Report: Half of staff may quit LA Times if right-wing Koch brothers buy paper

posted at 4:01 pm on April 30, 2013 by Allahpundit

Call their bluff. Wherever you stand politically, we can all agree on that, right? If you’re a liberal, you want to see the fair, balanced, impartial LA Times newsroom rise as one and walk out in protest of having to work for libertarian oligarKKKs. If you’re a conservative, you want them gone for different reasons, partly as a smoking gun of bias and partly because it’ll clear the decks to hire more neutral reporters. And if they don’t walk out, that’s okay — their cheap bravado will have been exposed in all its cheapness.

Call their bluff. Break the left’s media monopoly. Then rename the paper the “Los Angeles Kochtopus,” just to spite them.

At a Los Angeles Times in-house awards ceremony a week ago, columnist Steve Lopez addressed the elephant in the room…

Facing the elephant trunk-on, “Raise your hand if you would quit if the paper was bought by the Koch brothers.” About half the staff raised their hands.

Perhaps one brave Times reporter would go public with a story killed by the new owners. She would lose her job, and it would be written about in The New York Times. And, it would pressure the LA Times owners to be more objective. But many of the people working at the Times support a family or are still developing their careers and can’t afford to lose their jobs — especially in a town with few job opportunities for newspaper journalists.

If half the staff quit under Koch ownership, that would leave half as many people likely to stand up to the owners — not to mention a huge loss of talented journalists who have built a wealth of LA knowledge and relationships over years of experience.

Half may be an underestimate. According to lefty Harold Meyerson, “A recent informal poll that one L.A. Times writer conducted of his colleagues showed that almost all planned to exit if the Kochs took control (and that included sportswriters and arts writers).” Cheap bravado among like-minded liberals or a bona fide threat? There’s only one way to know for sure.

After Meyerson’s piece came out last week, I tweeted it as evidence that the great conservative dream of buying up big-name liberal media outlets and making them more objective had a fatal flaw, namely that the reporters themselves would never tolerate it. Some will walk, others will stay on and defy warnings from the top not to tilt left and then dare ownership to fire them, knowing that martyrdom from the rest of the media awaits. Ace countered that Fox News proves that’s not true: Surely there are plenty of liberals working there, however grudgingly, in the name of collecting a paycheck in a highly competitive industry. They’ll put money over ideology if push comes to shove. Maybe, but Fox isn’t an exact analogue. Fox started from scratch as a conservative network; the Kochs buying the Times would be an invasion of liberal territory, a takeover of a once-eminent serious newspaper. It would threaten the left in a way that building a conservative media outlet from the ground up wouldn’t. Choosing to work for it would, at least at first, be seen by some leftist media types as tantamount to crossing a picket line. That’s a price worth paying in the long run, and even in the short run to see the bias exposed so nakedly, but if you think the Kochs are going to swoop in and turn the Times neutral or even conservative-leaning overnight, you’re kidding yourself.

John Ziegler thinks it’s mostly cheap bravado:

Right, but donations aren’t ownership. A big donor wields influence but not direct power to fire, hire, or dictate editorial policy, and his name doesn’t affect perceptions of the company’s brand the way it would if he owned it lock, stock, and barrel. If you’re a liberal working for NPR, you can shrug off the Kochs’ donations on grounds that NPR itself remains left-leaning and independent. If they want to give you money to do your work under those circumstances, hey, it’s their dime. If you’re a liberal working for the Koch-owned Times, though, then suddenly you’re a tentacle of the Kochtopus. And if you stay on on for the paycheck even after other reporters quit in protest, you’re a sellout according to your bien-pensant friends. Different dynamic. Doesn’t mean most won’t, in fact, sell out — a reporter’s got to eat — but as I say, different dynamic.

Exit question for media pros: How often are would-be purchasers pressured into issuing statements like the following? I’m asking earnestly. Maybe it’s standard practice and I just don’t know it:

“As an entrepreneurial company with 60,000 employees around the world, we are constantly exploring profitable opportunities in many industries and sectors. So, it is natural that our name would come up in connection with this rumor,” Melissa Cohlmia, a spokeswoman for Koch Companies Public Sector, said in a statement last month.

