Michelle: Are you ready for state-owned newspapers?
posted at 3:20 pm on March 26, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
Recorded this morning, before the Times announced a new round of layoffs and a five percent pay cut across the board. She’s talking here about the Cardin bill that would make local papers eligible for nonprofit status, which is still a ways away from government ownership but a concrete step in that direction. From a political standpoint, it’s a distinction without much of a difference: If and when national papers become eligible too, we can all guess from which side of the aisle most of their donations will come and what that’ll do to the public’s trust in the objectivity of their reporting. How low can our faith in media go? We’ll find out.
Actually, I know a guy with money to burn who I bet would be tickled to get involved with fair, impartial institutions like newspapers. Someone should give him a call. Exit question one: Will blogs count as “newspapers” for 501(c)(3) purposes too? Exit question two: Will even tax exemption and charitable contributions be enough to keep papers afloat long-term? As long as the trend towards online news consumption continues and copyright laws let blogs reproduce the key paragraphs from news stories, they’re going to bleed.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
You mean our newspaper reporters AREN’T working for Obama?
Could have fooled me.
How many people subscribed to Pravda during the old USSR?
NoDonkey on March 26, 2009 at 3:23 PM
The People’s Newspaper is pleased to report that President for Life Ogabe has doubled the daily bread ration.
Bishop on March 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM
Newspapers are dead.
To me.
carbon_footprint on March 26, 2009 at 3:24 PM
501(c)3s aren’t allowed to endorse candidates, can they?
amerpundit on March 26, 2009 at 3:25 PM
At least the nationalization will mean the connection between Democrats and the Drive-Bys will be explicit.
Weebork on March 26, 2009 at 3:26 PM
In America, you subscribe to newspapers. In Soviet Russia, Pravda was subscribed to you!
Wineaholic on March 26, 2009 at 3:27 PM
BBBWWWWAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…………..
……. oooooooohhhhhhhhh, ahhhhhhhh ahahahahahaha!
Stop it Michelle……
……… you’re killing me.
Seven Percent Solution on March 26, 2009 at 3:27 PM
and what that’ll do to the public’s trust in the objectivity of their reporting.
…………
Huh?
It’s already in the sewer.
Part of the reason their circ numbers are down.
artist on March 26, 2009 at 3:27 PM
Taking over the newspapers just makes it official…
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM
How can it be a non-profit when it takes in advertising revenues to turn a profit?
I’m confused…
RedbonePro on March 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Not officially. However, their reporting will say that Obama walks on water and that Sarah Palin strangles kittens.
teke184 on March 26, 2009 at 3:28 PM
Your post provided me with an image of a tax return form, with a box at the bottom asking if you want an automatic payment to the NYT, LAT, Trib, etc. A tax deduction for a non-profit.
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 3:30 PM
You’re a democrat?
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 3:31 PM
The wheels have come off.
saiga on March 26, 2009 at 3:31 PM
Get this provision into the bill and I will start my blog the next day. Donating to my favorite charity…priceless.
WashJeff on March 26, 2009 at 3:31 PM
News papers can never come back strong for no less than 2 reasons. The news they deliver is NEVER less than 8 hours old amd much is over 24 hours old.
the other reason is their high margin product is help wanted ads. Help wanted ads are dying because of less openings and on line posts are free. On line openings have a wider circulation than the subscription of a paper.
seven on March 26, 2009 at 3:32 PM
In case you were wondering what happened to communism after we defeated it in Europe, you don’t have to look far . . . it’s all around you and it is in the process of transforming your once great Republic. You’ve finally done it people, you’ve lost it all.
rplat on March 26, 2009 at 3:33 PM
FIFY
Yngmarine on March 26, 2009 at 3:34 PM
No, not in the slightest.
You?
RedbonePro on March 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM
SAMIZDAT.
SAMIZDAT.
SAMIZDAT.
SAMIZDAT.
SAMIZDAT.
SAMIZDAT.
OhEssYouCowboys on March 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM
IF the government wants to pay liberal hacks to write the news, fine. But without anybody reading those newspapers, they won’t be very effective propaganda outlets. You can lead a horse to the New York Times, but you can’t make him read it.
keep the change on March 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM
Headline: New York Times Unpatriotic!
