the same thing that happened to local news twenty years ago and national news ten years ago. How did that work out for you, newcasters? Posted by: reino on October 22, 2006 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINKOops--by local and national news, I mean TV coverage. Posted by: reino on October 22, 2006 at 1:09 PM | PERMALINKI missed the trailer for today's changes, so imagine my little "WTF?" this morning when I unwrapped the paper. It can't be long now until they turn it into the USA Today, LA Edition. At which point, all of my news and opinion will come from the internets. Posted by: craigie on October 22, 2006 at 1:10 PM | PERMALINKWell, I thought the lead story in the LA Times sports section about "da Bears" was very interesting. Plus great coverage of Hawthorne Race Track in Cicero. Posted by: thethirdPaul on October 22, 2006 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINKI suspect these changes (to the front page anyway) are less about aiding navigation than they are about selling papers on a newsstand. Bigger headlines and pictures above the fold make the paper stand out in a crowded visual environment. One thing that's interesting is that while papers are busy reducing the visual density of news on their front pages, cable TV has been doing the opposite. Rather than have a single talking head fullscreen reading a story, these days you get the newsreader ensconced in a corner with a perpetual crawl on the bottom and flashing sidebars and overlays to blast you with mostly unrelated information at all times. Posted by: jimBOB on October 22, 2006 at 1:18 PM | PERMALINKFor a tutorial on what a newspaper front page should look like, I offer HuffPo. Lots of ledes, all referencing complete stories inside. Posted by: SteveAudio on October 22, 2006 at 1:21 PM | PERMALINKYou think the Times/Trib are bad, look at any tabloid paper (not available in Los Angeles as far as I've seen). 4 stories on page 1? Forget that, how about one headline. Not one headline story, just one headline. Oh my God, this sounds like the standard Republican defence of American policies ("we're still better than Stalin and Hitler"). We're all going to hell. Posted by: don hosek on October 22, 2006 at 1:23 PM | PERMALINKThe KC Star did a similar retooling recently. I was underwhelmed. Posted by: Global Citizen on October 22, 2006 at 1:24 PM | PERMALINKKev, nothing wrong w/being a fossil. Here in Dallas, the stupidest change was about 2 years ago. On the back page of Metro (B sec) they put a pic of the front page of each section. Well, unless you turn to that page first thing in the whole paper, you've already seen P1 of A, B and, immediately next to the page page of B, the P1 of C. Duh. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 22, 2006 at 1:27 PM | PERMALINKDon: Most New Times-brand tabloids are pretty good, and usually a lot better at times on local news coverage that the seven-day daily in town. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 22, 2006 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINKWho are these changes supposed to attract, exactly? I never get that. It seems to me that certain sorts of people read a newspaper, and nothing you can do to that newspaper is going to attract the people who don't read. What am I missing? Especially since these things are supposedly tremendously profitable already. Posted by: craigie on October 22, 2006 at 1:32 PM | PERMALINKThe REAL problem with newspapers is that they're all organs of the Democrat party (excluding a few centrist publications like Wash Times, WSJ, NY Post, and a couple others). Compared to that, listening to moronic consultants is a minor sin. Posted by: American Hawk on October 22, 2006 at 1:39 PM | PERMALINKIf you believe in a wider conspiracy, the purpose of all this not to attract people to news, but to direct them to non-news. Then it will be easier for the people to believe that Saddam was responsible for 9/11 and all that. Posted by: gregor on October 22, 2006 at 1:41 PM | PERMALINKcentrist publications like Wash Times, WSJ, NY Post Now Hawk is just phoning it in. Wash Times centrist? The reverenc Moon will be wanting his money back if that is the case. The WSJ reports honestly on the news pages because businessmen rely on facts. They make up for this with a batshit-crazy editorial page. As to the NY Post? I'm just nonplussed that that rag could even be mentioned in the same post as the WSJ as a source of serious news. Posted by: Global Citizen on October 22, 2006 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINKAnd what's with the multiple fonts for the headlines? At least the ChicagoTrib seems consistent. Posted by: Daryl Cobranchi on October 22, 2006 at 1:44 PM | PERMALINKI picked up the Times this morning and promptly said, "What is this ugly sh*t?" Yet another great (O.K. maybe not great, let's say pretty good) newspaper spirals towards mediocrity. I already turn from the front page to page four, skipping the uselessness of pages 2 and 3. I foresee a time in the near future when I don't bother with the front page either, knowing the real news (if it exists at all) is buried deep inside. What ever happened to that David Geffen/Richard Riordan scheme to buy the Times? They certainly couldn't run it as poorly as the Tribune does. Posted by: Samba00 on October 22, 2006 at 1:46 PM | PERMALINKFor some perspective, as an LA TIMES subscriber: I think the way forward for headlines at the paper was actually illuminated by the *Black Dahlia* advertising insert for the film the LAT included with a Sunday paper a few weeks ago (not quite the same effect, but you get some sense of the impact at this link http://webapp1.latimes.com/theblackdahlia/). So I think they should go retro! In the 40's apparently the LAT had screaming 2 IN high two-word solid black headlines about a sordid sex murder. (of course, they actually had competition from other papers back then . . .). Yeah, the press has really degenerated since then . . . OTOH, I used to live in Chicago, and I loved everything about it EXCEPT the Tribune. I truly hope the LAT doesn't get dragged to their level, since it is (even now) a far superior paper in so many ways . . . Posted by: trixi on October 22, 2006 at 1:52 PM | PERMALINKWhat a weak effort from today's American Hawk. I was hoping that the first parody-troll/chain-yanking post would be somewhat entertaining, but that was just lame. Oh well, back to the pure excitement of the 1-4 Packers and the 1-5 Dolphins on Fox. Posted by: Dwight on October 22, 2006 at 1:53 PM | PERMALINKDwight... don't forget AZ at Oakland later! Craigie: You're right.. there's little newspapers can do, IMO. The decline was there well before the Internet, although that has hit metro dailies harder than others. Hawk almost makes you pine for an Al. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 22, 2006 at 1:59 PM | PERMALINKIf you want a real newspaper, despite the stupid libel laws, look to the UK. OTOH, a lot of German papers go even snazzier w/the design than American ones. What we need is something like the Guardian: A progressive newspaper established as a nonprofit foundation that can still have an appropriate nonprofit status to write opinion. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 22, 2006 at 2:01 PM | PERMALINKBiggest error on LAT front? Mixing serif and sans-serif fonts. That's a pretty standard-level no-no. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 22, 2006 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINKOTOH, a lot of German papers go even snazzier w/the design than American ones. Maybe, but I thought Kevin was talking about serious newspapers. Take a look at the frontpage of the daily German newspaper "Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung" (FAZ). On the right with italic headings, two editorials. In the middle, three top stories continued on following pages. Down below four "smaller" stories also continued. On the left information about some top stories about topics other than politics (sports, economics etc.) on pages inside the newspaper. As a newspaper copy editor, I agree with Gadfly. Plus, I don't like all-caps heads, unless the Times is trying to appeal to people who miss the old Hearst papers in L.A. (and I'm talking about the days when the Lord of San Simeon was alive, not the waning days of the Herald-Examiner). Other than that, I don't see anything inherently wrong with the design. Is there a law that says an "elite" paper has to have "Caps-and-Lower-Case" headlines? Or since the New York Times and Washington Post do, it's de rigueur, just as every college must follow Harvard, Yale and Princeton's lead? About a year ago, the Baltimore Sun, another Tribune product, drastically and similarly changed its look -- for the better, as far as I'm concerned. Don't get me wrong...all things being equal, I wish the Times wasn't run by the Trib people, and believe that editorially, it has declined (just as the Philadelphia Inquirer has after its "golden" Gene Roberts era of the eighties). But a paper's design and its content are two entirely different entities. Posted by: Vincent on October 22, 2006 at 2:21 PM | PERMALINKI think the web re-design of the New York Times looks fantastic. Posted by: Linus on October 22, 2006 at 2:33 PM | PERMALINKI am glad that the op/ed is moving to the back of the front section and I do hope that next