Sears seems like it faded away long ago

People woke up Monday to the news reports about Sears filing for bankruptcy. And not the kind that allows a company to skip out on its debts while restructuring itself so it can stay alive.

Sears was Amazon.com before Amazon.com existed

No, it seems like this may be the end for the historic retail giant that has been with us for 125 years, and for many of them was a dominant presence in terms of where we all shopped for goods.

EVEN IF YOU didn’t have a Sears store nearby, there was always the Sears catalog. Which in rural parts of the nation was a dominant presence. It really isn’t a stretch to say that Amazon.com was the same basic business model as Sears – except they use the Internet to make goods available, while Sears went to the expense of publishing hard-copies of catalogs advertising their goods.

But Sears most definitely is a part of the past!

One that I suspect most of us won’t mourn in the least. Unless you happen to think like my step-mother, whose reaction to hearing the news would be to wonder what kind of bargains would be available at the inevitable “Going Out of Business!” sale.

I don’t doubt there are some other people who will have the same reaction. Although I have to confess to being confused, since there have been so many cutbacks and reductions in recent years by Sears to try to buy more time for the company to survive that I don’t even know where there is a Sears store anywhere near where I’m living these days.

Sears stores of my youth … 

I KNOW WHERE all the Sears locations within Chicago proper were. As in “used to be.” We don’t have Sears any longer in the Second City that was the corporate headquarters to the one-time retail giant.

Even many of the suburban locations have long-since closed.

Personally, I might be inclined to want to take a trip to the Sears store where my family often shopped when I was a child, which was the Sears that was an anchor to the River Oaks shopping mall in suburban Calumet City.

Except that store closed some five years ago. I’ve heard countless schemes and proposals for how the city wishes to reuse the building, but none of them have managed to come about.

… are already long-gone from the retail scene

ON THOSE OCCASIONS when I happen to be in the area and drive by it, I see a huge vacant structure begging either for a new tenant or for someone to come along and tag it with graffiti. Of which I fear the latter is the option more likely to occur.

The Sears I remember of my childhood was a place where one could purchase just about anything. A “One-Stop Shop” for all of life’s needs.

But then, our society’s desires changed. Perhaps we think we outgrew Sears. Or perhaps some of us wanted the impression of purchasing higher-quality merchandise and were willing to pay a premium for it.

Although I suspect the majority of us were more interested in finding the financial bargains they could find shopping elsewhere. Just as those old neighborhood retail shops are gone because someone else could provide similar goods cheaper, Sears also got undone by the same basic premise.

The original Sears corporate complex

AFTER ALL, IT would cost a lot of money to keep a fully-staffed store with many departments – including many with specialty salespeople who actually understand their product.

From a business end, it’s cheaper to have the big-box model staffed with retail clerks who know nothing and provide next-to-no service or assistance. Something to keep in mind the next time you shop there and can’t get anybody to help you. You’re getting what you pay for.

The 'tower' no longer caries Sears brand name

Some of us will mourn the memory of Sears. We’ll stubbornly insist on using the Sears moniker to ID the building bought by the Willis Group. But then we ought to think of just when was the last time we bought anything from one of their stores?

In my case, I can’t even remember. I suspect I’m not alone. That’s why they’re soon-to-be no more.

  -30-

And then, there was one?

I remember as a kid my father used to send me to a local store every Sunday to pick up a newspaper. The Chicago Tribune, always the Tribune.

Unofficial newspaper war grave marker?

I can recall him complaining about other newspapers, and once I remember hearing him muttering "I hate that paper" when a television commercial touting the Chicago Sun-Times came on the air.

YET I ALSO can recall whenever we’d visit my maternal grandparents, I’d get to see copies of the Sun-Times. My grandfather subscribed; my mother throughout her life would pick up and read a copy (until the end when her eyesight became weakened to where she couldn’t read much) whenever she’d get a chance.

When she finally passed on a few years ago, it only seemed appropriate that my brother, Christopher and I, paid to put her death notice in the Sun-Times (which ticked off the editors of the newspaper I was writing for at the time – they would have preferred I paid them to publish the notice).

Now I’m sure none of this is particularly unique. Many of us can tell tales about why we chose whichever news sources we prefer for information about the screwy world in which we live.

But those sources are withering away, one by one, to the point where we may soon be down to the survivor. It seems the Chicago Tribune really will be able to declare itself “the winner!!!” of the Great Chicago Newspaper War. The Last News Rag Standing, so to speak.

NOW I KNOW the Chicago Tribune is claiming that the bid its corporate types is putting in to buy the Chicago Sun-Times is not going to result in the immediate cessation of publishing of the Sun-Times. I read that same Chicago Tribune editorial in which they said they envision publishing two separate newspapers.

They “savor the importance of preserving what metropolitan Chicago now enjoys; thriving competition between two large news organizations that know they serve readers best by trying to outdo each other.” Or so sayeth the Tribune.

