When it comes to comics, the winners are ... *
This note will appear in Monday's Calendar section:
To Our Readers
Today we introduce two new comics to our daily lineup: "Stone Soup" by Jan Eliot and "Home and Away" by Steve Sicula. They replace "For Better or for Worse" and "Sally Forth." For more about our decision, go to latimes.com/readersrep. And comments are welcome at comics (at) latimes.com.
Sherry Stern, the editor who oversees the comics, has been asking readers their thoughts for the past several months as a variety of strips were given five-week trial runs. The entry on this journal for the most recent try-out, "Stone Soup," includes links to previous posts as well.
Readers were variously tickled and annoyed at the chance to vote, as Stern's explanation below says.
Here's what Stern said:
In August, Lynn Johnston announced that she was going to stop creating her comic "For Better or for Worse" and that she would tell the story of the comic's Patterson family over again. We decided to sample the "new" "For Better or for Worse" and several other comics and let our readers tell us their preferences.
More than 2,000 emails later, we have decided to add two of the sampled comics to our pages: "Stone Soup" by Jan Eliot replaces "For Better or for Worse" and "Home and Away" by Steve Sicula replaces "Sally Forth."
I appreciated hearing from our readers, ranging from those who were thankful for the chance to offer an opinion to those who questioned my intelligence for even considering dropping "For Better or For Worse."
Ultimately what won was the aim to keep the comic pages fresh and relevant. Readers responded to "Stone Soup" and "Home and Away" in a way that made me believe they appreciated the humor and humanity of both comics and wanted a long-time relationship with the characters.
I know people will be disappointed that we didn't keep "For Better or For Worse." But many, many other Times readers agreed with this letter writer:
I've enjoyed Lynn Johnston's comic strip for at least the past 15 years. I was greatly saddened to read that she was no longer going to continue it. I was rather perplexed to hear that she changed her mind and was going to continue it but do so by going back and starting over. What? As much as I've loved Ms. Johnston's work, I really don't need a rehash. There are so many new, exciting, funny comic strip creators out there. Please give them (and your readers) a chance rather than turning back the clock.
(Stern, other editors and comic artists talked about polling readers on comics in a recent story at washingtonpost.com.)
*Update Monday: Below is the note that Stern is sending to readers who have sent comments.
Thanks for writing.
Because "For Better or for Worse" was ending (in a sense), we thought it would be a good time to hear what readers think of some other comics.
The decision to replace "Sally Forth" with "Home and Away" wasn't planned as part of the testing, but was a result to the positive response to "Home and Away" and to keep our comics pages fresh. "Home and Away" is a new comic that has the promise to be a clever and relevant take on working families and should speak to the "Sally Forth" crowd. "Stone Soup" is aimed at those who liked "For Better or for Worse."
It's always tough to add and subtract comics. We keep "Peanuts" even though it's in repeats because we know it's the most popular comic we run. But we try to balance the old favorites with new comics that speak to different audiences.
I hope you give both "Home and Away" and "Stone Soup" some time and see if they develop as we hope. We have no long-term contract for the comics and will be watching them as well.
Sincerely,
Sherry Stern
Deputy Editor, Features
*Update Tuesday: Some comments and questions from readers are addressed in a new post on this journal.
*A new post on this topic added Thursday addresses more reader comments.
Stone Soup I would agree with, but Home and Away? Really? Poorly drawn, insipid and unfunny. If you had a great deal of positive feedback about that strip, I seriously have to question the intelligence of the mass readership. Ugh.
Posted by: B Smith | February 23, 2009 at 07:51 AM
Well, if you wanted to alienate your female readers between the ages of 35-70, you've done a terrific job. Replacing For Better or For Worse with the driva you selected just signals another death knell of the paper for me. And don't you remember what happened the last time you tried to cut out Sally Forth?
Thanks so much for taking away what little enjoyement I was still getting out of the Los Angeles Times. Once the California section goes, my subscription to this paper will go as well.
Posted by: Barbara J Stroud | February 23, 2009 at 08:11 AM
I guess I understand the decision to trade "For Better or Worse" in for something else. However, nothing was ever mentioned about getting rid of another comic, such as "Sally Forth". Why not give readers the opportunity to weigh in on that one? Why not get rid of one of the other comics that make absolutely no sense, such as "Lio:, "9 Chickweed Lane", "Zits", "Prickly City", etc.
I think that it was very sneaky to not let the readers have a say in that decision.
Posted by: Kyet Scruggs | February 23, 2009 at 08:22 AM
I totally agree with your choice. I was going to nominate Steve Sikula's strip as the most sophisticated and actually funny offering. The others are DUDS and even Stone Soup is childish and sophomoric. I suspect many more comic readers are over the age of 40 (if not 50) than under and so many "teenage" strips are a bit much. I will place my vote although tardily for Steve Sikula's strip and fuhgheddabout "Stone Soup" dumb dumb dumb
Karen Cotter Valley Village, CA 91607
Posted by: Karen Cotter | February 23, 2009 at 09:02 AM
As someone who has been reading the Times comics section for almost 20 years, I've seen a lot of comics come and go, but this is the first time I have seen a need to comment. I am disappointed that you decided to pull "Sally Forth" especially since it was never really said that particular comic was on the potential chopping block. I totally love "Stone Soup" and like the fact that is replacing "For Better or for Worse", but I didn't like "Home and Away" the first time it was run, and the fact that it replaces a comic that I do like and did not know was going away saddens me.
Posted by: Karen | February 23, 2009 at 09:04 AM
I do not know why you removed Sally Forth. It was relevent to out times. We need more continuing story comics. Continuing relevent comics give us a view on current life as it is. It would have been nice of you to have informed us that you where going to remove a comic strip and let us vote on it.
Posted by: Fred Weiss | February 23, 2009 at 09:14 AM
The Los Angeles Times continues its precipitous decline. The comics mirror the Times' endless "tinkering" urge, as well as the paper's failure to understand that the dwindling number who remain readers do so because they have some appreciation for certain core features (not to mention journalistic traditions). You are breaking long-time relationships in a sad (and I believe ultimately futile) effort to "chase" a different demographic. In the course of that effort, you simply alienate those you DO have. "Sally Forth" was a sharp and perceptive look at relationships (personal and business). It WAS "fresh and relevant." And the re-telling of "For Better of For Worse" was fresh because many of your readers weren't there for most of the original, and those who were are very unlikely to remember the details - and Lynn Johnston is changing some of it.
Posted by: Brian | February 23, 2009 at 09:16 AM
Why was Sally Forth dropped? Just exactly how is Blondie "fresh and relevant". If you want to drop a strip, how about dropping that one. I understand the FBOW decision but am rather peeved about dropping Sally.
Posted by: Judy - Costa Mesa | February 23, 2009 at 09:19 AM
Man, I can't believe you guys got rid of Sally Forth! That was one of the few comics I really enjoyed reading, and now it's got an absolutely terrible strip in its place. If you're going to remove anything, take out Lio. Now that is a bad comic.
Leave Sally Forth, though; I think it's only gotten better since 1999.
Posted by: Ray | February 23, 2009 at 09:24 AM
I am saddened that you have removed Sally Forth. I may be older, but I thought the comic strip was relevant, refreshing and funny.
I think it it time for me to make a change.
Marilyn Way
Posted by: Marilyn Way | February 23, 2009 at 09:27 AM
I'm chagrined that you pulled Sally Forth from your paper. Sally Forth is one of the best comic strips around today - and a highlight of my day. While I understand the need to swap out comics periodically (especially true given that For Better and For Worse has ended its run), replacing a current, successful, and very funny strip, Sally Forth, isn't something I can easily understand - or accept. Yet again, my local paper doesn't provide me with the content I want to read. I've been a subscriber (7 days a week) since 2003, and given the very high cost of subscriptions, as well as the changes in the Times' content, including the latest, pulling Sally Forth, I'm seriously considering cancelling my subscription.
Posted by: Jordan Buchanan | February 23, 2009 at 09:30 AM
I do not at all question your replacing :For Better or For Worse" nor the process used in coming to a decision. However, you did not explain why, with no notice or process, you dumped "Sally Forth." IMHO, the absolutely worst and most tasteless, repetitive, and unfunny comic on your page is "Get Fuzzy." That whole lot ought to be put to sleep.
Posted by: Thomas Welbers | February 23, 2009 at 09:33 AM
So, for the past several months, you've been offering several mediocre comics as suggested replacements for the strip For Better or For Worse. At last, you've made your decision - and part of that decision is to replace a comic strip that was never mentioned as being up for replacement! Sally Forth has been part of your comic pages for years and is one of the few strips I have followed daily - while skimming over some of your lesser offerings. Now, Sally Forth is replaced with arguably the worst of the contenders you have offered for consideration! Home and Away is poorly drawn, the humor is ... what humor? Of the two new strips, Stone Soup seems the better of the tepid offerings, but still easily passed over. If you're going to replace a strip, why not Prickly City? The right-wing bent of that strip seriously doesn't play in Southern California, does it? And Tundra! Chad Carpenter is so hard up for ideas for his strip that he regularly takes the ideas submitted by readers (with nothing better to do but send him ideas) and makes some real clunkers out of them.
There are plenty of really good comics out there - I see them on the internet, but not in the pages of the L.A. Times. This paper is becoming increasingly irrelevant - I guess it is only appropriate that the comic pages should follow the trend of the rest of this paper!
Posted by: Roberta | February 23, 2009 at 09:52 AM
With two wonderful candidates to drop, Kathy (totally inane) and Blondie (a repetitive antique) you dropped Sally Forth? What kind of politics was involved here - it just doesn't make sense. Instead of upgrading the comics page you barely held even.
Posted by: Andrew Grygus | February 23, 2009 at 09:59 AM
Where's Sally Forth? Dump Rex Morgan or Bizarro or Prickly City if you must dump something. But surely you can find something better than Home and Away.
Stone Soup is a poor substitute for For Better or Worse. I'd rather read For Better or Worse which didn't join your paper until several years into the story line.
Posted by: Debra | February 23, 2009 at 10:13 AM
I don't like Home & Away. Did I read it wrong or was there a suggestion of a sex change in today's strip?
Personally, I don't think that sort of subject matter is appropriate for a newspaper of the Times stature.
Please bring back Sally Forth.
Posted by: Inez Garcia, Culver City 90232 | February 23, 2009 at 10:16 AM
The surprise departure of "Sally Forth" from the comics pages seems a most unpopular choice with your subscribers, myself included. Yes, I can still read the latest daily offering online, and for free, just as I can get all the news online, and for free. So, tell me, WHY am I still paying to buy the LA Times, when you're not giving me what I want, and expect, as a customer?
Posted by: Nic Sanburg | February 23, 2009 at 10:18 AM
I've subscribed to the LA Times for close to 20 years. The comics are one of the last reasons to continue home delivery. With the decision to dump "Sally Forth", it might be time for some of my own "changes". "Sally Forth" was one of the readable, relevant, and funny strips. Looking for changes in the comics page? Might I suggest dumping "Rex Morgan", "Marmaduke", "Family Circus", "Dennis the Menace", "Brewster Rockit"...all tired and neither funny nor "cute". When was the last time a reader ever remarked "Boy, today's Marmaduke was hilarious!" Or, "Wow, that Dennis the Menace...too much!!" There's plenty of dead weight right there. While we're at it, why not end poor "Dilbert''s exile to the Business section and bring him to the Comics??
And, please don't re-direct us to some LA Times website. I hate to burst your bubble but "latimes.com" is not the place to look for info on the Internet.
Posted by: Ed | February 23, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Are you guys completely crazy?! Keeping BLONDIE? Keeping CATHY? Keeping the for years uninteresting one note samba, GET FUZZY?! Let me guess; you stealth replaced "SALLY FORTH" not because it was unpopular, or these new two are better written/drawn strips (they're not) but because of BUDGET CONSTRAINTS! Huh? Sound familiar? I've been receiving the L.A. Times at the same home location for over 30 years and NOTHING done since Zell took over has pleased me - this is the last straw! Bring back SALLY or cancel my subscription!
Posted by: Judy Scott | February 23, 2009 at 10:25 AM
You want to drop a comic or two? Fine, drop Dr. Rex, drop Tundra; but for crying out loud, don't drop Sally. And for Home & Away, yet? Wow!
Want to bring in some good ones? How about bringing back B.C. and/or Wizard of Id?
This is the first time in 47 years that I've been really miffed at the Times!
Posted by: Max Lupul | February 23, 2009 at 10:26 AM
I applaud your decision to add Stone Soup, an old favorite from my former hometown paper the St. Paul Pioneer Press. Home and Away, however, is another matter. I find the strip not funny at all and encourage you to bring back Sally Forth.
Posted by: Richard Paske | February 23, 2009 at 10:30 AM
I'm very sad to see SALLY FORTH disappear without ceremony. As a daily subscriber, I had grown quite attached to that little family, and now I'll have to seek out their adventures elsewhere, leading me further away from the LA Times -- again.
Posted by: Jason F | February 23, 2009 at 10:30 AM
Did I miss something? LA Times editor Sherry Stern still does not explain what gives about why Sally Forth was removed. Bummer.., both For Better or For Worse and Sally Forth were excellent and entertaining comics. I guess the LA Times doesn't really give a darn about reader input. Good thing I can follow comics I like on line and maybe will cancel my newspaper subscription.
Posted by: jeannie kench | February 23, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Ugh! I knew you were considering dropping "For Better or Worse" (although nothing you ran in its place begins to compare IMO), but dropping Sally Forth came out of nowhere. And you replaced it with a strip that I found completely annoying. Please please please at least give us Sally back. "Get Fuzzy" and "Brewster Rocket" would be on my short list of strips that wouldn't be missed.
Posted by: Deni | February 23, 2009 at 10:34 AM
Actually I should thank you for the two new comic strips you've include, since it will save me a few seconds each morning not reading them. These are the kinds of comics that would have been rejected by my junior high school newspaper, and which any cartoonist with a shred of personal pride would hide from the public. "Home and Away" in particular is horribly drawn. It is never funny, and often it isn't even coherent. I can't even begin to imagine what kind of decision making resulted in adding these to the paper. Coin flipping?
Posted by: Rosemary West | February 23, 2009 at 10:40 AM
I'm so unhappy that you replaced "Sally Forth" with no warning. Why didn't you get rid of Kathy,which has too many words in the dialogue for a comics fan to appreciate. I'm still waiting for a real explanation as to Why? I must assume that Sally Forth costs too much and Home and Away is cheaper. The quality of the art work certainly seems to be a less costly choice. I agree with several comments......maybe it's time to save myself some money and cancel my daily subscription!
Posted by: roberta beard | February 23, 2009 at 10:42 AM
I absolutely LOVE Sally Forth. Where did the stupid idea of removing THAT comic come from? And replacing it with Far & Away no less!! Home & Away was by FAR the ABSOLUTE WORST of the contenders for the For Better or Worse spot. Do you go out of your way to keep the weird/unfunny comics and get rid of the ones your readers will like? Remember, it's not important what the editorial board wants to read, it's what the READERS who are PAYING for the paper want to read that counts!
Posted by: Kathie M | February 23, 2009 at 10:49 AM
I join the groundswell of outrage at the stealth removal of Sally Forth
Posted by: David Wheeler | February 23, 2009 at 10:52 AM
I am not pleased with your decision to drop Sally Forth unannounced, Why get rid of it and replace it with the merely average Home and Away? If you need to replace a strip get rid of Rex Morgan, or Brewster Rocket, both of which are not even worth reading. I personally would have like to have seen you keep For Better or Worse.
Posted by: Larry Bombach | February 23, 2009 at 11:00 AM
Congrats on removing FBFW and while I actually hated Sally Forth,and will never miss it, I agree with most that there are plenty that could also have gone by the wayside. Dennis the Menace, Cathy, Family Circle, even Get Fuzzy. Perhaps you can kill all the bland, dead comic strips and open up more space for all the news you're leaving out because you're folding California into the Main section?
Posted by: Bunny | February 23, 2009 at 11:11 AM
I echo the sentiments above - no reason was given for dropping Sally Forth. Dropping the "Better or Worse" reruns is understandable; the books are out there for people to enjoy.
Posted by: DrBear | February 23, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Replacing the always interesting "Sally Forth" with such a weak offering and in such an underhanded manner is a great disservice to your comic page fans. It is very disappointing. I hope you will try do do better by us in the days to come.
Posted by: J Dickey | February 23, 2009 at 11:25 AM
I am rather surprised at the decision to replace "Sally Forth" in the Comics section.
For the last five months, the Note to Readers said that other strips were being tested as a possible replacement to "For Better or Worse" and that readers would have a say in which strip would ultimately be included.
At no time did you discuss the possibility of also replacing Sally Forth. Nor were we given a say in it.
At the rate the LATimes is going with downsizing the staff and reducing the paper, you are now, by arbitrarly replacing a good comic, giving me even less reason to continue to subscribe.
