Recent scholarship has suggested that frequent receipt of news, especially in new media such as newspapers, altered conceptions of time in the early modern period. In particular, a new and modern "present" was born. This occupied a halfknown and semifluid point between the fixity of the past and the unpredictability of the future. It created an imagined contemporaneous moment that linked geographically dispersed events. It was progressive, appearing to move the world ever forward into a novel state. However, close examination of English newspapers in the period 1695-1713, the first era of sustained news periodicals, calls these suggestions into question. Certainly the press of this era provided a constant and corrective update of information from all over Europe. This might have encouraged a sense of a fluid, contemporaneous, and progressive present. However, newspapers also tended to catalog information like a chronicle, which had the potential to fix contents as established history rather than fluid news. Delays in communication from distant places and journalistic practices of holding back stories for later publication ensured that information of different ages was presented on the same page. This destroyed any clear sense of a contemporaneous moment. The requirement to print the next issue even when there was no new information drew explicit attention to the lack of progressive development in some stories. This article posits a highly fractured presentation of time in later Stuart newspapers. It suggests that this is perhaps best analyzed by concepts drawn from "postmodern" theory rather than a hunt for emerging features of "modernity."F or some decades, the Stuart age in England has been analyzed as the crucible of a new print-centered culture. With the rapid expansion of the press over the seventeenth century, scholars have posited new models of information and new kinds of social action made possible by these models. It has been suggested that in comparison with their predecessors, subjects of the later Stuart monarchs were significantly better informed about their world, and thus were able to participate in political, religious, and cultural debates that had hitherto been steered by elites. Jürgen Habermas's notion of a "structural transformation of the public sphere" has been central here, making an argument for a newly active audience