All right, that’s no big surprise, but it’s now legitmate to say
paying taxes = being patriotic
little italy on March 26, 2009 at 3:36 PM
Sudoku just ain’t the same on a CRT. That’s the only reason I get a paper during my lunchbreak any more.
Some claim that papers are dying because of their leftward bias, but the reality is that ink+dead trees+delivery trucks+kids on bikes leaving your paper in the wet grass+all the day-old content has already been talked to death on TV, radio and blogs= REALLY DUMB BUSINESS MODEL.
If gov’t gets involved it’ll be a pure money loser like Amtrak. Yay.
innominatus on March 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM
Parrots across America want their papers just as they are.
Patrick S on March 26, 2009 at 3:37 PM
This is insane. What’s next, major networks?
Good Lord.
RedbonePro on March 26, 2009 at 3:38 PM
So, the trade-off is that newspapers can be tax exempt as long as they don’t endorse candidates. Fine with me. I haven’t agreed with a major newspaper’s endorsement of a candidate since 1984. Many of them had a rare moment of clarity and endorsed Reagan.
Of course, they’ll still be free to engage in the hidden bias of selective reporting. Most major newspapers already function as the PR department of the Democratic Party, let’s just make it official so we know what papers to avoid.
TheMightyMonarch on March 26, 2009 at 3:39 PM
My wife and I discussed this issue over breakfast. I couldn’t make her see there is a difference. She kept insisting, that since the print media are already nothing but propagandists for the liberal/progressive/socialist/marxists, direct financial support would change nothing.
oldleprechaun on March 26, 2009 at 3:39 PM
Makes you wonder. The bias couldn’t get much worse. Could it actually get better?
hawkdriver on March 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
Real journalism from papers and the mainstream media died many years ago.
Thank God for the Internet, the only place to get the non-spun truth.
Impeach all dems in office.
ironmonk on March 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
At least it would legitimize Obama’s propaganda arm and pull the curtain away to reveal that the wizards of smart are actually are on the Messiah’s payroll.
technopeasant on March 26, 2009 at 3:40 PM
If you don’t read the newspaper you are not informed. if you do read the newspaper you are misinformed.
- Mark Twain
MB4 on March 26, 2009 at 3:41 PM
You can lead a horse to the New York Times, but you can’t make him read it.
keep the change on March 26, 2009 at 3:35 PM
Sure you can, by having the ‘Internal Security and Joy Police’ patrolling and making sure that everyone has gotten their required daily People’s Daily.
An informed populace is a happy populace, work will set you free, sacrifice for the fatherland, yada yada.
Bishop on March 26, 2009 at 3:41 PM
It can always get worse. Soon they might start making up charges, or reporting on stupid shit that aint even close to news. Like the minority whip going to a Britteny Spears concert.
Wait a tick……
Yngmarine on March 26, 2009 at 3:42 PM
This is the prelude to all newspapers coming under the control of the Ministry of Truth.
Did I type “control”?
Did I type “TRUTH”?
OhEssYouCowboys on March 26, 2009 at 3:42 PM
I don’t think they need legislation for that; the papers are pretty much non-profit already.
Vashta.Nerada on March 26, 2009 at 3:43 PM
Sure. They doubled the number of loaves, and made the loaves 75% smaller.
hawksruleva on March 26, 2009 at 3:43 PM
My in-laws still insist that CNN gives a balanced report of the news. I was much less intimidated by my father-in-law when I heard him say this.
The idea that the populace will start losing faith in the reporting of government owned newspapers may be a bit too generous. Most of the voting population are sheep and will follow anything.
AubieJon on March 26, 2009 at 3:45 PM
Remember when Winston had a 15 minute tirade about how the increased the chocolate ration by making it smaller….
somehow i cant shake that
Yngmarine on March 26, 2009 at 3:45 PM
You’re right of course. What was I thinking?
hawkdriver on March 26, 2009 at 3:45 PM
Exit question: Haven’t local newspapers been superseded by local TV news?
faraway on March 26, 2009 at 3:45 PM
That’s cuz people a) aren’t taught to think, and b) find it easier not to.
hawksruleva on March 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM
It’s all becoming clear, now. The wood pulp that was destined for use in newspapers, is now to be redirected to bread production.