Sunday's Calendar change means that it will again be a one section tabloid. However, the new front page (I was going to say home page, oh dear) is an abomination. Oh, and the ad inside the front section from the new pubished offered nothing. Here's what to do to bring back the Times: 1. Rehire Paul Conrad Bravo, Kevin. The L.A. Times blows. Not enough coverage of Halloween night rumbles between ballbat-wielding minorities that exist only in my mind. Sincerely, A hack Posted by: A Hack on October 22, 2006 at 2:54 PM | PERMALINKTHe problem appears to be that they didn't chose a very good consultant. These changes are about ten years old and not even particularly well executed (btw, that "picture bar" is called a skybox). There are some fantastically well designed newspapers in this country -- The Hartford Currant being the best of the traditionalists, the Baltimore Sun and the paper in Norfolk, being the best of the contemporary papers. But I will say that time after time after people (mostly those under 40) say that newspapers are hard to navigate. I grew up reading newspapers, and so can navigate them pretty well (although, it bugs me when things move around from day to day). Most people from generation, smart people even, have had trouble finding their way around a newspaper. It's odd to me, but them's the facts as we know it. Posted by: DC1974 on October 22, 2006 at 3:06 PM | PERMALINKPerhaps our host could make a nifty graphic from the raw data here showing the LAT's circulation vs population. Despite SoCal's pop going up 50%, their circ has dropped. (Similar NYT chart here). One of the problems the LAT has in the blogosphere is that there's very little cost incurred by those - including me - who point out all the ways that their reporters lie and mislead. But, the b-sphere isn't L.A. If they want to sell papers here, they're going to have to match the population: over half the workers in L.A. are barely literate. My solution: pass out free copies of the new "Soup Can Literacy Level/Big Pictures/Prizes!" edition of the LAT to each LAUSD "graduate". --- When I opened my TIMES this morning and saw that "bolder blacker headline," I immediately thought of the ad that ran for years in the back pages of cheap magazines: "Woman nearly itches to death!" Yeah, I had the same reaction today when I picked up the paper. Ugh. Less info. More fluff. And a strong visceral sense that I'd need to reset the trust-o-meter to zero until I'd had time to evaluate whether the changes in outward appearance were matched by changes in editorial integrity. One thing I also noticed in the inside house ad touting the changes, was a little "meet the people behind the Times" section, in which a couple of the profiled editors had their email addresses listed as 'firstname.lastname@latimes.com', in an apparent case of 'real address TK' substitution failure. So I guess I can add that to the list of reasons to be suspicious that the newfound interest in repackaging things in a more colorful fashion goes hand in hand with a de-emphasis of old-school editorial excellence, of the sort that would previously have (hopefully) caught such a blatant error. Who needs proofreaders, anyway? Posted by: John Callender on October 22, 2006 at 3:34 PM | PERMALINKIt was a double whammy when my sunday NYT didn't come (and the buggers wouldn't replace it, just give me a credit) and then the LA Times announced a new era of fluff. It would be better if Geffen et al managed to buy the paper and make it more responsive to those of us who want a serious paper in LA, but apparantly the Tribune doesn't want want to sell such a money-maker. Friends of mine at the paper say the Tribune-installed management is screwing everything up by promoting younger transplants from Chicago over the vets who really know how to run the paper. Maybe Geffen could buy the LA Daily News instead and give the Times a run for its money? Posted by: Happy Dog on October 22, 2006 at 4:08 PM | PERMALINKYou missed change (d): banner ad across the bottom of the front page of the calendar section. Posted by: Wireless Enthusiast on October 22, 2006 at 4:13 PM | PERMALINKWell, it was refreshing to read the headline in the Tribune shown above which states "2 GOP Bastions Under Siege" If only there many, many more. Posted by: thethirdPaul on October 22, 2006 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINKFor some reason, the media thinks they have to address the lowest common denominator in their quest to regain/retain readers. This means enticing pictures, titillating, cute headlines, and shorter less intellectually stimulating writing. In reality, what they are doing is shrinking the paper in an attempt to control material