Please rethink this decision
Posted by: Lynn | February 23, 2009 at 11:28 AM
I am very disappointed that you have decided to drop "Sally Forth”. At no time did you indicate that you were thinking of dropping this strip. I understood why you might change up "FBOFW" although nothing you have run in its place is remotely funny or drawn well. But I understood trying something new. But had I known that "Sally Forth" was on the chopping block for any of the other strips you have been "testing" I would have email my dissent everyday!!! This was done once before and the daily readers complained and "Sally Forth" returned to the comics page due to the popularity of the strip! I have put up with a lot of changes to the Times but if I have to get a subscription to comics.com in order to have "Sally Forth" I will drop my 10 yr subscription to the Times to make up for it.
Posted by: katie scott | February 23, 2009 at 11:31 AM
Home and Away can stay away. Sally Forth is a superior comic strip. There are much better candidates for termination for your Comics Editors to eleminate to justify their existence. May I suggest Cathy let her persue her quest for the perfect pair of shoes, diet and wardrobe on her own. Rex Morgan can battle Medicare on his own. Change for change sake is a poor excuse for bad judgement.
Posted by: Michael L. Ankenbauer | February 23, 2009 at 11:33 AM
If you are on the Internet, and complaining that the LA Times dropped your favorite comic: "Sally Forth" or "For Better or for Worse"... and you have the time to write here and complain about it...
Why not use your energy in a better fashion and find where you can read your favorite comic strip ONLINE and for free?!
Posted by: Patrick | February 23, 2009 at 11:42 AM
Bring back Sally Forth! You dropped this with _no_ notice, which is just as ridiculous as taking _half a year_ to decide on dropping FBOFW.
If you must get rid of a strip, get rid of Rex Morgan. It's slow-paced and not entertaining.
Posted by: Gloria | February 23, 2009 at 11:45 AM
I'd just like to add my voice to the list of daily home subscribers who were shocked by the removal of Sally Forth this morning. I understood your consideration of alternatives to For Better or For Worse as it went into a repeated storyline, but dropping Sally Forth with no warning was unreasonable. You gave us months to give our thoughts on For Better or For Worse and it's alternatives, but no opportunity to protest the removal of Sally Forth before you made that decision. I support the addition of Stone Soup, but bring back Sally Forth.
Posted by: Kim | February 23, 2009 at 11:48 AM
Jamie:
There's a lot of disagreement on replacement of Sally Forth, over some other strip in that section. I am displeased to note that some have named strips that I like in lieu of Sally Forth--Brewster Rockit, for one.
It might be useful to let readers vote on ALL the strips annually, and to drop the lowest rated ones--something akin to relegation to the second division in (real) football.
Finally: Stone Soup, good call. Home & Away, bad call.
Posted by: Medulla Oblongata | February 23, 2009 at 11:50 AM
The new take on For Better For Worse actually seemed like it would be quite interesting and not simply a rehash as so many others were spinning it. I was trying to accept the fact that FBFW was being set up to fail.
But now suddenly Sally Forth gets pulled for these two weak additions?
Ever considered taking away Blondie or Cathy or any of the other strips that are for all intents and purposes rehashes of very old themes? Or how about just any of the major dogs your paper continues to inexplicably carry - like Prickly City?
Getting the comics has been one of the last reasons why we maintain a subscription, but now that will change. I don't have any faith in any person that makes decisions at the LA Times anymore. My condolences go out to anybody still on-staff there who actually tries.
Posted by: Marco | February 23, 2009 at 11:53 AM
I do not understand why "you" messed around with Sally Forth,etc. without advance notice to let "us" vote. I am not going to list the idiotic strips "you" decided as replacements because when we were asked to vote it was stated that you would not pay attention to any comments...I simply cannot comprehend this yellow and shallow attitute of The Times and "you" do not resemble The Times of yore, an admirable and honorable paper that carried the likes of Jack Smith, Art Buchwald and really listened to its readers opinions. " Boo to You and Shame on You"......
Posted by: Jocelyn Gilbert | February 23, 2009 at 11:54 AM
I'm so glad to see the majority of comments echoing my thoughts upon opening the comic section this morning.
Dropping Sally Forth? Helllllooooooooo, we saved this comic a year or so ago and now you're doing it again?