OhEssYouCowboys on March 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM
I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast.
- – William Tecumseh Sherman
MB4 on March 26, 2009 at 3:46 PM
Personally, I can’t wait to see the results of the first telethon…
MC: …the NY Times desperately needs your donation.
(camera pans to phone bank)
*crickets chipping*
Neo-con Artist on March 26, 2009 at 3:47 PM
That and the bread supply doubled when all the nogoodnicks who didn’t vote for him went to the Northern Logging camps to be um, er, rehabilitated.
hawkdriver on March 26, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Save the trees, kill a newspaper.
faraway on March 26, 2009 at 3:47 PM
They’re not supposed to but churches do it constantly.
SnarkVader on March 26, 2009 at 3:47 PM
*crickets chirping* (oops)
Neo-con Artist on March 26, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Can’t wait for this to play itself out. Assuming this atrocious legislation is passed, down the road the editorial board of the NYT will be overseen by a government bureaucrat. No self-respecting editor, even a rabid left winger will stand for this, but this is where the Times would be headed.
Do business with government and leave your humanity at the door.
EMD on March 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Also in the news…
Boot production in Britian is up 50% over last year. ALL HAIL INGSOC!!!!!!!!!!
I think orwell was off by a few decades… but i dont think he was too wrong on what would happen
Yngmarine on March 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM
Think of ACORN with printing presses.
faraway on March 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM
It was a joke…you see you said you were confused, so I took the confusion part and….oh, never mind…
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 3:49 PM
The only good thing about newspapers becoming state-owned is that the pretense of objective journalism will be removed and the product will suddenly become known for what it is; agenda-driven propaganda. And then, who knows, a brand new virgin industry of publications which present the full spectrum of facts and let the reader provide the opinion may spring into existence for the first time in US history. We’d call them “factpapers” to differentiate them from alleged “newspapers” like the Chicago Tribune, NYT, LAT, WP, etc.
Crusty on March 26, 2009 at 3:49 PM
And we were so arrogant and condescending to his warnings that the best we could do to heed them was to name a television show after his book.
hawkdriver on March 26, 2009 at 3:51 PM
Of course, the Obama Administration is going after the charitable deduction. From their point of view, it’s a win-win: not only does it increase government revenue, but it weakens private charitable institutions so the government can take over their functions. Ha, ha, newspapers – it’s a Bad Time to become a charity.
Realist on March 26, 2009 at 3:54 PM
You know what makes Wolf Blitzer so effective.
It’s wrapped up in the saying: “Once you can fake sincerity, you can be or do anything.”
technopeasant on March 26, 2009 at 3:55 PM
It is the absolute right of the State to supervise the formation of public opinion.
- Joseph Goebbels
MB4 on March 26, 2009 at 3:57 PM
A new cabinet position…Newspaper Czar.
The good news, there won’t be any real criteria…didn’t pay taxes, great…can’t hold a job, great…alcoholic, better…irrational, perfect…conservative, you’re fired…
right2bright on March 26, 2009 at 3:59 PM
State owned newspapers…
Next step: state owned tv and radio stations
And finally… every American will have a…. Volksempfänger so that he can listen to the voice of the Führer… I mean, the president.
Penguin on March 26, 2009 at 4:00 PM
Well, I mean after Big Brother from the book.
hawkdriver on March 26, 2009 at 4:03 PM
All and more will be assimilated. We are the new order. We are the state.
DasObamaReich on March 26, 2009 at 4:04 PM
Resistance is futile.
DasObamaReich on March 26, 2009 at 4:07 PM
My daughter’s horse is WAAAAAYYYYYY too smart to go anywhere near the New York Times. Its a shame liberals aren’t as smart as her horse.
dominigan on March 26, 2009 at 4:09 PM
I hope they fail. Oh wait…
bluelightbrigade on March 26, 2009 at 4:11 PM
What will the litterboxes and bird cages of the world have to say about this?