“We respect the independence of the journalistic institutions referenced in the news stories,” Ms. Cohlmia continued. “But it is our longstanding policy not to comment on deals or rumors of deals we may or may not be exploring.”

Do liberal media moguls typically feel obliged to reassure future employees that they won’t lean on them to push a certain line, even when they’re just one in a field of prospective buyers? I can’t remember a case of a newsroom fretting that a corporate suitor might wreak havoc by pushing them too far to the left, but I’m willing to stand corrected.


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 3 4

triple on May 1, 2013 at 2:30 AM

If it’s on Media Matters servers it’s crap. Get a better source. If it’s Media Matters I’m not clicking.

tetriskid on May 1, 2013 at 2:31 AM

Okay buddy. I guess they super imposed tucker carlson onto their secret moon base fox news set, while dubbing his voice in to match the screen exactly, autotune the news style.

Good luck with your delusions.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 2:32 AM

Okay buddy. I guess they super imposed tucker carlson onto their secret moon base fox news set, while dubbing his voice in to match the screen exactly, autotune the news style.

Good luck with your delusions.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 2:32 AM

Media Matters selectively edit things all the time. That is basically their premise. To enrage the gullible like you. Their crap filters up to Maddow and she plays it.

Also hilarious that it’s 2013 and you don’t understand how the internet works. But again… socialist.

tetriskid on May 1, 2013 at 2:39 AM

I should thank tetriskid for proving my point.

As you’ve just seen, it’s far more comfortable to assume media matters is lying, than it is to admit they were right, even when presented with irrefutable video evidence.

And how do you do that? How do you get past that massive cognitive dissonance?

You refuse to see the video.

Because it might prove you wrong.

And god, wouldn’t that be awful.

Of course, it doesn’t make him less wrong. But it does make him more comfortable and secure. You’re never wrong when you ignore information that might prove you wrong.

And now you understand why a diverse media is important.

Or you don’t, because I’m a dirty liberal and everything I say is lies. Right.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 2:46 AM

And now you understand why a diverse media is important.

Or you don’t, because I’m a dirty liberal and everything I say is lies. Right.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 2:46 AM

Except you want to destroy any opposing speech. Like the fascist you are.

FOX is the one channel with an opposing viewpoint so it must be silenced.

How fascist.

We are actually for a diverse media not a monoply.

Come back with a citation that isn’t from Media Matters. If you did learn to properly cite sources (something I doubt).

tetriskid on May 1, 2013 at 2:50 AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hcs3d3sG22E

Here’s the same segment, same graphics, but now with doocy. Yes, they actually interviewed this guy for the same story twice. They liked it that much.

And it’s posted to Greg Walden’s (R-OR) youtube account.

So there’s that.

FOX is the one channel with an opposing viewpoint so it must be silenced.

I don’t have a problem with people voicing opposing viewpoints. I’m here on hotair, when is the last time you visited daily kos?

I have a problem with a purported news organization acting as the PR wing of a political party. Does that mean fox should be shut down? No. They should be honest. When you report on a press release from the NRCC? Disclose that it’s a press release. That’s all. Don’t pretend like it’s real news.

Fox news has even gone so far as to recreate typos in republican press releases.

And that’s okay! You can report on press releases. But not as substitutes for news reporting – you report on them as press releases. “The GOP has released these figures..” or something to that effect. You don’t report it straight up as news, with zero disclosure. That’s called propaganda.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM

PS: It’s obvious you just learned the word fascist and you like to use it quite a bit, but that doesn’t mean it’s a correct usage. I’m a socialist.

I just learned the word skeuomorphism, but I don’t go around calling you a skeuomorph.

Seriously, are you five.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:02 AM

If this transaction takes place one of the following things might happen:

1) NOTHING – because given how the newspaper business is these days, no sane reporter is going to walk away from a paycheque, especially the sports/arts ones.

2) This one is less likely: a few writers do quit. The effect is either negligible or significant. If it’s significant and it’s really difficult to replace them and it hurts the newspaper, then all the Kochs did was pay money to have the liberal newspaper silence itself. Sounds good, no?

It’s a win-win situation for the Kochs.

AlexB on May 1, 2013 at 3:46 AM

GOOD! More unemployed liars and manipulators who wouldn’t know a news story if it banged them all night! What’s the real loss here? All they do is scan the Huffington Post and regurgitate the talking points faxed to them by the White House. I hope the Koch Brothers buy the paper and fire every last one of the losers.

Tbone McGraw on May 1, 2013 at 4:15 AM

I have a problem with a purported news organization acting as the PR wing of a political party.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM

That’s why I ignore MSNBC

BigAlSouth on May 1, 2013 at 5:54 AM

Is there any way to make ALL of them quit? PLEASE?

Dale in Atlanta on May 1, 2013 at 6:37 AM

these “journalists” aren’t biased or anything are they?

unseen on May 1, 2013 at 6:50 AM

I have a problem with a purported news organization acting as the PR wing of a political party.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM

So you think the La times should stop supporting democrates then?

unseen on May 1, 2013 at 6:51 AM

So they admit they’re Left-wing biased. And bigots.

RobertMN on May 1, 2013 at 6:52 AM

Coincidently, half to three quarters should be fired. Guess this is the pre-retort when one gets fired. “I’m not fired, I quit!”

mouell on May 1, 2013 at 6:52 AM

All I can say is good riddance.

sadatoni on May 1, 2013 at 7:06 AM

With the great outlook for the career of newspaper reporter, they can quit and live off the rest of the taxpayers thanks to their Bamster’s policies.

Good luck with their internet journalist careers.

zdpl0a on May 1, 2013 at 7:16 AM

Sure, half of them will quit. Just like all the liberals who were going to leave the country if Bush was reelected.

MPan on May 1, 2013 at 7:24 AM

Report: Half of staff may quit LA Times if right-wing Koch brothers buy paper

So? Am I supposed to believe that that would be a bad thing? In this Obama-economy, I’m sure they’d find new employment in couple of years (welcome to the ‘new normal’)

olesparkie on May 1, 2013 at 7:53 AM

BS..I’m in the newspaper business. We’ve cut staff to bare bones…

There’s nobody to cut from any newspaper…big or small…only essential staff remain

Redford on April 30, 2013 at 7:07 PM

1) Dump AP subscription. Huge $ for old news and nonstop slant.

2) I’m not a big karma person but the extortionate classified rates over many decades may have been a nice earner but they alienated many.

jangle12 on May 1, 2013 at 7:57 AM

EXCELLENT

stenwin77 on May 1, 2013 at 7:58 AM

Turns out I was wrong, the wmds were never there, and it was a waste of lives and money. Oops. But it’s okay! We freed iraq. Totally worth 4k troops dead and thousands more injured. You know who convinced americans like me that it was worth doing? The administration, but with help from a media who didn’t ask tough questions and never did their job.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 2:10 AM

You do realize no matter what news feeds you’re reading you still have to read btwn the lines YOURSELF?
And just where do you think those wmds went?
Do ya think they’re in SYRIA? And other places?
Didn’t you ever hear about soldier accounts and trucks moving $hit out of Iraq before we invaded?
BTW triple, if you turned from conservative principles to socialist principles just bcs of what you hear in the media, you have never been a real conservative-minded person. Nor even Libertarian.
If you cannot think well enough on your own to apply the Constitution yourself, you certainly have never been for Liberty.
It really doesn’t matter if news outlets are more one way than another. The real point is, you have to decide for yourself what is right & what is wrong.
I only use media to gather what I am certain enough to be facts on an issue I personally must decide. The rest of it I don’t worry too much about bcs there is literally too much of it.
I then rely upon experts I consider trustworthy to give me the lowdown on things I have no time to look into myself.
Are those experts always right? No. But I take stuff with a grain of salt.
You telling us you are now a socialist liberal basically bcs of media is proof in the pudding that you never held any of those principles dear to your own heart.
You were nothing but a fair weather conservative whose heart was a closet communist & you didn’t even know it.
Read the Constitution & start reading the Founders in their own words, not some hack historian’s version of what they said, but them in their own damned words & then think logically about what it all means.
Then you might be able to form some real meaningful principles regarding govt & information.
It is exactly what I did. What I have always done.
Unless you really do believe in communist principles.
Then you are America’s enemy.
Bcs communism is not an opposing viewpoint in America. In America that is an enemy position directly in conflict with the founding of this country.

Badger40 on May 1, 2013 at 8:01 AM

Kochs buying the Times

Too good to check.

If half the staff quit under Koch ownership

Good riddance.

petefrt on May 1, 2013 at 8:20 AM

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM
That’s why I ignore MSNBC

BigAlSouth on May 1, 2013 at 5:54 AM

That’s why I ignore CNN.

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 8:20 AM

I’m sure the NYT would take them in.

TerryW on May 1, 2013 at 8:22 AM

In this economy, the whiners who quit would just about be replaced by a line of applicants going out the building and down the block. I highly recommend they shut their gaping pieholes and toe the line under the new management. Political views are not worth the very real danger of inescapable poverty.

MelonCollie on May 1, 2013 at 8:24 AM

I say let the entire staff self-exit if they feel that strongly.

But history suggests that not a lot would change in the news rooms.

How many times have you heard celebrities frothing at the mouth vowing to leave the country if a Republican is elected? How many actually leave? Zero.

Bravado is one thing but earning a living is another. What would all these principled journalists do after they leave? Sell shoes in LA? Move their family to another city or state? Not likely.

And as far as killing stories, the LA Times does so on a daily basis. Try finding any reporting on the abortion trial, on Fast and Furious, on the catastrophic increase in health care cost under Obamacare. Crickets.

The LA Times staff isn’t against killing stories based on principle, but rather they are against killing stories that support their agendas.

The best thing that could happen to the readers of the LA Times is to begin to read and understand both sides of the major issues. They might actually learn something instead of only reading the opinions of a bunch of like-minded liberals.

I hope the Koch brothers buy the paper and I hope a portion of the staff leaves to open up opportunities for a more balanced presentation of the news.

BMF on May 1, 2013 at 8:28 AM

Let them quit. That will save having to fire them.

BetseyRoss on May 1, 2013 at 8:35 AM

There’s the door!

Pardonme on May 1, 2013 at 8:57 AM

I laughed at reading the statement coming from the Union of Low Information Journalists, decrying harsh right wing positions like pro gay marriage and pro drug legalization.

Once again I ask, do stupid people go into journalism or do Journalism Schools turn smart kids, stupid?

MNHawk on May 1, 2013 at 9:04 AM

And, this would matter………why?

It’s not unusual to have a staff purge when new management or ownership of a company takes the reins; if the progs quit, that saves the new management time, and time is money!

There are plenty of hungry journalists who will fill their places!

mountainaires on May 1, 2013 at 9:24 AM

What part of “we’re taking our country back!” do the collectivists not understand?

jomondo44 on May 1, 2013 at 9:43 AM

PS: It’s obvious you just learned the word fascist and you like to use it quite a bit, but that doesn’t mean it’s a correct usage. I’m a socialist.

I just learned the word skeuomorphism, but I don’t go around calling you a skeuomorph.

Seriously, are you five.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:02 AM

Imbecile, the fascists were socialists, remember Hitler’s party was called Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Translation for dolts such as yourself: the National Socialist party. as for you bring a socialist, a lot of cretins are, so what’s new.

jimver on May 1, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Only half, bummer.

goatweed on May 1, 2013 at 9:51 AM

The Chicago Tribune already made the mistake of buying the LA Times and thinking it could add neutral voices to the staff. Really worked out well. The staff, aided and abetted by the former owners who acquired a voting interest in the Tribune properties, performed much the same way then as they are now with the rumored Koch purchase. There are many reasons for the financial troubles of the Tribune and it’s media companies, not the least of which is the purchase of the papers, TV stations, and the Cubs by a developer named Zell, but the LA Times purchase certainly contributed to the mess which preceeded the Zell purchase. Zell borrowed heavily against the Tribune media assets, the paper ended up in bankruptcy court which brought about the current situation where the Koch Bros. are rumored to be intersted in the Tribune’s entire media empire.

polarglen on May 1, 2013 at 9:55 AM

“We respect the independence of the journalistic institutions referenced in the news stories,” – Koch spokeswoman

Heh. The ‘institutions’, not the ‘journalists’. Maybe the Koch are having a funny

Liberalism truly is a religion

“What we do know is that great papers publish credible, trusted journalism online and on the printed page. Whoever comes to own these mastheads needs to understand that protecting newsrooms from ideological taint is no small thing. The future of American journalism depends on the ability to print truth, not opinion.” The Newspaper Guild & Communications Workers of America

The need for a free press comes from the fact that one man’s truth is another man’s lie.

Opinion is the Editor of Journalism. Facts are selected to prove a point. The defense against poor argument, is a counter argument.

The history of Science, which liberals worship, has proven over and over that the wise men can be wrong, that the most respected thinkers will fight to suppress perceived heresy, which later turns out to be true. Or at least more true than the old dogma.

These liberals are so deep into denial about their religion, they cannot tolerate contrary opinion. The Bhuddist says “The only truth is, there is no truth”. Liberals believe they know truth, and must prevent people from speaking untruth.

The Constitution did not mandate a newspaper be ‘fair’, because who decides ‘fair’, the King?

A free press means everyone, and anyone can print opinion, and if they wish, facts, subject to contraints of libel and slander. FOX does not have to be fair and balanced. Neither MSNBC. But everyone must be free to participate.

The Kochs are buying facilities, contact lists, and customer lists, not journalists. The Times is not an institution, The right to a Free Press is an institution

entagor on May 1, 2013 at 10:10 AM

I don’t have a problem with people voicing opposing viewpoints. I’m here on hotair, when is the last time you visited daily kos?

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM

The oh-so-tolerant DailyKOS does not tolerate dissent. Users are banned there upon posting the very first comment which does not ring in the echo chamber. That banning is usually followed by nasty email from the moderators and the sharing of email addresses with others to continue the nastiness. The same goes for many other left-leaning sites.

stvnscott on May 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM

Jobs must be easy to come by in LA if those guys can stand up for their principles this way. Hope the brothers do buy the Times as they own our local rag, too.

Kissmygrits on May 1, 2013 at 10:28 AM

PS: It’s obvious you just learned the word fascist and you like to use it quite a bit, but that doesn’t mean it’s a correct usage. I’m a socialist.

I just learned the word skeuomorphism, but I don’t go around calling you a skeuomorph.

Seriously, are you five.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:02 AM

You immature idiot. You bandy the word homophobe like it’s going out of style.

Hypocrite.

hawkdriver on May 1, 2013 at 10:36 AM

The need for a free press comes from the fact that one man’s truth is another man’s lie.

entagor on May 1, 2013 at 10:10 AM

Why are you repeating my lie?

Unless that’s a condensed form of saying that what appears to one man as the truth appears to another man as a lie, it’s nonsensical.

But if decisions were really that hopeless, there is little a free press could do about it. And there would be little reason for it, besides winning a tug-a-war of words. And this is essentially the nihilism that is the core of liberalism.

Axeman on May 1, 2013 at 10:51 AM

I don’t have a problem with people voicing opposing viewpoints. I’m here on hotair, when is the last time you visited daily kos?

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:00 AM

The oh-so-tolerant DailyKOS does not tolerate dissent. Users are banned there upon posting the very first comment which does not ring in the echo chamber. That banning is usually followed by nasty email from the moderators and the sharing of email addresses with others to continue the nastiness. The same goes for many other left-leaning sites.

stvnscott on May 1, 2013 at 10:25 AM

Correct, that screaming idiot Triple, confesses to being a socialist, quotes Media Matters as Holy gospel, calls his crack headed opinion facts.. Denies he doesn’t want to silence every pice of opposition, yet also rants like a friggin baby, because the ONE.. ONE network which does give conservatives a voice.. is TOO PARTISAN, there fore exempt from being a true opposition station and should be close..

and I did sign on to kos once, and got banned in twenty minutes..

Triple you are a twisted liar, can’t even get that Your beloved propaganda from a site which has been caught countless times, falsifying reports, cutting video with exculpatory evidence.. is a joke..

but you call them, your “facts” as if a really really tightly clenched pair of fists made unicorns fart skittles..

You are the most completely indoctrinated brain dead Good German I have ever read here..

You whine we only listen to facts we like.. yet, there is no one here who can escape your leftist dogma, it’s everywhere. We read multiple news sources, unlike you who take media mistake’s quotes and run to taunt people vastly smarter than you..

You claimed the NYT’s is a conservative source, without a trace of intelligence. That just confirms how far left you are, so fringe that the NYT’s is conservative?.. no person outside of kos believes that.. and the point Tinker, is we don’t adore the NYT’s as a source, your side does, which makes it’s confirmation of the Pigford scandal beyond your ability to distort.. even rank and file liberals have to concede they were ripping us all off…

You can only be so badly twisted left, to so wilfully ignore every other liberal source which confirms something you don’t like..

Because getting your news from Media Mistake.. and kos, is the handiwork of an idiot, incapable of accepting news which doesn’t fit your own twisted opinion..

and you have proven it in post after post after post..

go back and cry with your socialist friends…

because this country will have a civil war, before we ever allow twisted socialist/fascists to silence us. FOX shows both sides, and the fact, it’s opinion pundits donate to the GOP just kills you.. while you have zero problem with the opposite truth, l;eft wing news prints DNC press releases, then, has every celeb they can find, rah rah cheer lead for the democrats, they exclude our side most of the time, and when they do allow one of ours to speak, it’s extremely hostile to their opinions, … democrats?

They get softballs, pillows and tea..

you’re a liar,

and an idiot…

mark81150 on May 1, 2013 at 10:55 AM

Only half, that’s 50% too little. Hey, here’s a new strategy to make the media more balanced/conservative, just force all the leftists/progressives to quit.

RoyalFlush on May 1, 2013 at 11:04 AM

I hope that the purchase is made and the Liberals keep their word and quit. Would be a win win in my opinion. The truth finally being printed in what was once a Liberal rag, and Lib douche bags unemployed.

SGinNC on May 1, 2013 at 11:15 AM

Imbecile, the fascists were socialists, remember Hitler’s party was called Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Translation for dolts such as yourself: the National Socialist party. as for you bring a socialist, a lot of cretins are, so what’s new.

jimver on May 1, 2013 at 9:45 AM

The “Volk” play much the same role as the proletariat, and even in Mein Kampf, Hitler sneers at bourgeois sensibilities. His rhetoric was full of preference for the strong, hardy “worker” and “The Volk”. It’s one of the reasons he embraced militarism, because a single act of bravery and sacrifice can come from a person of any station, it was an individual act of devotion to the country or his Volk.

Hitler himself seemed quite at ease–to outright proud–that he never rose higher than a lance corporal in the military.

Axeman on May 1, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Badger40 on May 1, 2013 at 8:01 AM

You get an “atta boy,” for that response to ignorance from the “socialist!”

tomshup on May 1, 2013 at 11:44 AM

mark81150 on May 1, 2013 at 10:55 AM

You get an “atta boy” too!

tomshup on May 1, 2013 at 11:49 AM

Let them quit. It would avoid their being fired, which is what should happen if they don’t quit.

JayDick on May 1, 2013 at 12:24 PM

“Kochtopus”

If I had just one of those, I’d never have to leave the house!

Tsar of Earth on May 1, 2013 at 12:50 PM

If all the liberal journalist bail out – success will be asasured

Obamatrix on May 1, 2013 at 12:57 PM

BUY IT!
Then, dig out that video of Obama praising Rashid Khalidi, release it, then liquidate all the assets.
It would be worth it.

Dexter_Alarius on May 1, 2013 at 12:58 PM

Imbecile, the fascists were socialists, remember Hitler’s party was called Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Translation for dolts such as yourself: the National Socialist party. as for you bring a socialist, a lot of cretins are, so what’s new.

jimver on May 1, 2013 at 9:45 AM

The “Volk” play much the same role as the proletariat, and even in Mein Kampf, Hitler sneers at bourgeois

sensibilities. His rhetoric was full of preference for the strong, hardy “worker” and “The Volk”. It’s one of the reasons he embraced militarism, because a single act of bravery and sacrifice can come from a person of any station, it was an individual act of devotion to the country or his Volk.

Hitler himself seemed quite at ease–to outright proud–that he never rose higher than a lance corporal in the military.

Axeman on May 1, 2013 at 11:19 AM

Yep, only the intellectually challenged and denialists don’t see or recognize Hitler and his beliefs for what they were, he was truly a socialist at heart. Hitler was too much of a megalomaniac (and to be sure a hypocrite) to acknowledge Marx as his l or call himself anyone’s disciple. yet privately (see the recorded conversations between Hr,ann Raunshning (a Danzig fellow Nazi who knew him well before his accession to power) and at times even publicly, he conceded that National Socialism was based on Marx. That brings us to your mentioning of ‘the Volk’, Indeed, that’s is how he reportedly talked to his fellow Nazi Otto Wagener as early as the 1930s. The socialism of the future would lie in “the community of the volk”, not in internationalism, he claimed, and his task was to “convert the German volk to socialism without simply killing off the old individualists”, meaning the entrepreneurial and managerial classes left from the age of liberalism. They should be used, not destroyed. The state could control, after all, without owning, guided by a single party, the economy could be planned and directed without dispossessing the propertied classes.

jimver on May 1, 2013 at 1:33 PM

That would be a good thing. It would save time firing them.

The Rogue Tomato on May 1, 2013 at 1:34 PM

PS: It’s obvious you just learned the word fascist and you like to use it quite a bit, but that doesn’t mean it’s a correct usage. I’m a socialist.

I just learned the word skeuomorphism, but I don’t go around calling you a skeuomorph.

Seriously, are you five.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 3:02 AM

Lol. Analogy fail.

You want to shut down free speech? Right? That is fascist.

Good for you that you are living in 2007 and finally found out about Apple’s design language.

Now I can see why you can’t even properly cite a source or understand the internet.

tetriskid on May 1, 2013 at 2:02 PM

It’s California, they may be able to collect unemployment if they voluntarily terminate their employment. If not, surely they will quickly find employment at another newspaper, since the newspaper business is as in demand as landline telephones.

Wallythedog on May 1, 2013 at 2:07 PM

It’s California, they may be able to collect unemployment if they voluntarily terminate their employment. If not, surely they will quickly find employment at another newspaper, since the newspaper business is as in demand as landline telephones.

Wallythedog on May 1, 2013 at 2:07 PM

There are not a lot of newspapers (as in print media) left in the GLAA area, frankly it’s LA Daily News and LA Weekly and the latter basically posts info on current events (cultural, food, etc) in the LA area, it’s not really a newspaper outfit. well, that assuming they want to continue to live in the LA metro area (and I am sure they do). Also, don’t think they have as many options as they make it sound, mist of them probably lack the skills required for working in the new media. I’d say tbey are bluffing.

jimver on May 1, 2013 at 2:21 PM

The people saying “that’s why I ignore npr/msnbc/lat/nyt/cnn” are missing the point.

You don’t ignore anyone.

You take in information from all sources and make an educated opinion for yourself.

You don’t listen to one source that basically repeats your worldview back to you and call it a day.

People are lazy. With television you just sit—watch—listen. The thinking is done for you.

That’s fox news in a nutshell. The thinking is done for you.

The man who said that was roger ailes.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM

That’s fox news in a nutshell. The thinking is done for you.

The man who said that was roger ailes.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 5:31 PM

You moron. You just told us earlier how the news made you turn from a ‘conservative’ (my A$$ you were) to basically a liberal.
So you let the news think for you without ever considering to read btwn the lines like I explained earlier.
You damned cowardly nonthinking pathetic excuse for a human being.
The vehemence I feel for you is quite strong. Bcs your arguments are retarded.
If you were really a conservative it doesn’t matter what Rush Limbaugh, Glenn Beck, Bill O’Reilly, etc ever say in the media, bcs being conservative is living & believing in certain PRINCIPLES, which you clearly never had if you were so easily led away from them to become a socialist which is nothing more than a communist.
You have absolutely no sense in your head if you can be led away from what is right so easily by your nose.

Badger40 on May 1, 2013 at 7:43 PM

Hey, triple, I’m truly excited about your claim to have converted from conservatism to socialism in 2009! That makes it even easier for you to meet the challenge that I issued to you yesterday…the challenge that you ignored.

Here it is again:

…since you’ve shown yourself to be so concerned with bias in newspapers, it should be easy for you to provide us with a couple of links to other posts you’ve made around the Web where you show the same verve in denouncing the Leftist bias that you’ve just admitted exists.

And the best part? The fact that you were a conservative a few short years ago should make it really easy for you to provide those links. And you get to kill two birds with one stone: 1) you’ll prove that you actually take media bias seriously, as opposed to simply being another dishonest Lefty hack who just makes up lies out of his a$$ and 2) you’ll prove that you actually were a conservative, as opposed to simply being another dishonest Lefty hack who just makes up lies out of his a$$.

Take your time…we’ll continue to wait for those links.

rvastar on May 1, 2013 at 8:04 PM

You just told us earlier how the news made you turn from a ‘conservative’ (my A$$ you were) to basically a liberal.

Not “the news”. More news. When your only source of information is an echo chamber, your beliefs are influenced by that, and only that. That is what happened to me.

When I was exposed to all viewpoints – not just a narrow selection based on what I wanted to hear – that is when my opinions changed. They didn’t change because I lacked principles. They changed because my principles didn’t line up with conservative beliefs all along – I just refused to believe anything that challenged my conservative mind as biased. That’s a powerful drug, and you’d be wise not to underestimate it.

It’s very easy to delude yourself that you’re right and everyone else is wrong. But it’s only easy when you make it a point to only watch news that fits your point of view. You know why conservatives love fox? Because on fox, conservatives are never wrong. And liberals always are. Is that the truth? Hell no. It’s probably somewhere in the middle. But sometimes the truth is uncomfortable. And we can’t have that.

Never getting your opinions challenged is cowardly. It’s easy. And it’s safe. It’s why you never watch MSNBC. It’s uncomfortable to get called out by Rachel Maddow, who instead you can just dismiss as a biased lesbian who doesn’t know anything. But staying in Fox’s safe little bubble, where conservatives are never wrong, only makes conservatives, as a movement, more out of touch and ill-informed.

You damned cowardly nonthinking pathetic excuse for a human being.

I feel so sorry for you.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 8:12 PM

Take your time…we’ll continue to wait for those links.

rvastar on May 1, 2013 at 8:04 PM

AP or any hotair staff can confirm I joined the site when it went live (as malkin’s site), and I’m sure some of my more conservative posts are archived somewhere.

Do I have access to those archives? No, I’m just a user. If anyone could find comment history, that would be awesome.

triple on May 1, 2013 at 8:15 PM

Imbecile, the fascists were socialists, remember Hitler’s party was called Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei. Translation for dolts such as yourself: the National Socialist party. as for you bring a socialist, a lot of cretins are, so what’s new.

jimver on May 1, 2013 at 9:45 AM

Exactly, “triple” burbles its willful hatred of honesty and history by denying that fact:

http://www.la-articles.org.uk/fascism.htm

ebrown2 on May 1, 2013 at 9:52 PM

Is there any way to make ALL of them quit? PLEASE?

Dale in Atlanta on May 1, 2013 at 6:37 AM

Editor-in-Chief Sarah Palin

malclave on May 1, 2013 at 10:03 PM

But, if Al Jazeera bought the paper, they’d all stay and beg for overtime.

esnap on May 2, 2013 at 3:11 AM

I know of some weeklies in NW Montana that are always looking for journos that don’t mind sitting through endless HS basketball games and county commissioner’s meetings.

claudius on May 2, 2013 at 9:35 AM

An immediate 50% improvement in the quality of the LAT – when they leave

Besides, it bypasses firing them

Obamatrix on May 2, 2013 at 10:22 PM

An immediate 50% improvement in the quality of the LAT – when they leave

Besides, it bypasses firing them

Taking that one more step: And means they won’t qualify for unemployment benefits unless Kalifornia is even weirder than I can imagine?

EconomicNeocon on May 3, 2013 at 11:28 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4