I don’t doubt the sincerity of the editorial writer who came up with that line, and the others in the editorial that says there will remain two publications with “independent” editorial voices. It is the wish of many a news consumer, except perhaps for some snotty kid-types who think everything rotates around the Internet and that “news” is the boring content – compared to porn and YouTube videos of kids getting into fights and cutesy kitty cats for the more sensitive amongst us.

Sun-Times tries to explain move to its readership

But I’m skeptical. I can’t help but envision the corporate types who, soon enough, will decide that there are economical efficiencies to combining editorial resources into one “super paper” of sorts – perhaps one whose content can then bolster the on-line products they think will sell better to a younger generation.

IT COULD BE one year, or five or so down the line before Chicago becomes a one-newspaper town – perhaps with a few pages set aside for local news called the “Sun-Times section” of the newspaper to pay homage to the tabloid that for most of its life took pride in being the publication of choice for city-based readers.

It wouldn’t even be a new story for Chicago. Let’s not forget that both the Tribune and Sun-Times once had sister newspapers – in the form of Chicago Today and the Chicago Daily News.

Particularly at the Sun-Times/Daily News combination there was the sense of two newspapers that tried to keep unique identities on everything – until the business-types figured they could be more profitable as one larger Sun-Times rather than two separate publications.

It will be interesting to see how the next few weeks play out – since corporate types have hinted they’d like to have this deal complete by June 1, and are merely waiting for federal regulators to indicate that a Chicago newspaper combo wouldn’t violate anti-trust laws.

IS ANYBODY CRAZY enough to put in a competing bid. Would the federal government in this Age of Trump decide to meddle just to show us all who “the boss” truly is!

And what would a Tribune-owned Sun-Times look like? As things stand, the Sun-Times has for several years been printed at the Tribune-owned plant, and I argue the paper hasn’t really “looked right” (the pages seem “too small”) ever since the Sun-Times gave up control of their physical product.

Will future generations wonder why city newsboxes needed more than one slot?

It leaves a lot of questions and uncertainty, that some people I’m sure won’t concern themselves with. It does make me think of a plaque erected along Michigan Avenue south of Madison Street that pays homage to the various newspapers and wire services (including my one-time employer United Press International) that have existed in Chicago.

Is that destined to be the grave marker for the Chicago newspaper casualties that have rung up throughout the years; completely ignored by the many passersby who walk along Michigan Avenue daily without giving it a moment’s notice.

  -30-

Where have all the news boxes gone?

I have to confess to not really noticing until the past couple of days – I can’t remember the last time I bought a copy of the Chicago Tribune from a news box.
 

Is this now a historic relic?

I happened to be in downtown Chicago on Wednesday and had no problem finding an honor box for the Chicago Sun-Times in which to deposit four quarters in order to get a copy of the Bright One.

BUT LOOKING OVER at the nearby spot where there should have been a white and blue box hawking the Chicago Tribune resulted in vacant spaces. I wound up having to walk into that DePaul University bookstore that doubles as a Barnes & Noble franchise in order to spend my $1.99 for a copy of the modern-day incarnation of the World’s Greatest Newspaper.

It got me to thinking around all the locations that I used to stumble into and find a news box from which to buy a Tribune. They are all gone.

And now, Crain’s Chicago Business confirmed it with a report they published Thursday on their website. Newspaper officials won’t say, but the News Media Alliance confirmed that the Tribune really is eliminating those boxes in which people are trusted to deposit the correct amount of change before taking a copy of the paper.

The Tribune does still use honor boxes for the free publications they want people to take – such as the Spanish-language “Hoy” or the pseudo-alternative “Red Eye.”

BUT THE DAYS of reaching into one’s pocket and picking out some spare change in order to get a copy of the newspaper seem to be fading away. Which is a shame, since I have always been the odd-ball (at least as far as newspaper management is concerned) who wants the printed paper, but doesn’t particularly care for home delivery.

Although when one considers how much newspapers are costing these days, I suppose I can see where the idea comes in that you’re better off trying to get people to walk into stores where they can pick up a paper along with whatever goods they buy. Just think of trying to put $6 worth of quarters into a box for a Sunday New York Times.

The beginning of the 'downfall?'

In my case, the Walgreen’s about a block from where I live is a common spot for buying my copy of the Tribune. Either that, or whatever gas station I happen to stumble into while out and about with my life’s business.

Still, there is something about the news boxes that added to the character of the urban community. And not just because they’d have a tendency to eat peoples’ quarters and jam up – thereby refusing to provide people with the paper.

IN A SENSE, it was Chicago city officials themselves who began this trend when they required publications to put their wares in those massive multi-news boxes that were supposed to eliminate the clutter on the streets.

But instead, they often turn into a filthy, grimy mess, particularly when one looks at them and sees that most of the slots are empty. Not exactly something that anybody wants to deposit money into.

Besides, with the Tribune now charging $1.99, it makes me wonder if a news box would have to be built to accept pennies. Or if the Tribune would just want people to pay an even $2 – with all those extra pennies adding up to additional profit for the paper.

In short, newspapers cost quite a bit more than they used to – although I can recall decades ago when then-Gannett CEO Al Neuharth openly said major metro newspapers ought to charge in the dollars for their product rather than for spare change.

HIS THEORY WAS that it would increase the demographic of people buying the paper because the rabble who think in terms of the news box were less attractive to would-be advertisers.

I’m sure there are those people reading this who are screeching and screaming at their computer screens that I’m an idiot – I can read all this stuff for free via the Internet. Except that I really don’t like reading anything on a computer screen – I will go to my grave preferring ink on paper as a medium.

Even though it makes me wonder how much, at the end, I will be shelling out for copies of the paper. Since I can recall selling copies of the high school newspaper I wrote for, and being taunted by fellow students that they could buy copies of both the Tribune AND Sun-Times for the 50 cents I was asking for “The Arrow” of Thornwood High.

So when I hear the hedline to this commentary being sung in the back of my mind to the tune of the old Pete Seeger song “Where Have All the Flowers Gone?,” I realize I’m probably alone

  -30-

EDITOR’S NOTE: I wonder how many people these days comprehend the one-time meanings of “The Bright One” or the “World’s Greatest Newspaper.”

Honoring the President; what holiday?

Another holiday – President’s Day – has come and gone. Yet I doubt many of us noticed a thing.

Monday was supposed to be the day we paid tribute to the many men (not quite four dozen) who have served as U.S. president during our nation’s history. But I wonder how many of us worked our way through the day.

OR IF WE had the kind of government-related post where work actually shut down for the day, did we just waste it away sitting in front of a television set watching whatever mindless junk happened to be on for our viewing?

Personally, about the most impact the day had upon me was the fact that there was no mail delivery. Not that I was expecting anything of significance. Although I did notice one of my neighbors got a package delivery; courtesy of United Parcel Service.

I don’t think many of us gave a thought to those people who have served our nation with the ultimate ego-boost of a political position – that of president of the United States.

As in the guy who in theory is in charge of the country (and often is referred to as “the most powerful man in the world”), but whom we often see can easily be thwarted by Congress and the Supreme Court.

PERSONALLY, I WOULDN’T have the ambition to run for president – I’d feel like I had to make too many ideological concessions to have any chance of getting a significant number of votes.

Plus I’d have to kiss way too many behinds to come up with the kind of campaign cash it takes to run a credible electoral effort. Personally, I don’t see the point of running for political office if one is only capable of taking 1 percent or so of the vote.

So what should we think of the men who have made the effort to be the chief executive of U.S. government? It’s a thankless job, and one that probably draws way too much hostility and abuse from the opposition.

And there’s always opposition! Someone is always going to think you are wrong. And someone is always going to think that the world would be better off without you in it – even if they don’t have the nerve or intelligence to carry out such insane thoughts!

PERHAPS THE CONCEPT of a President’s Day (instead of the old-fashioned notion of celebrating the birth of George Washington – the first president) isn’t the most absurd holiday we offer.

It’s more practical than trying to honor all 43 men who have held the office (and you just know some people would go out of their way to ignore the holidays of those presidents they want to disrespect.

It reminds me of an old “The West Wing” episode where actress Allison Janney’s “C.J. Cregg” character was appalled to learn of a religious group that devoted a day to its members praying for her soul – because they were convinced that as a Democrat who sided with liberal causes, she was going to Hell.

Most people, however, aren’t willing to put that much thought into the day. In fact, I really believe most people let Monday pass by without any thought.

IT WAS A day for retailers to hold weekend-long sales – the one that caught my attention was held by the Guitar Center chain. Fifteen percent off selected items, and it was possible to get a Stratocaster make of guitar for $99.

No, I didn’t go out and buy a discount guitar on Monday. Or a new mattress or sofa or even a car (the latter of which I could use these days). I didn’t give in to commercialism on this day where we’re supposed to honor the concept of our government – although not as intensely as we do on Independence or Memorial days.

Although I have to admit what I actually did do during the morning hours isn’t something I’m proud of – I watched the one-millionth (or so it seems like) airing of the Sandra Bullock film “Miss Congeniality,” a film I'd never seen before, where the attractive actress has to play the part of a frumpy FBI agent who has to disguise herself as a beauty queen to undermine a plot to disrupt the “Miss United States” pageant.

So what’s my punishment for wasting away a federal holiday morning – perhaps I should have to sit through several hours of tapes of George W. Bush’s incomprehensible presidential rhetoric without actor Will Ferrell to translate?

  -30-