Indianapolis Times, Volume 37, Number 95, Indianapolis, Marion County, 20 August 1925 — Page 7

THURSDAY, AUG. 20,1925

—but this is 1925 V and the year 1 925 has brought a change in the Indianapolis newspaper situation No longer does one newspaper print more paid advertising than all others combined

\ The Indianapolis Times has no quarrel with the Indian- ’ \ apolis News. We agree with many of their ideas; in fact, on \ this page is reproduced in its entirety an advertisement f Uerht Oft \ printed by the News in their August 19th issue and we even \ / pjetf yf , 4 uiect \ agree with most of the things claimed therein. * old s aOJ soW 6 36 \ But there are a few facts that have not been made clear \ ftft 4 , e rti9e, stores \ and to these we wish to add some additional “light on an old \ ..w'-'t', \ subject.” \ - y o u wore * an a °’ {ed 46 7 \ \ I “ tll^ouaeverßa^As^® l32^ o tot* a v Ol£ * ericd ' e . \ First—At no time more than during a Greater \ - \ Indianapolis Week ought we to agree that \ lers B ° \ - Greater Indianapolis has room for three \ — ■ ' \ ** newspaper, \ * a ... , +; s etO- \ \ . and t ed u catl be a d^ eTtlse . a no^ et * \ \ 11658 ‘ dressy^ e d, a el 01 \ Second—No one Indianapolis newspaper now \ p va X* er 'l' ?rodUC trodced satisfy \ prints more paid advertising than all of its \ 't a rie s1 P a?< ’ T .^rdin cveaSll ctery eat - \ contemporaries combined. The Times gain \ • \ of 1,143,082 and the News loss of 25,536 Unes \ tory Dot c oP are *®/do \ ' during the first seven months of this year \ icetios ® erc l' a otber ariy to ot ' ier - \ is the story of 1925. Indianapolis merchants \ Vo exact art \ are checking results as perhaps never be- \ ° { ’Pf’* 'best roer<di via rc bants, * o ne \ fore and this is their answer in unrnis- \ Vnrerr * veto ru rrt * fte a d ot 1 takable language. \ \ tre ®nbat eWSpa¥el 'pri-nted \ Third—Thriving newspapers are the best \ yof® ay ai l n e a r than aft \ tioli ats d92 3 and a s a six thirteen 18S " es * and 60,36 t \ city. . Detroit, St. Louis and Cleveland \ e ° , C^ l5 ’ l9 ® **** ° f \ are g °° d GXamplcs - For the good of \ • aoa? L S to and i“ d * e^ sive \ Greater Indianapolis no one Indian- \ aga te. i^ eS morc a a boas t. is a^. U o t advertises in . \ apolis newspaper should print more \ T:uis I? J^d^ eC^ua \ c( 3 for adv e^iscr8 ‘ \ advertising than all of its contem- \ ' t oUs^ eV7S t 0 prodUC ? m \ poraries combined, \ ° 1 n results \ \ _ | , dt ,ertUing- first ‘ \ ' \ . TpC . yoiume ° f a \ As we said before, we have no quarrel with \ • u iati° n " first n •' \ the News. It is a good newspaper and a good \ Firs { > n cirC ' n6lPaa ot \ advertising medium—but not the only one in \ ' \

The Indianapolis Times

THE INDIANAPOLIS TIMES

7