Billionaires Move Mainstream Media Further Left

[drivebymedia]

Newspapers Are Billionaires’ Latest Trophies

Just $250 million.

That’s all Jeffrey P. Bezos paid on Monday for The Washington Post, which was once worth several billion dollars.

$70 million. That’s all John Henry paid on Friday for The Boston Globe, a paper The New York Times had acquired for $1.1 billion in 1993.

Next to nothing. That’s what IBT Media paid to buy Newsweek over the weekend from IAC, which itself had paid only $1 plus $40 million in pension obligations to buy it two years ago.

How do you explain the prices that these storied media institutions have been sold for over the last 72 hours?



http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/08/05/billionaires-latest-trophies-are-newspapers/?_r=0

Excellent ...

 

[Mac1958]

.

The internet.

.

 

[drivebymedia]

.

The internet.

.

So true, and the "King of the Internet" will bring print media and WAPO to another level

 

[Wyatt earp]

.

The internet.

.

the tree huggers should be happy

 

[candycorn]

.

The internet.

.

the tree huggers should be happy

Billionaires are not necessarily a liberal voting block. In fact, the Zuck is a supporter (or so it seems) of Chris Christie, R-NJ

 

[drivebymedia]

Billionaires are not necessarily a liberal voting block. In fact, the Zuck is a supporter (or so it seems) of Chris Christie, R-NJ

True, but most support freedom of the press and the internet, and freedom of readers and viewers to form their own opinions.
Ergo, the Mainstream Media moves further left ...

 

[Pete7469]

.

The internet.

.

the tree huggers should be happy

Bed wetters are never happy.

If everyone who isn't a libtard went "Galt", and found a new island to live on free from moonbats these assholes would chase us there. Even before they turned the entire country into Detroit. I don't know why these assholes can't just take their dumbasses to europe, they have every degree of leftwing lunacy there already. Let us have just one country where bed wetters aren't destroying private property rights, trying to disarm everyone, attacking religious displays, taking money from productive people and trying to limit their speech.

It's funny to me that billionaires that oppose them are demonized, but billionires who are basically buying democrook political whores, and empowering them are heralded.

What are these bed wetters going to do when their political masters are in complete control and start "managing" the excess population?

 

[Edgetho]

.

The internet.

.

Not entirely true.

While the Internet has had some effect on newspapers in this Country, the major reason they're failing is that they're spitting in the eye of half their readership.... Conservatives.

There virtually ARE NO Conservatives newspapers.

Even in Conservative towns.

In the UK, newspapers are as big and powerful and financially healthy as ever. One or two falls by the wayside every now and then, but they're healthy as a group.

Know why?

Because, unlike the US, they have competing viewpoints, competing politics, competing papers.

In the UK, their major 'Broadsheets' that favor Conservatives actually out-number liberal rags.

In this Country?

I could travel from SW Florida with my Gannet Paper in hand and not find a FUCKING BIT OF DIFFERENCE in the headlines and especially the political leanings in New Yawk, Boston, Philthydelphia, Ballmer, Washington DC, Houston.....

They're ALL the same.

There is NO difference between the LA Slimes, the Chicago Trib, the Boston Globe, the WaPo, the New Yawk Slimes, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, the St Louis Dispatch, the Cleveland Plain Dealer....... None. No difference.

Name me a Major Viewspaper in this Country that endorsed Mitt Romney for president.

How about George Bush?

How about Bob Dole? How about.....

They're all the same.

Why should I bother with a newspaper when everybody is saying the same thing with the same biases?

Not gonna happen.

This Country's media is a one-way street.

Except for the WSJ. Which is still infested by WAY too many libtards. But at least they try, usually unsuccessfully, to present the Conservative POV.

The problem with the media in this Country is -- The Media

 

[drivebymedia]

There virtually ARE NO Conservatives newspapers.

For a good reason ....

And the mainstream media continues to grow and move left.

For a good reason ...

 

[drivebymedia]

Republicans are so befuddled and panicked, they do this:


Reince Priebus blasted NBC and CNN on Monday night for spending millions “promoting” Hillary Clinton in their upcoming miniseries and film


Read more: Reince Priebus: CNN, NBC promote Democrats - Hadas Gold - POLITICO.com

And this freak is SERIOUS!

 

[Katzndogz]

The guy who bought Newsweek regretted it too.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Billionaires are not necessarily a liberal voting block. In fact, the Zuck is a supporter (or so it seems) of Chris Christie, R-NJ

True, but most support freedom of the press and the internet, and freedom of readers and viewers to form their own opinions.
Ergo, the Mainstream Media moves further left ...

So, in your little pinhead, a continual shift further left is an indication of a free press?

 

[bendog]

I'm not sure this is ideology. I used to read the papers online, but I'm unwilling to subscribe to just one because I enjoyed the diversity of opinion, and I'm not buying into 4 or 5. Yahoo sells advertising and is more and more useless as a news source.

I look at Amazon quite often. My kid orders e books all the time. I think the apple store itunes is on the way out, and mp3 songs are all over amazon. Ezra Klien can't touch the NYT economix blog, but he kicks Krugman and the WSJ's ass. Maybe do a premium membership kinda deal.

 

[drivebymedia]

I'm not sure this is ideology. I used to read the papers online, but I'm unwilling to subscribe to just one because I enjoyed the diversity of opinion, and I'm not buying into 4 or 5. Yahoo sells advertising and is more and more useless as a news source.

I look at Amazon quite often. My kid orders e books all the time. I think the apple store itunes is on the way out, and mp3 songs are all over amazon. Ezra Klien can't touch the NYT economix blog, but he kicks Krugman and the WSJ's ass. Maybe do a premium membership kinda deal.

In your wanting to get a number of views on a given subject, you are a walking antithesis of FOX and the tea party.

To them, their is only one view, and if you are not with them, you are against them.

Fair and balanced!

 

[theDoctorisIn]

.

The internet.

.

Not entirely true.

While the Internet has had some effect on newspapers in this Country, the major reason they're failing is that they're spitting in the eye of half their readership.... Conservatives.

There virtually ARE NO Conservatives newspapers.

Even in Conservative towns.

In the UK, newspapers are as big and powerful and financially healthy as ever. One or two falls by the wayside every now and then, but they're healthy as a group.

Know why?

Because, unlike the US, they have competing viewpoints, competing politics, competing papers.

In the UK, their major 'Broadsheets' that favor Conservatives actually out-number liberal rags.

In this Country?

I could travel from SW Florida with my Gannet Paper in hand and not find a FUCKING BIT OF DIFFERENCE in the headlines and especially the political leanings in New Yawk, Boston, Philthydelphia, Ballmer, Washington DC, Houston.....

They're ALL the same.

There is NO difference between the LA Slimes, the Chicago Trib, the Boston Globe, the WaPo, the New Yawk Slimes, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, the St Louis Dispatch, the Cleveland Plain Dealer....... None. No difference.

Name me a Major Viewspaper in this Country that endorsed Mitt Romney for president.

How about George Bush?

How about Bob Dole? How about.....

They're all the same.

Why should I bother with a newspaper when everybody is saying the same thing with the same biases?

Not gonna happen.

This Country's media is a one-way street.

Except for the WSJ. Which is still infested by WAY too many libtards. But at least they try, usually unsuccessfully, to present the Conservative POV.

The problem with the media in this Country is -- The Media

Romney had the endorsement of 22 major newspapers in the US, including 3 of the 4 NY newspapers. (New York Post, Daily News, Newsday)

 

[whitehall]

What does the left really want? They rail against corporate wealth but would they rather have the government run the newspapers?

 

[Mr. H.]

.

The internet.

.

the tree huggers should be happy

Billionaires are not necessarily a liberal voting block. In fact, the Zuck is a supporter (or so it seems) of Chris Christie, R-NJ

Christie is a Republican?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

There virtually ARE NO Conservatives newspapers.

For a good reason ....

And the mainstream media continues to grow and move left.

For a good reason ...

We have talk radio.

The print media seems to want to alienate any potential reader to the right of Mao. Fine with me, I cancelled my subscription to the NY Times in 1986 and never looked back

 

[candycorn]

What does the left really want? They rail against corporate wealth but would they rather have the government run the newspapers?

Cannot speak for the entire "left" but to me I think it's a winner of an idea not to allow the same media company to own too many media outlets in the same region.

I think the government has no place in owning newspapers.

That being said, I think the newspaper model to follow would be to set them up like the not-for-profit charities; advertise enough to pay your workers, keep the lights on and anything above that is prohibited. This would take approval from the government as it were but the newspapers fill a public interest role of watchdog on that government, informing the public, and carrying long-lead stories of widespread importance.

The old model of advertisers footing the bill for the paper and it competing favorably with more convenient, just as accurate, interactive, customized, and of course faster electronic models is dead.

 

[drivebymedia]

While the Internet has had some effect on newspapers in this Country, the major reason they're failing is that they're spitting in the eye of half their readership.... Conservatives.

Does this account for why Rupert Murdoch is selling all of his print media holdings?