Get a grip and respond to your readers, most of whom seem to agree with me and object to SF's replacement. ;(((
Posted by: JudithLasker | February 23, 2009 at 11:57 AM
I have subscribed to the LA Times since 1957 and have read the comics daily and Sundays. Currently the Sunday comics have diminished to the point that not reading them doesn't leave the reader out of the loop. As for the daily comics, They have shrunk from three pages to two which I can deal with. however unwillingly.
Removing Sally Forth is a shock and almost unforgivable and I do hope will be reconsidered. I would have liked to see For Better or For Worse reinstated as the two you have chosen are quite mediocre. They are not the kind of strip one looks forward to reading to find our what will happen next or for a good chuckle.
A few that just take up space are Brewster, Prickly City and Tundra for example. I like many of the comics you carry but some are completely off the wall.
Perhaps the choice should be made by a panel of readers and not by a opinions randomly sent in to the web site. Funny and not overly political might be a consideration for the majority of the choices. (We used to call them the funnies)
Posted by: Margaret Hagen | February 23, 2009 at 11:59 AM
What in the name of the Bloody Blue Pleiades possessed you to replace "Sally Forth"?
I can see dismissing the recycle of "For Better or Worse" and "Stone Soup" was probably the best of an underwhelming bunch...but "Sally Forth?"
Note to discussion: "Get Fuzzy" is a collateral descendant of "The Far Side" and is one of the few strips that possesses that quality of humor the ancient Greeks called "being funny."
And I agree that "Rex Morgan" should be put in a retirement home while a place in Forest Lawn is selected for him.
Posted by: Jim | February 23, 2009 at 12:13 PM
For months you have been previewing comics to replace FBOFW. Today I find that you yanked Sally Forth as well. In my home we take two papers, the Times and the Other Los Angeles Paper, so there is some overlap in the comics. Losing FBOFW in the Times was not a big deal, since it was in the Other. Losing Sally Forth without any warning, however, seems a rather underhanded thing.
The Times has become a little less relevant to my household today. Instead of two cleaver, well drawn, well developed comics, there are two sketchy, thin, mundane replacements.
Oh well, back to reading funnies online. Seems you can't count on the Times for much in the way of quality anymore.
Posted by: Ira | February 23, 2009 at 12:13 PM
I am in agreement with the Sally Forth supporters...especially given that you took 6 months to replace a recycled FBOW but no notification about Sally Forth?
Posted by: David | February 23, 2009 at 12:23 PM
I completely agree with the comments other readers have made, and deplore not only the dropping of Sally Forth, but the way it was done.
Posted by: Jay Michtom | February 23, 2009 at 12:24 PM
I, too, was surprised to find that Sally Forth had been replaced when I opened the comics page this morning. This seemed to go against the stated purpose of the evaluation of the new strips, which was to give readers a chance to enjoy something new instead of "reruns" of For Better Or For Worse.
There are three reasons why I read the comics. One - to laugh (Dilbert, Fox Trot (gone, I know), Pearls Before Swine). Two - to have some connection to the larger world (Doonesbury - politics, Mutts - nature). Three - to follow an ongoing story about which I care. Sadly, now that Sally Forth is gone, I don't really have the third reason anymore. It seems like this decision was made abruptly, and without any reader input, despite the lofty claims of the comics editor. If the intention, original or not, was to replace multiple strips, the readers should have been informed at that time and given an opportunity to vote not only on the replacements, but on the ones being replaced. Although I don't agree with every poster's opinion of which ones are "bad", I do agree that there are several sub-par strips that could easily vanish without much angst.
Posted by: Stephen Arvedson | February 23, 2009 at 12:29 PM
My wife and I, too, are upset and saddened by the loss of Sally Forth. The Times removed this strip some time ago, but re-instated it, after much reader protest. Please reconsider your decision. FBOW has had it's place, but Sally Forth is still timely and funny.
Posted by: James Lytthans | February 23, 2009 at 12:47 PM
Hm. The paper this morning said there would be "more about our decision." So I expected to see something about *why* after no warning, you dropped Sally Forth. I agree with the previous posters, FBOFW had to go. I didn't much care for any of the replacements, all of which were trying too hard to be trendy, topical, and current. But Sally Forth? Could we get a little explanation why that was replaced by the lame and derivative "Home and Away"?
Oh, and ... Bring back Prince Valiant!
Posted by: Mike | February 23, 2009 at 12:51 PM