costs, and reducing features and staffing in an attempt to cut payroll expenses. In my eyes, I'm more interesting in quality than junk. Posted by: acf on October 22, 2006 at 5:00 PM | PERMALINKabout selling papers on a newsstand.... jimBOB on October 22, 2006 at 1:18 PMNot exactly a lot of newsstands in LA. Most sales are subscription or coin kiosk. lauded the Soviet Union and the way it taught him how to be a good American. .... mhr at 3:07 PMAny one who knows Stalinism would recognize your Bush adulation as typical of Stalin's true believers. The only difference is that nowadays you call him "Bush" and will be voting for his agenda in a couple of weeks. Posted by: Mike on October 22, 2006 at 5:48 PM | PERMALINK I recently retired from a paper now descending briskly into faceless second-tierdom. Successive design changes played an integral role in its decline. Designers are now intent on making newspaper fronts more eye-catching. To do that, they are reversing a trend from the '90s of making fronts look "cleaner," often with lots of white space between design elements (pictures, headline, text, etc.). The spaces are now filled with "reader drivers," typically shaded boxes with blurbs to stories inside. This produces a look like a Kandinsky abstract with words superimposed. Blurbs, data/factoid graphics, story labels and other design elements proliferate at the expense of prose -- although not necessarily of information. A well-written and well-designed news graphic can convey some information, such as statistics, that would be mind-numbing in the body of a story. A graphic also can illustrate a trend more forcefully than a written observation. These "infographics," as they're known in the trade, are too large relative to their content in most newspapers. (The most informative infographics I see regularly, those in The Economist, are quite compact. Writers, editors and designers are effectively forced to distill the subject to its quantitative essentials. You don't see evidence of that discipline and coordination in American papers' graphics.) The most obvious change in this LAT is a four-story front. Thirty years ago, 10 or 12 would've been normal in this paper. The reproduction is too small to read some headlines, let alone stories, but it appears two are features, one timely, the other can't tell. That's not unusual for a Sunday edition. Watch for the balance of news/news feature or analysis/feature stories Tuesday-Saturday to see if front-page content really is softening. The most striking thing about this particular front page is its color coordination. On first glance, you get the sense you're looking at swatches for decorating a sun room. (How long will it be before photographers are assigned to "bring me something in chartreuse?") Concerns about content are justified. Even more ominous than redesigns such as this is the move most papers will make this year to narrower pages. That, plus fewer pages due to declining ad revenues, assures a reduction in content. If you have a good international newsstand, thumb through the German "Die Zeit" sometime. It's a weekly, so they have more time to really get it right, but it sets a very high standard of newspaper layout. The photos and graphics in it have also become more pronounced in recent years, but everything generally remains in a harmonious, visual balance. I also really like how they use the entire back page of the first section for a detailed listing of the edition's contents. I'm certainly no newspaper connoiseur, but it's probably the most beautiful, readable design of a newspaper I've ever seen. (Its contents don't suck either.) Posted by: ami in deutschland on October 22, 2006 at 6:30 PM | PERMALINKConsider yourself lucky Kevin. The recent redesign of the Baltimore Sun was an absolute abortion. Posted by: Sharon on October 22, 2006 at 7:35 PM | PERMALINK免费电影下载 免费在线电影 看免费电影 免费电影网站 韩国电影 两性生活 性教育片 两性健康 性爱图片 免费激情电影 免费黄色电影 最新电影 成人性爱电影 免费小电影 性电影下载 成人电影下载 免费电影在线看 宽带电影 经典电影 恐怖电影 免费影片 免费影院 最新大片 十八电影网 美女写真 人体艺术 美女图片 美女走光 美腿图片 三级片 强奸图片 美女祼体图片 性爱文学 偷拍走光 漂亮美眉 泳装写真 乳罩内裤 成人贴图 情趣内衣 性生活电影 作爱自拍 艳情图片性交电影 做爱视频 性福电影 人体艺术 明星合成裸照 裸女贴图 黄色小说 成人小说 乱伦故事 强暴图片 轮奸视频 性虐待电影 迷奸图片 妓女日记 强奸小电影 自拍裸体 美女床上自拍 黄色电影下载 在线色情电影 裸露美少女 av美女贴图 色情电影下载 同志图片 性爱视频 明星露点 激情写真 女性阴部 美女乳房 美女裸照 性激情图片 激情小电影 性感图片 妹妹贴图 美女做爱图片 汤加丽写真集 全裸美女 淫荡小说 淫乱小说 淫书金瓶梅 舒淇写真 美女脱衣视频 裸体女人图片 人体写真 美女手淫图片 波霸美女 淫水美女鲍鱼 阴户阴道阴毛屁股 美女图库 口交肛交图片 A片下载 毛片 偷窥图片 裸体视频聊天室 成人网站 成人论坛 性爱论坛网站 性变态图片 淫女图片 日本女学生 美女下阴图 女性生殖器 操逼图片 美女激情 搞笑手机铃声 个性铃声 dj铃声 唱得响亮铃声 手机铃声图片 高频铃声下载 手机铃声格式 搞怪铃声 比特铃声 自编铃声 adp铃声 七彩铃声 经典手机铃声 最新手机铃声 手机铃声制作 诺基亚手机铃声 小灵通铃声 移动手机铃声 手机动画 手机彩图 手机铃音 手机铃声论坛 短信铃声 来电铃声 音乐铃声 歌曲铃声 铃声试听 手机壁纸 彩色铃声 v3铃声下载 手机待机图片 免费手机图片 三星手机图片 手机mp3下载 手机主题 如何制作手机铃声 真人原唱和弦铃声 qd铃声下载 经典铃声 联通手机彩铃 神奇铃声 最新铃声 另类铃声 联通铃声下载联通手机铃声 联通炫铃 中国联通炫铃 联通彩铃 联通彩铃下载 中国联通铃声 联通免费铃声 联通用户铃声 联通cdma铃声 联通和弦铃声 联通mp3铃声 联通特效铃声 联通炫铃下载 联通炫铃网站 联通炫铃业务 联通cdma炫铃 联通手机图片 联通手机炫铃 中国联通彩铃 联通手机彩铃下载 联通彩铃业务 联通彩铃网站 联通免费彩铃 联通cdma彩铃 Posted by: mmf铃声 on October 22, 2006 at 9:46 PM | PERMALINKWhat a coincidence...right when they lay off yet more reporters they redesign the paper to hold fewer stories. Vincent: I'm a do-it-all weekly editor; I use initial caps/small caps for subheads. Posted by: SocraticGadfly on October 23, 2006 at 12:06 AM | PERMALINKOpened this morning's LA Times and was horrified about how absolutely trashy is had suddenly become. No dignity at all. UGH! Posted by: Observer on October 23, 2006 at 1:21 AM | PERMALINKI still mourn for the days when the ink came off on your fingers. Now that's being a fossil. Posted by: Paul on October 23, 2006 at 6:11 AM | PERMALINKThe Detroit Free Press is another newspaper that's going down the toilet, in pretty much the ame way as the LATimes. They's switched to narrower paper, pg 2 is a quide to the rest of the paper, pg 3 has switched from being a continuatin of the front page to advertising. The number of stories on the front page has dropped to 2-4 and much of the news content feels more and more like canned features rather than current reporting. Stranger is that its added a second sports section and has taken to printing the likes of Jonah Goldberh and Michael Goodwin. A week back it's headline -- it's top strory of the day -- was that no one had clinched the National League Pennant. This isn't a newspaper -- this is a bird cage liner. Posted by: beb on October 23, 2006 at 8:57 AM | PERMALINKbeb, the Free Press is now run by Gannett, which used to own the Detroit News, and as someone who spent 2 1/2 years at a Gannett paper, I'm sure they are trying to standardize the product to Gannett style (which may result in improvements for small dailies, but downgrades for its larger ones). Since the News is still around, has it changed in any way? By the way, Kurt Andersen has a piece on the LAT in this week's New York mag. His smug, Manhattan-centric angle: don't try to be a national paper like the NYT, but be local to the nth degree. http://nymag.com/news/imperialcity/23173/index.html Posted by: Vincent on October 23, 2006 at 11:19 AM | PERMALINKThe LA Times graphic designer Joseph Hutchinson is INCOMPETENT and a yahoo. This redesign is tacky, tacky, tacky. And headlines, in the main section no less, where most of the words aren't even capitalized? That's the very essence of second-rate. Get rid of Hutchinson!!! Posted by: Janet on October 23, 2006 at 11:41 AM | PERMALINK"The REAL problem with newspapers is that they're all organs of the Democrat party (excluding a few centrist publications like Wash Times, WSJ, NY Post, and a couple others). Compared to that, listening to moronic consultants is a minor sin." American Hawk lowers the rhetoric to the standard righ-wing ignorance. "All newspapers?" It's all too clear that you haven't actually read very many papers, much looked at them. The Chi Trib is, and ALWAYS, has been an "organ" of the Republican Party. The Hartford Courant is quite conservative. Most of the newspapers in this country are more conservative than even the Tribune, which is centrist. The paper I work for in suburban Los Angeles has done a number of stories on the sleazy land deals of a local congressman. He got endorsed for re-election anyway, I guess because he's Republican. The governator got the nod also, despite the fact the he got in bed with special interests faster than you can say "Gray Davis." The papers you mention are NOT centrist, they are conservative or right-wing if you prefer. Last, but not least, the Times endorsed the Republican incumbent for governor of California. I'm not sure that's based on political leanings so much as endorsing the local movie star over the Northern California pol. Posted by: Bob on October 23, 2006 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINKThe new LA Times front page is hideous, but I do like that they finally moved the editorial and op-ed pages from the back of the second section to the back of the first section. That's a step in the direction of being a big-boy newspaper. Now, if Andres Martinez could occasionally support the interests of paycheck-to-paycheck working people, instead of fronting for the corporate investor class, the Times really might start to accomplish things. Posted by: David on October 23, 2006 at 3:34 PM | PERMALINKCouple of things . . . 1) The redesign was done in-house. Joe Hutchinson, their creative director, led it, not a consultant. 2) There was no mandate from corporate. This was the end of a process started by their editors.
