Perchoutofwater Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 John F'n Kerry wants to save the Boston Globe. I just don't see saving these dying papers. And though I think they are stinking liberal institutions, their politics has nothing to do with it. They are out dated, just like the horse whip manufacturers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wirehairman Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 No Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randall Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 We need good reporters. I would say force TV stations to have real news outlets. In the old days they would lose money on news and make up for it elsewhere. They did this because it was part of getting a license to broadcast. I would also like to see a line between opinion disguised as news and real news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 pravda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sox Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Hell,why not? We've bailed out every other damn thing out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikesVikes Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Here's a billion now please print this nice heart warming story about me. TIA. President Obama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pope Flick Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 We need good reporters. I would say force TV stations to have real news outlets. In the old days they would lose money on news and make up for it elsewhere. They did this because it was part of getting a license to broadcast. I would also like to see a line between opinion disguised as news and real news. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Negatory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Irish Doggy Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 We haven't bailed out all the other newspapers that went under in the last few years or the ones in bankruptcy, so why stop now? Seattle Post-Intelligencer, Cincinnati Post, Rocky Mountain News, Philly papers, Chicago Tribune.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 no, bail outs need to stop... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 no, bail outs need to stop... Bail outs should never have started to begin with. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Perchoutofwater Posted April 22, 2009 Author Share Posted April 22, 2009 Bail outs should never have started to begin with. But we've been bailing out individuals since FDR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Clearly no. Whether I like it or not (and I don't, I hate it actually), the world is moving away from printed newspapers to online news. Bailing out newspapers would be the equivalent of supporting steam engines or propeller driven aircraft. Their time has come and is now going. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 But we've been bailing out individuals since FDR. And, thus, I state my case. Bail outs should never have started. It's called survival of the fittest. You can't hack it.... go away and don't be a drain on those that can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yo mama Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 (edited) No Agreed. However, I would not be wholly opposed to tax breaks, subsidies, or other governmental benefits being provided to the media because we collectively benefit from an informed society. But I am opposed to government ownership of private media. I am also opposed to shoveling borrowed cash into a failed/failing business model. Edited April 22, 2009 by yo mama Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Bail outs should never have started to begin with. why did you have to go and 1up my quote like that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skylive5 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 why did you have to go and 1up my quote like that? Sometimes I just can't help myself and get lucky at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kid Cid Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 And, thus, I state my case. Bail outs should never have started. It's called survival of the fittest. You can't hack it.... go away and don't be a drain on those that can. + a whole fricken bunch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WaterMan Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 We've also been bailing out(President pardons) criminals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Savage Beatings Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Should we? No. Will we? Almost certainly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Sad to see the death of real journalism. . . not necessarily the Boston Globe, but newspapers in general. Newspapers employ journalists that actaully need to do research before intelligently writing a story. Magazines cant be far behind . . . Blogs depend too much on misinformation and google searches (of newspapers!) and most television media blurs the line between entertainment and actual news. I.E.- Fox News spends a heck of a lot of time airing shows that are entertainment, rather than news. Too many shows masquarade as legitimate channels of impartial news when they are clearly meant to be entertainmnet with an ideological slant. O'Reilley, Hannity, are all comparable to "The Daily show" or "The Colbert Report". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bushwacked Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Will we? Almost certainly. Hmmmm...I'd be up for a friendly wager on this. I say we will not see a federal bailout of newspapers during Obama's first term. As long as we can agree that we are talking bailout proportions of the auto and mortgage industries (i.e...not tax incentives or things like that); full blown federal govt. saving newspaper print companies from bankruptcy with federal tax dollars. For one, the Bush and Obama bailouts were justified in that many people were convinced that the kick in the nuts was better than a crossbow shot to the skull. Two, too many regional papers have already folded to start cherry picking which ones are saved. Three, it would be political suicide and voters wouldn't stand for it. What say yee? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 you know, the technological changes are obvious and paramount, but I have to think the newspapers are also hurting because of a failure of good journalism. the two trends are clearly interrelated. but I am DAMN certain you can't rescue good journalism by having the government take over and throw money at yet another dying business model. I mean seriously, that is the absolute pinnacle of governmental arrogance right there -- not at all surprising to see john kerry at the center of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azazello1313 Posted April 22, 2009 Share Posted April 22, 2009 Hmmmm...I'd be up for a friendly wager on this. I say we will not see a federal bailout of newspapers during Obama's first term. As long as we can agree that we are talking bailout proportions of the auto and mortgage industries (i.e...not tax incentives or things like that); full blown federal govt. saving newspaper print companies from bankruptcy with federal tax dollars. what really is the difference? on the one hand, the government says, "here is a check for eleventy billion dollars." on the other hand, the government says, "that check you owe me for eleventy billion dollars, go ahead and tear it up." six of one, half dozen of the other. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts