Obama “would be happy to look at” newspaper bailout bill

posted at 10:55 am on September 21, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

With the American people sick to death of corporate bailouts, one might think that the White House would avoid sounding the least bit interested in another plan to save an industry from itself.  Apparently the Obama administration has not yet realized this, as Barack Obama himself sounded quite interested in Senator Ben Cardin’s (D-MD) plan to rescue the newspaper industry from its self-inflicted wounds.  Instead of encouraging the broadsheets to develop a new business plan, Cardin would turn them into charity cases — and non-profits for the purposes of tax relief:

The president said he is “happy to look at” bills before Congress that would give struggling news organizations tax breaks if they were to restructure as nonprofit businesses.

“I haven’t seen detailed proposals yet, but I’ll be happy to look at them,” Obama told the editors of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette and Toledo Blade in an interview.

Sen. Ben Cardin (D-Md.) has introduced S. 673, the so-called “Newspaper Revitalization Act,” that would give outlets tax deals if they were to restructure as 501(c)(3) corporations. That bill has so far attracted one cosponsor, Cardin’s Maryland colleague Sen. Barbara Mikulski (D).

Obama then offered this rationale:

“I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding,” he said.

Not to be flip, but … so?  Since when has it been the business of government to shape public speech?  I seem to recall something in the Constitution that explicitly made that none of the federal government’s business.

Besides, newspapers are as guilty of those charges as blogs, and in many cases rather egregiously so.  For instance, just in the last few days, the Washington Post decided to put the ACORN story “in context” not by reporting on the people in ACORN, their actions on videotape, and the organization’s attempts to evade responsibility, but by reporting that one of the two reporters on the case has a father who is a Christian minister.  They also tried to pass off a quasi-quote as a smear of racism, which Scott Johnson at the blog Power Line highlights:

More nefariously, the Post implies that Giles and O’Keefe worked with racist motivations:

Though O’Keefe described himself as a progressive radical, not a conservative, he said he targeted ACORN for the same reasons that the political right does: its massive voter registration drives that turn out poor African Americans and Latinos against Republicans.

“Politicians are getting elected single-handedly due to this organization,” he said. “No one was holding this organization accountable. No one in the media is putting pressure on them. We wanted to do a stunt and see what we could find.”

If O’Keefe had said something incendiary about a racial motivation for undertaking his investigation of ACORN, one can be sure that the Post reporters would have quoted it instead of simply larding the context with an imputation of racism. The Post certainly provides no supporting quote.

It appears to me that Post reporters Darryl Fears and Carol D. Leonnig are alone responsible for introducing race to the discussion. Associated Press reporters Sharon Theimer and Pete Yost pick up where the Post left off in this story:

James O’Keefe, one of the two filmmakers, said he went after ACORN because it registers minorities likely to vote against Republicans: “Politicians are getting elected single-handedly due to this organization,” O’Keefe told The Washington Post. “No one was holding this organization accountable.”

But did O’Keefe say any such thing? The Washington Post reporters imply the existence of a statement that is nowhere quoted. The AP takes the cue and puts the words in O’Keefe’s mouth. It’s quite a racket they’ve got going here, and someone really should call them on it.

The entire raison d’etre of the newspaper industry, according to their own leading lights, is to shine a light on the halls of power and enforce transparency.  If they’re getting a big tax break from the government by becoming “non-profit” (many of them are already non-profit in practice, which is their problem), doesn’t take impact their ability to report in an objective manner?  For that matter, what would prevent blogs from organizing as 501(c)(3) entities themselves?

The government has no place in the newspaper industry.  It had no place in the insurance or automaking industries either, but this is much more dangerous.  The only unique value newspapers have is in their independence from the government.  Once they become beholden to Congress and the federal bureaucracy, they may as well change their names to Government Times.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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: 1 2

No serious fact checking!!!!!!!!! Oh that’s sooo rich Mr. President.

katablog.com on September 21, 2009 at 11:40 AM

They want a “revolt” to occur. They’re itching for an excuse to shut down all those agitating right-wing radio hosts, blog sites, etc.

Daggett on September 21, 2009 at 11:13 AM

Who will be their muscle, their enforcer?

The Military? Nope, they love America.
The Local Police? Nope, they despise politicians.
The Unions? Nope, not without more pay increases.
ACORN? Nope, we would kick their arses.

