As a 26 year old young man, I read the New York Times on a regular basis. I may miss an issue, and I don't read the paper entirely, but I do try to read any newspaper as much as possible.

I really wish that newspapers would just focus on the news. Twenty year olds are intelligent human beings with minds and brains.

If newspapers want to reach young readers, they should experiment with our hearts and minds and not treat us like we're stupid. They should tell us why we should be reading about Iraq, President Bush, the Supreme Court nominations and that Kobe, Britney and dental bling aren't significant. The newspapers have it right to publish their papers for young readers online. But the daily paper version of the news is still king. You can't underline, write, and actively read an online news webpage. Furthermore, nothing is quicker than grabbing a newspaper and taking it with you.

I think the bigger problem is that people in general just don't like to read, and read things that aren't "interesting." We are all trapped in a media bubble that is inundated with too much information. I'm concerned that people are not concerned about the world that is greater than themselves. I suppose ignorance truly is bliss.

As a student photographer, I know first hand the challenge in photgraphing personal subjects. Photographing personal subjects is not easy. This is the challenge of our profession.

Photgraphers are artists. They are seeing and viewing the world around them. Photographers sometimes have control over what they are shooting. But sometimes life just happens, and photographers just so happen to be photgraphing subjects that are sensitive, personal, and private.

So, as viewers, we have the responsibility to look at images. We have to respect images for what they are. Photography is tricky because it doesn't matter if a photograph is made for commericial or artistic reasons; photographs are art even if they are used in ads, or published in a magazine, or if they are a simply snapshots. Art is subjective, and unfortunately people sometimes misunderstand this. In general, people have a very limited definition of what art is (i.e. NEA and Mapplethorpe and Giuliani etc etc etc etc).

I find it disappointing that Ms.Karnasiewicz basically saying that the Leibovitz's work is too intimate. This is a wrong characterization. I haven't seen the show myself as it is presented in the Brooklyn Museum because I live in California. However, I have seen Leibovitz's book, and I must say the images are outstanding.

I think if we ask artists and photgraphers to censor themselves from showing intimate images, we are basically asking them not to bother making any work at all. Leibovitz work is a gift, and that gift should be shared. Viewers should appreciate this gift.

If Leibovitz images "are shocking in their intimacy" and "they have stayed inside that shoebox" then Karnasiewicz is missing the point altogether. Art by its nature is to be shared. If Leibovitz showed us more celebrity portraits instead of shots of Susan Sontag, she would be simply insulting the intelligence of her viewers.

Self-censorship is not the job of artists. Viewers deserve photography that is revealing, intimate and beautiful.

I'm a Chinese-American and I'm not offended by this at all. Rosie's joke was racial, but the difference between her and Richards is that she wasn't using a derogatory remark.

I would have preferred that Rosie wouldn't have made fun of the Chinese language, but honestly I really don't care. I usually would own up to my feelings, but I don't think Rosie is a racist and I think in this case we would be overly sensitive to assume that she is.

Rosie wasn't angry, and Richards was. She wasn't on a angry tirade, and she wasn't telling us that Chinese people would have died on Angel Island if they tried immigrating over to the US in the past. Whatever you want to make of it, this is just another media-attention-grabbing-stunt.

I am all for intellectual, highbrow content on Salon. And I do agree with Joan Walsh's comments about our celebrity saturated culture. But I loved the Fix, and I did not feel guilty about reading it. In fact, I liked that a website like Salon had a celebrity column that was comprehensive and concise. The Fix was like Goldilocks: Just Right. I do not like all my news to be celebrity news, but the Fix was just enough. I miss the Fix :(