Neither television nor radio nor magazines nor books nor any other medium can begin to match newspapers for depth and breadth of coverage  . In fact, all these media themselves depend on newspapers to bring them information that they then process and distribute as their own brand of news. Now many newspapers are locked in a struggle for survival. If they lose--which is by no means impossible--we all lose. The great task for editors and publishers is to respond to the competitive challenge caused by online news, and at the same time use their own online news to increase their profits  . As yet,they haven't figured out a smooth and sure way to do that. So they cut some more to get profit. The cuts in size that they are making are in some cases risky and in others without considering the results. With every cut, publishers tirelessly argue that readers won't even know the difference. The trouble is that by the time customers do notice that they are getting less for their money,it will be too late--too late to notice the reduction in the number of readers. The other big cuts, of course, are in staff  . The victims would be the oldest and most experienced workers because they are the highest paid. While there is plenty of tired _ among them,there is also a lot of talent. When experienced staff leave in large numbers--as they often do now--the newspaper loses great professional memory. But the real loser is the readers, who are suddenly robbed of the insights   that only the experienced reporters can bring. As for the future, there is at least one big, bright sign:intelligent young people will continue to flood into journalism in urgent search of jobs, despite its high demands and modest   pay. According to the passage,which of the following can best describe the author's    attitude towards the ways the editors and publishers have adopted to get profit?
The author has no objection. The author is against them. The author has not shown it clearly. The author regards them reasonable.