Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Pelosi’s Talking Payoff; Not Merger

The San Francisco Chronicle reports - - -

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, worried about the fate of The Chronicle and other financially struggling newspapers, urged the Justice Department Monday to consider giving Bay Area papers more leeway to merge or consolidate business operations to stay afloat.

In a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder, released by Pelosi's office late Monday, the San Francisco Democrat asked the department to weigh the public benefit of saving The Chronicle and other papers from closure against the agency's antitrust mission to guard against anti-competitive behavior.

The entire story's here.


My Comments:

What does Pelosi mean by “more leeway to merge or consolidate business operations?”

The notion of independent newspapers is mostly a fiction.

The majority of them long ago sold out to the Democratic Party.

Have you ever noticed that when the Dems propose -- say a 10% increase in welfare spending -- and the Republicans argue it should only be 4%, newspapers don’t say very much about both parties wanting to increase welfare spending?

Instead they mostly say something like: “the GOP is fighting the Democrats’ attempt to increase aid to needy families.”

Why did the Swift Boat Veterans have to bring to the public’s attention Sen. John Kerry’s failure to release, as he promised, all his Navy records?

Former Sen. John Edwards’ affair cum "love child" was well-know and documented for weeks. But almost all major newspapers wouldn’t report the scandal until a few top Dems gave the signal Team Obama had decided Edwards could be an embarrassment so it was time to throw him overboard.

How about Dem Rep. Charlie Rangel? Could a Republican with his record remain chair of the House’s tax-writing committee? Wouldn’t there be “an outcry” from America’s newspapers’ editorial pages that he at least step down from his chairmanship?

California Democrat Rep. Pete Stark on the House floor said President Bush wanted to see our soldiers in Iraq have their heads blown off “for his amusement.” It wasn’t even a back page story in most newspapers.

Remember the racist, anti-American sermons of then Sen. Barack Obama’s pastor and close friend of almost 20 years, Rev. Jeremiah Wright?

Most newspapers followed the party line and told us they were just about “snippets.”

And do you know of any newspaper that reported on what Ms. Obama meant when she called America “a downright mean country?” Or any newspaper that at least reported trying to and kept at it?

There are many more examples I could cite. I know many of you could, too.

What Speaker Pelosi’s proposing isn’t about merger; it’s about payoff to party faithfuls.


Anonymous said...

John, for all of the idiocy that Pelosi spouts, this letter actually is a reasonable request against what has for a long time been an overly restrictive view of anti-trust law. The idea that papers, or for that matter, radio/tv stations, were competing only against other members of their exact same medium, rather than alternative forms of media is ridiculous. I don't see where she is asking for a handout, rather she is asking the justice to lay off (in a perfectly appropriate way).

Now the hypocrisy alert can see if she pushes for relaxed anti-trust enforcement for radio/TV station mergers and other industries. I'm not holding my breath for that.