We the people, have our muscle locked and loaded.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 11:40 AM

NBC/MSNBC is already the propaganda arm of the Gov’t, being owned by GE which is heavily subsidized by the Gov’t.

Just think…Olberman and Maddow’s saleries paid for by your tax payer dollars….

daesleeper on September 21, 2009 at 11:40 AM

Crikey. What’s next, an individual mandate to subscribe to NYT or WaPo, and if we don’t we’ll be fined? Its not a tax, only an incentive to ensure the health of our democracy after all . . .

I really don’t think the people are going to stand for this. We need another march.

Firefly_76 on September 21, 2009 at 11:41 AM

This must be why the NYT took the “For-Sale” sign off the Boston Globe a week or two ago. They knew this was in the works I bet.

TheBigOldDog on September 21, 2009 at 11:41 AM

At one time, I wrote a monthly conservative editorial for a liberal major city newspaper. After I wrote a column critical of Obama, just before he won the official nomination, I was told that I had “broken the papers policy of being unbiased.” I was told that if I wrote another one like it, they may not publish it, or they would edit it.

I wrote two more against Obama, then received an e-mail that they would have to cut me.

No. I don’t think newspapers need a bailout. Let them die the slow, natural death they deserve.

Star20 on September 21, 2009 at 11:43 AM

I wonder if it is even legal to do that. Doesn’t it fly in the face of the McCain/Feingold bill? Is funding a media source that comments and uses your name in the last sixty days a violation of something somewhere? Now I realize we fund NPR, and I’m not sure that’s constitutional if it has one story about politics, but this is different.

Oh, they’ll do it, it will be just wrong.

archer52 on September 21, 2009 at 11:44 AM

Because the Legacy Media’s been doing such a bang up job of keeping America informed…

BadgerHawk on September 21, 2009 at 11:01 AM

The best way to keep factions from shouting at each other is to simply not print one side’s viewpoint and propagandize the other. Since the ‘net, that doesn’t work anymore.

a capella on September 21, 2009 at 11:44 AM

fogw at 11:40
California legislators are negotiating regarding how many prisoners to release to meet a federal judge’s requirements. All of those folks will need a job.

GaltBlvnAtty on September 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM

No, no no, a 1000 times NO!

Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM

I feel like I’m in the Twilight Zone here–having been zapped in the middle of Orwell’s “1984″.

varnson on September 21, 2009 at 11:59 AM

Newton in… no wait… Neutron in Chief has the right formula: Newspapers bailout + amnesty = 4 more years.

Michelle Dubois on September 21, 2009 at 12:01 PM

As much as you guys hate the NYT, the fact is you get a lot of your own content from their reporting. Blogs love to brag about being at the forefront of the “new media”, but until they develop substantial investigative and reporting budgets, there will still be a huge need for the major newspapers. What passes for research around here is little more than a google search.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

California legislators are negotiating regarding how many prisoners to release to meet a federal judge’s requirements. All of those folks will need a job.

GaltBlvnAtty on September 21, 2009 at 11:56 AM

Yeh, and they are qualified for any number of positions.

Protest Rally, Mob enforcement.
ACORN, Hooker Division.
Black Panthers, Voter Protection Bureau.
Attorney General.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:06 PM

If we give the newspapers a bailout does this mean we’re going to bail out all the brothels that are in trouble?

HondaV65 on September 21, 2009 at 12:07 PM

So how would it be any different than it is today?

angryed on September 21, 2009 at 12:07 PM

What passes for research at the NYTs is even less than a google search, based as it is on an ideological test. Even the National Enquirer has scooped the New Yak Times.

Dhuka on September 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

A dishonest media is not worth saving… Your premise assumes honest and impartial investigative efforts… The Elite Media, led by its “standard” (and I use that term VERY loosely) bearer, the NY Times, deserve to die… The sooner, the better…

And their duly elected (and selected) President can provide the eulogy…

Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM

Barak Goebbel’s problem is a bail out of just a select few ‘failing newspapers’ is patently discriminatory. The gubmint would have to (at least offer to) bail out all failing newspapers in the country.

I’d be interested in seeing the taxpayers’ reaction to that.

alwyr on September 21, 2009 at 12:11 PM

A dishonest media is not worth saving… Your premise assumes honest and impartial investigative efforts…
Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 12:08 PM

So you think partisan blogs would be better equipped to conduct honest and impartial investigative efforts?

And frankly, yes the NYT does do yeoman’s work when it comes to research and investigative reporting, on political topics as well as others. Do you ever read the NYT outside of an attack post on HA?

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:15 PM

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

As much as you guys hate the NYT, the fact is you get a lot of your own content from their reporting. Yup, you’re right again. NYT broke the ACORN story while blogs were napping.

Blogs love to brag about being at the forefront of the “new media”, but until they develop substantial investigative and reporting budgets, there will still be a huge need for the major newspapers. Good for wrapping dead fish, swatting flies, bird-cage liner and hippy wallpaper.

What passes for research around here is little more than a google search. Yeh, googling is a waste of time. Why checkout thousands of sources when it’s all so easy just to buy a copy of the NYT.

moron.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Do you ever read the NYT outside of an attack post on HA?

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:15 PM

I don’t.

….. claps for self.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:24 PM

I don’t.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:24 PM

Great. Then stfu because you’re hardly qualified to give a worthwhile opinion on the subject now are you?

I for one read the NYT and HA frequently, and I can say the former is a great deal more fair, insightful and valuable than the latter.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM

As much as you guys hate the NYT, the fact is you get a lot of your own content from their reporting.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

You say content, we say laugh material.

Vashta.Nerada on September 21, 2009 at 12:28 PM

Barry has to pay off those who lied and covered for him.

bayview on September 21, 2009 at 12:31 PM

Won’t change anything, except to keep newspaper whores paid.

Just turning the formerly MSM into the world’s biggest vanity publisher.

Kristopher on September 21, 2009 at 12:31 PM

I for one read the NYT

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM

This explains alot. You need to get out more.

daesleeper on September 21, 2009 at 12:33 PM

This explains alot. You need to get out more.

daesleeper on September 21, 2009 at 12:33 PM

LOL. I said right after that I read HA frequently. I do “get out” more intellectually seeing as I read both sides. Do you? Reading liberal articles through HA attack posts doesn’t count.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:35 PM

Ummm I hope the “Precedent” is talking 501(c)4.. as a 501(c)3 can not do political grandstanding of any kind due to having their tax exemtion pulled.

But then 501(c)4′s can’t do certain things either as they can have what little tax exepmtions pulled as well.

I have blogged about this a number of times. This is not good at all.

upinak on September 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

I’m honestly unsure why being exempt from taxation would put these guys in the pocket of the government. Do regular nonprofits bend to the will of the current administration?

I can definitely see why newspapers getting a big fat check from the government would be a problem; that’s a no brainier.

But I need some help on this one.

Trent1289 on September 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

Plenty crr6. In fact nearly all of my friends are liberal. We argue about things all the time. So I hardly exist in an echo chamber. I linger at HA because it is nice to cavort with folks who share similiar views. You seem to visit simply to throw excrement at the wall and see what sticks.

daesleeper on September 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Great. Then stfu because you’re hardly qualified to give a worthwhile opinion on the subject now are you? The “subject” is bailing out newspapers with taxpayer dollars. As a taxpayer that makes me more than qualified moron. Silly you, thinks this is all about one paper, the NYT. And BTW, I seriously doubt if you could make me stfu.

I for one read the NYT and HA frequently, and I can say the former is a great deal more fair, insightful and valuable than the latter. I get my information from far more sources than you do. What makes you think commenters here only read the NYT and HotAir. Your projection is showing Nancy. I win.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:43 PM

I linger at HA because it is nice to cavort with folks who share similiar views.

I guess we differ here. It bores me to “cavort” with people who think like me.

You seem to visit simply to throw excrement at the wall and see what sticks.

daesleeper on September 21, 2009 at 12:39 PM

That’s rarely the case. This thread is a good example. I started with a serious point about the role of major newspapers play in investigative reporting and resarch, and the half-wits here fail to address it, or sling ad hominems. Trying to argue seriously here is generally like tossing pearls to swine, that’s why most of the “trolls” give up.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:45 PM

For that matter, what would prevent blogs from organizing as 501(c)(3) entities themselves?

Interesting concept – an unforseen consequence that leads to these chumps getting hoisted by their own petards? Sounds interesting…

As much as you guys hate the NYT, the fact is you get a lot of your own content from their reporting. Blogs love to brag about being at the forefront of the “new media”, but until they develop substantial investigative and reporting budgets, there will still be a huge need for the major newspapers. What passes for research around here is little more than a google search.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Yes, I was blown away by their coverage of the ACORN human-trafficking story, the NEA getting turned into “Goebbels-Lite,” and the SEIU becoming the “purple people-beaters.” Not to mention how actual veterans of the war against the Nazis were the largest segment of those accused of carrying swastikas at townhall rallies by the current Speaker. Real Pulitzer-quality stuff, with biting turns of phrase that would make Shakespeare weep in envy. Please do come back when you’ve got your “A”-game ready, clown.

Blacksmith on September 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

reporting that one of the two reporters on the case has a father who is a Christian minister

And this is relevant to the story in what respect, WaPo? Oh that’s right: It isn’t! But yes, please, let’s bail out these fine institutions out there doing the “yeoman’s work” of “investigative journalism.”

The blogosphere has done plenty of investigative reporting over the years. The boss wrote a post about this several months back listing several examples of this, and she herself has exposed plenty of stories. In fact, if memory serves, she was the first to start talking about ACORN, and that was years back. Another one that comes readily to mind is the story of the phony Bush National Guard memo, which was exposed by conservative bloggers. That was sure some crack investigative journalism by the esteemed CBS News team! They were taken to school by a handful of rag tag bloggers. C4P is one of my go-to sites every morning, and the editors there do an exceptional job of vetting all of the anti-Palin stories that run in the vaunted MSM. Were it not for that site, I would probably not know even a fraction of the things I know about Gov. Palin, and what is true and what is just made up or “placed into context.”

Proponents of traditional media better prepare themselves because news and the way it’s distributed is changing. The Internet has democratized it, and that’s not going away. It doesn’t take a whole lot of money to pick up the phone or drop a few emails to source out a story. The blogosphere may rely on newspapers and wire stories now because they’re there, but when they aren’t, bloggers will be more than capable of picking up the mantle and carrying on.

As for the bailout: Please STOP with the corporate welfare!!!!

NoLeftTurn on September 21, 2009 at 12:53 PM

I find it most “interesting” that on the day Obama has a golf outting with a NY Times employee I see a headline on Drudge stating that the President is open to a newspaper bailout. Hmmmmmmm

lyfsatrip on September 21, 2009 at 12:55 PM

Interesting concept – an unforseen consequence that leads to these chumps getting hoisted by their own petards? Sounds interesting…
Blacksmith on September 21, 2009 at 12:49 PM

It wouldn’t be a 501c3. it would be a 501c4 and they are a PITA…. trust me. It takes months and months to get that.

upinak on September 21, 2009 at 12:56 PM

When they get their grubby little paws in the media, this is no longer America. The future is beginning to look less certain. 2010 cannot come soon enough.

erakis on September 21, 2009 at 12:57 PM

I started with a serious point about the role of major newspapers play in investigative reporting and resarch, and the half-wits here fail to address it, or sling ad hominems. Trying to argue seriously here is generally like tossing pearls to swine, that’s why most of the “trolls” give up.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Hey crr6, here’s how I failed to address your comments ….

As much as you guys hate the NYT, the fact is you get a lot of your own content from their reporting. Yup, you’re right again. NYT broke the ACORN story while blogs were napping.

Blogs love to brag about being at the forefront of the “new media”, but until they develop substantial investigative and reporting budgets, there will still be a huge need for the major newspapers. Good for wrapping dead fish, swatting flies, bird-cage liner and hippy wallpaper.

What passes for research around here is little more than a google search. Yeh, googling is a waste of time. Why checkout thousands of sources when it’s all so easy just to buy a copy of the NYT.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Liar.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 12:57 PM

Hey crr6, here’s how I failed to address your comments ….

Great. Then stfu because you’re hardly qualified to give a worthwhile opinion on the subject now are you? The “subject” is bailing out newspapers with taxpayer dollars. As a taxpayer that makes me more than qualified moron. Silly you, thinks this is all about one paper, the NYT. And BTW, I seriously doubt if you could make me stfu.

I for one read the NYT and HA frequently, and I can say the former is a great deal more fair, insightful and valuable than the latter. I get my information from far more sources than you do. What makes you think commenters here only read the NYT and HotAir. Your projection is showing Nancy. I win.

Liar again.

fogw on September 21, 2009 at 1:00 PM

I wonder where the bailouts were when the horse and buggy industry needed them.

This is a transparent attempt to payoff Obama’s supporters because they are losing their careers in his cause.

This should spar more marches than anything else.