Mister Ghost on March 26, 2009 at 4:18 PM
I had to resort to picking up free shopping rags and Independents at the barber shop to use for drop cloth.
And what does this administration have against the 21st Century?
kirkill on March 26, 2009 at 4:23 PM
I worked on the business end in print media for 5 years.
Print is not dead…the liberal model of print journalism is dying
(print advertising works, there will always be hardcopy floating around the pizzerias and cafes)
A Conservative version of NYT started right now, in the height of the “second great depression” would not only draw conservative business owners that did not want to advertise in a liberal rag, but also the circ numbers would dwarf all others…
We have the resources, if we don’t proactively change how information is absorbed in popular culture, expect a repeat in 2012.
Ed Graef on March 26, 2009 at 4:29 PM
Think of ACORN with printing presses.
faraway on March 26, 2009 at 3:48 PM
——-
Running a printing press requires actual skill…..
I have yet to hear of an ACORN brownshirt with skill for anything other than intimidation.
acat on March 26, 2009 at 4:33 PM
And groups try to remove church tax exemptions when they do. You think they will do the same to the papers?
Kel-C on March 26, 2009 at 5:09 PM
And here I thought they already were “non-profit” institutions. Isn’t that what they’re bitching about?
mojo on March 26, 2009 at 5:38 PM
State owned newspapers where have I heard of that before. This is what 68 million people voted for and even more to come why a surprise.
rsl775 on March 26, 2009 at 6:04 PM
So much for the Fourth Estate. R.I.P.
Dr Evil on March 26, 2009 at 6:59 PM
The Fourth Estate is to become the Fifth Column.
Dhuka on March 26, 2009 at 9:55 PM
This is the last thrashing of the “Newspaper Trust”.
GunRunner on March 27, 2009 at 1:42 AM
screw the newspapers, let’s just let people who get their talking points from the GOP become our source for unbiased news. Along with Rush and slant head Hannity. The good thing about these three is you only have to listen to one as they all parrot each other.
Monkei on March 27, 2009 at 10:02 AM
Shhhhhhhhhhh! Be vewy, vewy quiet.
74SeventeenSeventySix on March 27, 2009 at 10:42 AM
If the Obama administration gets their way to control the press I would not want to see Michelle (or others) to face the same injustices as Aung San Suu Kyi. Such a picture is not hard to envision today.
This administration passes laws without input by U.S. anymore, keeps our entire body of politic in turmoil, staffs key leadership positions with cronies whose backgrounds are less than sterling, and taxes revenues that have not even been generated. Because none of these actions are found in the Constitution President Obama thinks that his actions are perfectly legal. He must have slept through all of the classes in ethics offered by all of his expensive eduction or becasue of their elitism these important classes were not taught.
MSGTAS on March 27, 2009 at 11:11 AM
Another bill right out of the Nazi Party Platform written by Adolf Hilter.
“We demand legal opposition to known lies and their promulgation through the press. In order to enable the provision of a German press, we demand, that:
a. All writers and employees of the newspapers appearing in the German language be members of the race;
b. Non-German newspapers be required to have the express permission of the State to be published. They may not be printed in the German language;
c. Non-Germans are forbidden by law any financial interest in German publications, or any influence on them, and as punishment for violations the closing of such a publication as well as the immediate expulsion from the Reich of the non-German concerned. Publications which are counter to the general good are to be forbidden. We demand legal prosecution of artistic and literary forms which exert a destructive influence on our national life, and the closure of organizations opposing the above made demands”
http://people.westminstercollege.edu/faculty/mmarkowski/H113/AH/platform.html
nelsonknows on March 27, 2009 at 2:57 PM
MICHELLE can we please call it tass news just like it was for stalin.the papers insult are intelligence every day now they want us to pay for it.please stop printing lies .maybe then we would read your paper .
wade underhile on March 27, 2009 at 7:25 PM
It’s work that I wouldn’t mind and wouldn’t be too unfamiliar with(the newspaper industry) in industry experience.
Explain the “other” media group of Atlanta and its various newspapers still managing to survive. They’ve been attacked by various conservative groups and pulpits yet have survived the times better than their peers.
sethstorm on March 27, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Comment pages: