PDA

View Full Version : Robert Gibbs: No bailout for newspapers



Rockntractor
05-04-2009, 06:06 PM
Robert Gibbs: No bailout for newspapers
TAGS: Government Bailout, White House, Media, Robert Gibbs, Newspapers
By CAROL E. LEE | 5/4/09 4:08 PM EDT Text Size:







Asked in his Monday briefing if the White House would consider bailing out the newspaper business, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs told reporters the government may not have the power to reverse the industry’s decline.

“I don’t know what, in all honesty, government can do about it,” Gibbs said in response to a question about the Boston Globe’s financial struggles.

Noting that it's a "bit of a tricky area to get into," given the relationship between the White House and the media, Gibbs said President Barack Obama “believes there has to be a strong free press" and expressed "concern and sadness" over the state of the industry.

But Gibbs wasn’t just sympathetic — he also twisted the knife a little, digging into reporters who questioned the Obama administration’s commitment to cutting spending.

“You guys didn’t think $100 million meant a lot a few weeks ago,” Gibbs said. “But looking at some of the balance sheets, $100 million seems to mean a lot.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22072.html
The court jester has spoken!

Odysseus
05-04-2009, 07:17 PM
But Gibbs wasn’t just sympathetic — he also twisted the knife a little, digging into reporters who questioned the Obama administration’s commitment to cutting spending.

“You guys didn’t think $100 million meant a lot a few weeks ago,” Gibbs said. “But looking at some of the balance sheets, $100 million seems to mean a lot.”

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0509/22072.html
The court jester has spoken!

See, that'll teach them to question the great and powerful O. Let them eat Chapter 11. :D

Rockntractor
05-04-2009, 07:21 PM
The chicago political system on a national scale!

lacarnut
05-04-2009, 07:36 PM
If I had to watch an egotistical prick like Gibbs for more than a couple of seconds, I would punch out the TV. :eek: However, I would not be surprised if the O reversed course and bailed them out. He is probably mulling over the fact that he did not become King.

Bubba Dawg
05-04-2009, 08:06 PM
So, if the Obama Administration did bail out the press, do you think it might...just might...affect their coverate of the Obama Administration?

tacitus
05-04-2009, 08:24 PM
So, if the Obama Administration did bail out the press, do you think it might...just might...affect their coverate of the Obama Administration?


No the majority of the newspapers are already in the back pocket of the DNC, and what is left doesn't matter. TV news OTOH is totally socialist, well maybe not Fox as much as the rest.

Nubs
05-05-2009, 11:00 AM
So, if the Obama Administration did bail out the press, do you think it might...just might...affect their coverate of the Obama Administration?

Based on precident of the bank bailout with TARP, the governments refusal to accept TARP repayment, and efforts to convert prefered stock to common stock, the goverment would become owners of the bailed out newspapers. This would convert the "free" press into, literally, state run newspapers.

Odysseus
05-05-2009, 11:08 AM
If I had to watch an egotistical prick like Gibbs for more than a couple of seconds, I would punch out the TV. :eek: However, I would not be surprised if the O reversed course and bailed them out. He is probably mulling over the fact that he did not become King.
He may end up bailing them out, if only because those newspapers are a core asset to the DNC. Without print media, especially the NY Times, to set the parameters of coverage, TV news would be clueless. One of the dirty little secrets of journalism is that most journalists don't know much about an issue until they read about it in the NY Times. The Times fulfills the same function for the left that talk radio does for the right, in that it identifies issues, frames the debate and provides context for its audience.

So, if the Obama Administration did bail out the press, do you think it might...just might...affect their coverate of the Obama Administration?
Hard to say. On the one hand, it's hard to imagine the mainstream media being even more sycophantic and obsequious to the big O. Still, if a bailout generated a massive backlash of criticism that the press was now owned by the government and had lost any semblance of objectivity, the media elite might just decide that they had to prove their independence by biting the hand that feeds them, but I'd call that a longshot. We're talking lapdogs, not working dogs, and they're very comfortable playing Pravda to the DNC's Stalin.

No the majority of the newspapers are already in the back pocket of the DNC, and what is left doesn't matter. TV news OTOH is totally socialist, well maybe not Fox as much as the rest.
TV Network news and CNN have been losing market share steadily, but as long as the networks continue to generate profit through their other programming, they won't need a bailout, and the news shows will continue to parrot the elite print media's talking points, even as their ratings follow the circulation numbers straight down. It's the same situation that Hollywood is in. The big studio hits subsidize the political vanity projects that the stars do to convince each other that they are more than just photogenic airheads. Thus, Oceans 11, 12 and 13 pay for Syriana and a host of other leftwing propaganda that dies at the box office. If the studios weren't making money with the big projects, then the agitprop would be the kiss of death for the industry, but because Tom Cruise has three Mission Impossible movies, he can afford to open a disaster like Lions For Lambs, which was a bomb, but not a career suicide bomb.