The LA Times graphic designer Joseph Hutchinson is INCOMPETENT and a yahoo. This redesign is tacky, tacky, tacky. And headlines, in the main section no less, where most of the words aren't even capitalized? That's the very essence of second-rate. Janet, many excellent newspapers use downstyle headlines. Sorry if it appears "tacky" to you. Posted by: Vincent on October 23, 2006 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINKOne last thing, particularly those who are heaping derision upon Hutchinson . . . what part of the Times newsroom leadership do you think he bypassed to put this redesign into the paper? This was done with the full endorsement of Dean Baquet and other editors. Posted by: Steve on October 24, 2006 at 11:53 AM | PERMALINKdigital surveillance cameras xmx digital surveillance cameras http://digital-surveillance-cameras.blogspot.com Discount prescription drugs online - no prescription! generic tylenol generic tylenol Discount pharmacy UK: discount viagra discount viagra generic viagra generic viagra buy viagra buy viagra order viagra order viagra cheap viagra cheap viagra discount levitra discount levitra generic levitra generic levitra buy levitra buy levitra order levitra order levitra cheap levitra cheap levitra discount cialis discount cialis generic cialis generic cialis buy cialis buy cialis order cialis order cialis cheap cialis cheap cialis mens health pills mens health pills adult DVD rental adult DVD rental adult DVD adult DVD Wholesale adult dvd wholesale adult dvd adult DVD rentals adult DVD rentals adult sex movies adult sex movies adult video adult video adult DVD movies adult DVD movies adult DVD empire adult DVD empire adult video and dvd adult video and dvd cheap adult DVD cheap adult DVD adult porn DVD adult porn DVD adult DVD download adult DVD download adult xxx DVD adult xxx DVD rent adult DVD rent adult DVD online adult DVD rental online adult DVD rental adult DVD now adult DVD now Prescription drugs online prescription drugs online Prescription drugs prescription drugs Drug prescription drug prescription drug online prescription drug online prescription drugs store drugs store Drugs online drugs online Discount prescription drugs Discount prescription drugs Discounted prescription drugs Discounted prescription drugs Prescription drugs discount prescription drugs discount Cheap prescription drugs Cheap prescription drugs Prescription drugs prescription drugs Discount drugs Discount drugs Drugs store Drugs store Adult dating personals Adult dating personals personal adult dating personal adult dating dating personals dating personals Adult dating Adult dating Adult personals Adult personals Adult dating personal Adult dating personal Adult dating services Adult dating services Adult dating online Adult dating online Adult dating Adult dating Online adult dating Online adult dating dating online dating online Online dating Online dating Adult dating services online Adult dating services online online dating service Online dating service Adult dating site Adult dating site Adult sex dating Adult sex dating Adult dating service Adult dating service Adult dating online Adult dating online internet portal internet portal internet search engine internet search engine online portal online portal seek and find seek and find pay per click search engine pay per click search engine ppc search engine ppc search engine internet dating internet dating free internet dating free internet dating online dating online dating free online dating free online dating singles online singles online free match free match singles club singles club online dating site online dating site diskont apothek diskont apothek duscount pharmacy discount pharmacy Posted by: adult sex toys on October 25, 2006 at 1:45 AM | PERMALINK 
November 2009
October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003 August 2003 July 2003 June 2003 May 2003 April 2003 March 2003 February 2003 January 2003 December 2002 |
|
|
    |
|
||||||
|
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
|
||||||||