Hmmm maybe part of what Breitbart is doing is spotlighting what the propaganda machine ahead of this stinking bit of legislation.

Heads up!

petunia on September 21, 2009 at 1:09 PM

At one time, I wrote a monthly conservative editorial for a liberal major city newspaper. After I wrote a column critical of Obama, just before he won the official nomination, I was told that I had “broken the papers policy of being unbiased.” I was told that if I wrote another one like it, they may not publish it, or they would edit it.

I wrote two more against Obama, then received an e-mail that they would have to cut me.

No. I don’t think newspapers need a bailout. Let them die the slow, natural death they deserve.

Star20 on September 21, 2009 at 11:43 AM

Did you save the evidence? You are not alone in this kind of thing. You should take your story to Breitbart and Beck. They are looking for more evidence to put before the public.

Beck has made the point the we can’t trust any legislation out of Washington because they stuff everything full of payoffs to their friends… I’m for shutting down Washington until 2010 when we can start to right the catastrophe than began in 2008.

petunia on September 21, 2009 at 1:15 PM

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

“our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.” Do you get it now?

Michelle Dubois on September 21, 2009 at 1:22 PM

The last place government money should ever go is to the media. There is no great recipe for totalitarian governance than to have the media sucking from the government’s teat.

Scrappy on September 21, 2009 at 1:26 PM

“I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding,” he said.

I just spit up my lunch reading this.
OMG WTF?!?!?!?
I really am amazed at the gall this guy has.
Why is he now concerned with accuracy?!
He never was before!
I suppose what he is really saying is this:

I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions that are unflattering to me, with no serious fact-checking except when liberals are speaking, no serious attempts to put stories in context unless we are talking about liberal concerns, that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void, or letting people hear the real truth ,but not a lot of mutual understanding,and too much real understanding concerning our efforts to propagandize the news

I find reading between the lines is quite helpful in my ‘understanding’.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:38 PM

This is DoublePlusUnGood.

++UnGood.

Geochelone on September 21, 2009 at 1:41 PM

substantial investigative and reporting budgets, there will still be a huge need for the major newspapers. What passes for research around here is little more than a google search.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

Pot calling kettle black yourself.
Even the big news outlets do no spend time doing the ‘investigative’ reporting they used to.
The little man does probably more than anyone.
ACORN blowout?
Planned Parenthood videos?
You Tube videos abound of the little man’s investigative research reports. Joe the Plumber anyone?
It is more erratic at times, but often more cutting edge & accurate bcs these people often have to political agenda other than getting the truth out.
Sometimes they only get the truth out on one side of the political spectrum, but at least it is being reported.
ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, NY Times, Newsweek, etc are nothing more than liberal shills.
This is why the explosion in the conservative media.
This is why FOX news is always leading in viewers.
People are voting with their reader/viewership.
The ‘investigative’ reporting of the major networks doesn’t exist anymore (Dan Rather?).
I would rather search through online media reports for the truth than be spoon fed propaganda diatribe through print & TV media.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM

And BTW- there is nothing wrong with internet reasearching a story, if you can confirm the accuracy of the information obtained.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM

And BTW- there is nothing wrong with internet reasearching a story, if you can confirm the accuracy of the information obtained.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:44 PM

It is the same as book research in a library.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 1:46 PM

Society in every state is a blessing, but government, even in its best state, is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one; for when we suffer or are exposed to the same miseries by a government, which we might expect in a country without government, our calamity is heightened by reflecting that we furnish the means by which we suffer.” – Thomas Paine, Common Sense 1776

Michelle Dubois on September 21, 2009 at 1:22 PM

I always liked that quote, I wish people would realize that the government can only enslave society if the producers and achievers continue to supply it with the revenue to buy votes.

Chainsaw56 on September 21, 2009 at 1:49 PM

If he’s so concerned about the blogosphere, why did he have all those conference calls with liberal bloggers to get out his message?

erakis on September 21, 2009 at 1:53 PM

This myth that sometining is too big to fail is absolute B_llSh_t

And has anyone seen the new GM ad where the new CEO is announcing their new refund policy and he states that they ( government motors ) are putting their money where their mouth is. Like everything else that originates in this White House, thats a damn lie. They are bankrupt, now I ask who’s money are they talking about?

bluegrass on September 21, 2009 at 1:59 PM

Chainsaw56 on September 21, 2009 at 1:49 PM

Poor Thomas Paine would be labelled a hate monger & racist bigot, now.

