Posted on 05/23/2006 11:43:42 PM PDT by Lancey Howard
NEW YORK Former Philadelphia Inquirer Editor Robert Rosenthal, who spent 22 years at the paper, said the sale to a local investors group could prove problematic.
"It is a unique situation and I don't think it is necessarily a great one for journalism," said Rosenthal, who is currently managing editor at the San Francisco Chronicle. "Many of them are some of the most influential business people in Philadelphia and people who actively support politicians locally and nationally."
The veteran editor called the situation "very interesting and dangerous ... at times."
(snip)
In addition, Rosenthal called the leader of the investment group, Brian Tierney, a "fierce advocate who is used to getting his own way....I can't imagine a guy like Brian Tierney taking a back seat and letting things get in the paper that he is unhappy with," Rosenthal told E&P just hours after the deal was announced. "He was a very fierce advocate for his clients, there was nothing subtle about him -- elbows and knees."
Tierney served as national head of Catholics for Bush in 2000 and has been active in other Republican campaigns.
(Excerpt) Read more at editorandpublisher.com ...
Watch BOTH papers endorse Swann and Santorum....
Interisting. Maybe the new people could do a paper the RIGHT way?
Thanks for the ping.
I used to deliver the Bulletin. On my bike.
Circulation going up? What a great problem to have...
Philadelphia always votes heavily Democrat, meaning liberal, but it's not clear how many of those voters buy newspapers. Still, I doubt whether the new owners can afford to turn the paper conservative. There's a lot of limousine liberals in the area, too, I think.
But they could put an end to printing DNC talking points every day. And they could put an end to some of the more egregious lies and unattributed propaganda. Fox has shown that "fair and balanced" sells well.
Anything more than gradual change would probably involve firing 90% of the staff and replacing them. I doubt whether they'll do that.
Oh that would be great to bring in a real Catholic and Republic owner to these Philly fishwraps.
One can feel the fear and anguish going through the left wing lunatics who have gathered a paycheck for decades for lying about Catholics, Republicans and President Bush.
Some advise to the new owner if this happens:
Close down the newspaper, fire everyone who is a registered rat, ban the union and bring in new people to run the place. Any left over rat still employed will be like leaving a typhoid Mary.
Thanks for the ping Tribune7.This is great news:)
If you just stop and think about it, why would you not assume that journalists would be arrogant until proved otherwise? And why would you not assume that politicians pander to journalists to get PR, until proved otherwise? IMHO accepting the truth of those two questions is the beginning of political understanding.If anyone dares to insinuate that they or their company, industry, or institution should be associated with the public interest, journalism will disabuse them of that notion in a hurry. Journalism - which calls itself "the press" for no other purpose - reserves that role to itself.
Journalism declares itself to be objective. Yet if challenged on the issue of the the negativity of its coverage (of Iraq, for example) journalism replies that "that's the nature of the news. Bad news sells." And of course that is true, bad news does sell. So bad news helps make journalism profitable - and there could scarcely be a better definition of a special interest than that.
"Arrogant" doesn't cover it. Proclaiming yourself the embodiment of the public interest when in fact you are the quintessential special interest is chutzpah to the max.
If you just stop and think about it, why would you not assume that journalists would be arrogant until proved otherwise? And why would you not assume that politicians pander to journalists to get PR, until proved otherwise? IMHO accepting the truth of those two questions is the beginning of political understanding.If anyone dares to insinuate that they or their company, industry, or institution should be associated with the public interest, journalism will disabuse them of that notion in a hurry. Journalism - which calls itself "the press" for no other purpose - reserves that role to itself.
Journalism declares itself to be objective. Yet if challenged on the issue of the the negativity of its coverage (of Iraq, for example) journalism replies that "that's the nature of the news. Bad news sells." And of course that is true, bad news does sell. So bad news helps make journalism profitable - and there could scarcely be a better definition of a special interest than that.
"Arrogant" doesn't cover it. Proclaiming yourself the embodiment of the public interest when in fact you are the quintessential special interest is chutzpah to the max.
Media bias bump.
BTTT
More possible good news??? As the dino press augers into the abyss, acquisition possibilities(by conservatives???) may become more appealing. I see the NYT at some point going for a couple sacks of marbles and a chicken foot ;^)
FGS
Below the radar, Fox News is gradually taking over the "top-of-the-hour" five-minute news summaries on radio stations across the country as existing contracts with ABC, CBS, and NPR expire. Since a huge portion of the voting public gets the majority of its news from their car radios, this is a very favorable development for sane America. The country may yet be saved.
Really?! Absolutely wasn't aware of that.
Since a huge portion of the voting public gets the majority of its news from their car radios...
Just so. I in fact found that tidbit of information several years back while doing some research on NPR. Excellent development.
The country may yet be saved.
Hopefully before it requires radical surgery ;^)
FGS
Yet another conservative "win-win":
. . .
In November Bruce S. Sherman, whose money management firm Private Capital Management owns 19 percent of Knight Ridder, demanded that the company put itself up for sale. The initial round of bidding in early December generated interest from Gannett, McClatchy, and others, including a trio of private investment banks.
Sherman’s move sent tremors through the newspaper world. PCM has significant stakes in eight other newspaper companies, including Gannett, McClatchy, and The New York Times. Many analysts see Sherman’s effort to force the sale of Knight Ridder as a no-win proposition for journalism. If it fails, then investors may be further convinced that newspapers are terrible investments and pull out of the sector altogether. If it succeeds, then Sherman or other institutional investors may try to duplicate the maneuver with other newspapers, forcing companies to either auction themselves off or make even steeper cuts in an attempt to lift their stock.
Thanks for the link. I'm a little surprised I missed this development since I try to keep pretty close tabs on our faux press/media types. BTW, I haven't checked lately, but is Air America on life support yet?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.