Information about Conservapedia
Hello Mr. Schlafly. User Jpatt redirected me to your biography, and I had several questions for you about your personal background and the site itself. If possible, our class work would be published in Loyola's primary publication, the Phoenix. http://www.loyolaphoenix.com/ 1. I read the information about the founding of Conservapedia, and I'm interested in more details. What drove you to make the choice to move from Ivy League law practice to online communication and media dissemination? Do you have any advice for someone looking to publish on the web, especially given that technology moves so quickly in the modern age? Thank you for the information. Sarah
- The traditional media options have been:
- write a book, with a typical best-seller reaching only about 30,000 people, and only one one topic
- appear on television, prevented by the format from conveying anything of substance and reaching only a "dumbed down" audience
- print a newspaper, which is too slow and anachronistic today, and dominated by biased liberals
- Conservapedia is obviously better than all the traditional options. Conservapedia reaches far more people, on far more topics, than hundreds of best-selling books. Conservapedia provides substantive information in contrast with the television medium, and to an audience that is not dumbed down as TV viewers are. Conservapedia is also much quicker than newspapers, and free of the their liberal bias.
- As an added, bonus, Conservapedia incorporates the best of the public. Your student newspaper should consider switching over to a format like Conservapedia to benefit from insights and information offered by your students, and to provide more content than the fixed format can. But some liberals in the media oppose opening their formats to more public input, because that reduces liberals' ability to censor and control. Increasingly, traditional media are about controlling information rather than providing it. Thank God that Conservapedia contributors are able to bypass that liberal censorship here.--Andy Schlafly 10:15, 3 March 2012 (EST)