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 2:01 PM

What’s wrong with you people?? Have you forgotten the extraordinary investigative reporting of Jason Blair? You can’t put a price tag on reporting like that!

Now, for every Blair exposed, how many more aren’t? And if you start digging up information on what corporations own which newspapers, you’ll find a pattern very close to the one which exists in television.

I stopped trusting “journalists” (including Walter Crapkite) when I was stationed in Viet-nam in ’68. I see no reason to give them money. I frequently receive telephone solicitations from the [Newport News Virginia] Daily Press. When they ask why I don’t want to subscribe I tell them it’s because of their far-left editorial leanings. But, they are owned by Tribune Publishing, as in Chicago Tribune, so I expect I’m in no danger of subscribing. At least not voluntarily.

oldleprechaun on September 21, 2009 at 2:15 PM

Profits=customers (readers): Perhaps if the newspapers were truly unbiased and printed both sides of an issue, readership would not go down. I know that I need both sides of an issue before I can make up my mind. My contention is that with fewer readership comes less advertising, therefore financial failure. To make up for the loss of income with fewer readers, the boneheads, without evaluation of content, merely raise the price of the papers and say that the production costs are rising. Oh, yea, aren’t they union? I do not believe that America is as left leaning as our media would suppose, they are just the loudest. The silent majority votes with their pocketbook including what they read. My fear is not the take over of the existing leftist leaning newspapers, other than (1) we the taxpayers will be supporting a government mouthpiece and (2) government control over all (“non-balanced”) news. We need to learn how the people survive under government control in communist countries. Oh, I almost forgot, America used to be a country that the oppressed could come to for freedom of speech. I wonder how many LEGAL immigrants like the direction our country is going?

holymoly on September 21, 2009 at 2:26 PM

At least not voluntarily.

oldleprechaun on September 21, 2009 at 2:15 PM

When will they mandate news subscriptions, like healthcare?
Hmmmm…..

Badger40 on September 21, 2009 at 2:34 PM

Do you ever read the NYT outside of an attack post on HA?

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:15 PM

Since you asked me directly: no, I don’t waste my time reading “the grey lady”…

I’ll ignore the “attack post” reference, as I do not feel it is an attack to list the clear BIAS this dowager leader of the Elite Media trowels out on a daily basis as NEWS when it should be loading up the OPINION PAGES and labeling it as such…

I used to subscribe to Newsweek starting in the late 1970s, but cancelled my subscription after they started attacking President Reagan…

Feel free to subscribe to the NYT and support them as desired… Just don’t ask me to support them with one penny of my tax dollars… Your liberal opinion stops at my wallet, and I will fight you hammer and tong should you put your fingers in my pocket…

Think “Gladiator”, and I’m Russell Crowe…

There, I feel better…

Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 2:38 PM

I frequently receive telephone solicitations from the [Newport News Virginia] Daily Press. When they ask why I don’t want to subscribe I tell them it’s because of their far-left editorial leanings. But, they are owned by Tribune Publishing, as in Chicago Tribune, so I expect I’m in no danger of subscribing. At least not voluntarily.

oldleprechaun on September 21, 2009 at 2:15 PM

Tell them you are on the “DO NOT CALL” list and you are going to turn them in… That should stop them for good…

Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 2:41 PM

It is interesting that some read the NYT to become informed. I have never read it, which i do often to see what they are saying, without coming across several, purposeful lies in supposed news stories.

If one subverts supposed research by lying, what is it worth?

proconstitution on September 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM

Newspapers are horribly expensive. The vast majority of money goes into the print production.

There’s a new blog news outfit in San Diego that I believe will be the role model for the future. It’s a bona fide news group. That means, they actually get out and go get the news. You really can’t investigate from a computer screen.

BUT…it’s local news only. They don’t bother with national stories. AND…it’s all on-line.

So far, advertisers are flocking in, so there’s no charge. Moreover, journalists from all over the country are calling to see if they are hiring.

Real journalists like to investigate. The young guys who started this venture are, of course, bright and, well, darn young. They pay good wages to the reporters and say, amazingly enough, they are making plenty of money.

That’s the way of the future, I think.

AnninCA on September 21, 2009 at 2:46 PM

$2 Monday through Saturday and $6 on Sunday…

Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 2:48 PM

If one subverts supposed research by lying, what is it worth?

proconstitution on September 21, 2009 at 2:43 PM

$2 Monday through Saturday and $6 on Sunday…

That is the cover price for the NYT…

Khun Joe on September 21, 2009 at 2:50 PM

Go ahead–make our day!
The media is polling slightly ahead of dope pusher and putting them on the dole will bring them even lower to the professional political class!

chickasaw42 on September 21, 2009 at 3:03 PM

Barack Obama himself sounded quite interested in Senator Ben Cardin’s (D-MD) plan to rescue the newspaper industry from its self-inflicted wounds

Absolutely not! Let the Zombie Media die form its self-inflcted wounds!

ya2daup on September 21, 2009 at 3:13 PM

Gee, you’d think they didn’t care what the American people thought.

This is the first president who has given me the feeling of being talked at rather than talked to. Couldn’t say that about Carter though he was inept, nor Clinton though he was lying through his teeth. At least they cared somewhat about what we thought.

Dr. ZhivBlago on September 21, 2009 at 5:16 PM

I’m honestly unsure why being exempt from taxation would put these guys in the pocket of the government. Do regular nonprofits bend to the will of the current administration?

…I need some help on this one.

Trent1289 on September 21, 2009 at 12:38 PM

NPR

ya2daup on September 21, 2009 at 5:39 PM

As much as you guys hate the NYT, the fact is you get a lot of your own content from their reporting. Blogs love to brag about being at the forefront of the “new media”, but until they develop substantial investigative and reporting budgets, there will still be a huge need for the major newspapers. What passes for research around here is little more than a google search.

crr6 on September 21, 2009 at 12:04 PM

While they may “research” and know all the facts of a story, they only report what is advantageous to their liberal agenda. Even if what’s being reported isn’t pleasing to a particular segment of the population, it’s still what’s happening. For example, as a conservative I may be disappointed by the actions of Mark Sanford, but I still want to know about it, I don’t want it dismissed and glossed over. Why do you think Fox News is the #1 cable news channel? It’s not because liberals love Hannity or Beck, it’s because they’re actually reporting the news!

The print media is blatantly biased. That – among other reasons – is why they are dying. They’ve dug their own graves, they need to go.

citrus on September 21, 2009 at 5:55 PM

It seems the anointed one has read Orwell’s 1984 as an instruction manual.

Dhuka on September 21, 2009 at 5:56 PM

The Ministry of Truth!

Dhuka on September 21, 2009 at 5:57 PM

They are already “presstitutes.” Why shouldn’t they be paid money for what they do?

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on September 21, 2009 at 8:48 PM

Of course Obama would be happy. Such a “bailout” would make another section of the media entirely beholden to their Democratic party patronage. And the government would act the same way with their new toy as they have with the banks, AIG,
automakers, et al. They will can people who say things they do not like.

{^_^}

herself on September 22, 2009 at 3:09 AM

MEMO TO NEWSPAPERS
FROM: BARACK OBAMA

We will be happy to consider financial assistance to newspapers. Executive pay will be based on the ratio of favorable to unfavorable stories about the current administration. The administration will decide which are which.

Our new Czar for the newspaper bailout program is Mr. Goebells here. Any words of guidance for our editors, Franz?

kens on September 22, 2009 at 9:56 AM

I am so looking forward to finally getting our newspaper industry organized and on solid footing all under the kind and wise direction of someone in the federal government.

Maybe Obama can appoint someone to be Director of Information – oh, he already has – it is Cass Sunstein! Cool, since he understands that Americans are too stupid to make good decisions for themselves and how a little informational “nudging” can fix that right up!

Cass could hold a daily telephone roundtable with other guiding lights of the administration (Chu, Ezekiel Emanuel, Rahm Emanuel, Browner, et al)and get updates on areas where the people are unable or unwilling to effectively advance the administration’s agenda.

Then like the current daily White House roundtable call with “journalists and publishers”, Sunstein can provide daily topics to be covered in the media. Anything that is published that is not on the list must meet guidelines in tone and tenor, or punishment will be meted out. The NEA can helpfully offer artists to produce reinforcing cartoons, posters, ads, etc.

What the heck, why bother with a bunch of newspapers scattered around the country. In the “efficient” new administration there should be just a single newspaper – so much easier to manage…

Good lord! We are just 8 friggin’ months into this guy’s term! What will this country look like in 2012?

in_awe on September 22, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Comment pages: 1 2