Word: digestable
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
TIME [Dec. 10] says: "The Reader's Digest is one of the greatest success stories in the history of journalism." Admittedly, the Digest enjoys circulation superiority. But is that equivalent to success? The real test of success is not size but quality. I regret to note TIME contributing to the American heresy that bigness is the same as goodness, that success can be tabulated on an adding machine...
...most young people the Reader's Digest serves as a pleasant introduction to adult reading...
...suppose that my main objection is that the food for thought has been so carefully sweetened for swallowing whole that the readers themselves digest very little. There is little stimulation for careful analysis or deeper inquiry. As indicative of this condition I cite the fact that to many students, "research for speech material" is synonymous with thumbing through the current edition of the Digest. Worse, they reproduce the chosen article . . . orally, right down to the last pastel adjective...
Your article on the DeWitt Wallaces is one of the best that I have ever read. Every reader of the Reader's Digest must have wondered about the people and the organization that do it. Then you come along and lift the curtain in a very perfect sort...
...suggest that since the Reader's Digest does not give the public an open forum or letters-to-the-editor section, some young couple get married and publish a magazine of direct reply. I would not suggest Reader's Indigestion [but] imagine the possibilities in free contributions to "The Character I Want to Forget...