During a sit-down with two newspapers last Friday, President Obama embraced an idea that would be farcical if he weren’t serious about it.
The president said he is "happy to look at" bills before Congress that would give struggling news organizations tax breaks if they were to restructure as nonprofit businesses.
"I haven’t seen detailed proposals yet, but I’ll be happy to look at them."
Sure, why not? Yet another monopolistic industry that drove itself into the ground by worshipping at the altar of the Almighty Profit Margin and pocketing the donation plate proceeds gets a possible economic boost/tax break from the White House. It seems that this administration will never grow weary of throwing money at craven, incompetent, self-entitled management types:
So far this year, Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., and CEO Janet Robinson have each been granted half a million stock options, and Robinson got 650,000 options last year. And for the past 19 months, they’ve been paid under a plan that allows for up to $3.5 million in annual bonuses.
Trouble is, in 1991, the Times adopted rules barring its executives from getting more than 400,000 stock options and $3 million in bonuses in any given year. On Friday, the company disclosed the errors in an SEC filing and restructured Sulzberger and Robinson’s packages so as to bring them in compliance with the Times‘ own rules.
Inept, grabby executives? I’m SHOCKED! Pinch Sulzberger, may I introduce you to John Thain?
Unlike the banking industry’s precipitous tumble last year, the newspaper business has been on a slow march into the La Brea tar pits, thanks in no small part to its stubborn refusal to join the 21st century. However, like the banksters, it, too, wants its greed and ineptitude rewarded, and this administration seems eager to help.
But wait, there’s more! Let’s not overlook the President’s continued contempt for online journalism. The money quote:
"I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context," he said, "that what you will end up getting is people shouting at each other across the void but not a lot of mutual understanding."
O RLY? No fact-checking or putting stories in context? Two words, Mr. President: Marcy Wheeler.
Look, there is no equating the two sides. Yes, the left has its fair share of crazies, but, unlike the right, our crazies call for parity, not armed insurrection, and they don’t have corporate sponsorship. (Honestly, how does one come to a "mutual understanding" with Foxheads who, even when presented with concrete physical evidence of your citizenship, still insist you weren’t born in this country?)
Like junkies with the DTs screaming "GET THESE BUGS OFF ME!", the national media have wasted more time and energy trying to shake off the "liberal" label the Republicans tattooed on their asses than by engaging in real reportage. Frankly, there hasn’t be "civil discourse" since Clinton "trashed the place." The media have spent the last two administrations either condemning Clinton for failing to keep it in his pants or fellating Bush, who should have whipped it out more often so we wouldn’t be mired in a never-ending land war in Asia, a war that, despite the shrill DFH protests, none of the cheerleaders in the White House press pool bothered to question. Most of the old national media types have proven themselves to be no more than stenographers for the well-oiled, well-funded conservative movement, even if you insist upon the existence of some mythical "balanced" media.
I recommend you re-read the comments about a "robust and open" Internet made earlier today by your FCC Chairman, sir. Because like it or not, the Internet — and blogging/online journalism — is not going away. You’re going to need the left’s help in 2012, Mr. President, so you might want to ease up on the false equivalencies.
Related posts:
Spotlight
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About Firedoglake
Advanced search
Nearly everything Obama says these days pisses me off but his repeated smackdowns of progressives is too much to take. Go to Hell, Mr. President.
Why not it’s just the taxpayers money?
Ain’t capitalism grand? Bestest system in the whole world, except for the fact that it inevitably crashes and burns. Repeatedly. Then us regular schmucks, who have been royally screwed by the system since the last crash, are expected to bail out our poor little bloated oligarchs.
Watertiger!!!!
Eat any elephants lately?
i’ll be interested in seeing how Michael Moore the Fat handles it in his new movie.
My personal choice is burn it to the ground, lock up the pirates who have been pillaging us for centuries, and start over.
oligarchs.
Glenn Beck could show you the right way to spell that word
The day I ask or take Glenn Beck’s advice on anything, you can lock me up and throw away the key, because I have permanently lost my mind.
I watched “A Face in the Crowd” yesterday. Glenn Beck really IS Lonesome Rhodes.
Yeah, I’m with ya. Gettin old is a bitch, and you do lose your mind. But if the day ever comes when I agree with anything that fucking psycho says, PLEASE, just lock me up with ya.
If it weren’t so destructive to real, living, human beings, this shit would be so fucking laughable. Yet, it’s legitimate debate?????
EDIT: Whoops, thought I hit the reply button. That was aimed at the very good DrDick @ 8.
I’m only pissed off because I haven’t figured out a way to get my business bailed out
Clinton’s up on TDS.
If Obama’s demeanor weren’t so calm, I’d swear he’s ADD. Can’t sit still. One disorganized project after another. Not to mention butting his nose into stuff that’s not his bizness, like the NY gov race.
Excellent, WT.
I am tired of the “fact-based” canard (quack!) lobbed at the blogosphere. Sure, there’s folks like me who just blast our own opinions into the ether, hoping for a reader or two, but there’s entirely too many real reporters and what used to be called journalists for anyone, including the President of the United States, to dismiss the medium.
So stop it, Obama. Just stop it. We get it, you don’t like us much. Surprise! It’s mutual.
Hell, I can’t get them to bail out the business I work for and I work for the state.
Move to Louisiana, become a Republican, and donate to Jindal.
Low and behold, a
stimulusbig-ass JindalCheck™ will be forthcoming.If I rant and rave like a clueless idiot , can I have my own TeeVee show?
One with a multi-million dollar contract?
DNC, DSCC and DCCC, RIP:
Well at least we know what one conservative is conserving, the fine old Louisiana tradition of political corruption.
Well, you have to be big, for starter.
OMG, Bill Clinton is now gonna help Haiti. Heh. Just like he helped when he was prez.
Back to bb. And after your bizness gets really really big, you have to pay yourself unconscionable amounts of cash & stock options, pump your stock price thru the roof via unsavory tricks, cash in your options, report large losses. That’s the formula. Govt will rush to your aid.
the Interwebs are not bipartisan!
To be fair, just because Big Media dishes out swill we do not have to partake. The following quote is a little dated since no durable goods are manufactured in the U.S. anymore but the gist of it remains true.
It’s what alpha males do.
One of the main reasons I enjoy this site is because it is fact based and not just opinion or commentary
Alpha male is just another term for major asshole.
We made a mistake: we gave the combination to the lock on the candy jar to a sugar addict. As a practical matter, you simply cannot bailout everything. As an impractical matter, you simply cannot bail-out everything. Obama has no fiscal common sense, and his crew of financial advice abusers are officers in the Junior Chamber of Despots. Ugh.
That explains why nothing they do matches their promises.
A big part of the problem is media consolidation. Faced with no real competition, they quickly sink to the lowest common denominator which drives people away. I don’t think I have watched anything except the nightly news on the networks for almost a decade. The newspapers are just as bad. We need to break up these big media companies and devolve the news down to the local communities. When my father was growing up, St. Louis had 3 German language newspapers alone. Now the city barely has one.
I’m here for the snacks.
OH, and btw to WT, who almost every time I can’t find anything I disagree with, I do find your confidence in the “internet” or blogging/in-line journalism, might very well be misplaced. Oh, not because we’re gonna quit. But because the folks who provide access are gonna figure out a way to limit it. In fact, I’d bet my last dollar to mere air they’re working on that right now.
“Mmmmm, how can we stop this “free speech” shit on the intertubes and still sound like we’re Mericans??? Meybe if we put in the context of nashinal sacurity, we’ll be able to sell anythin!!! Hell, we’ll not only be able to buy up all the ISP’s, we’ll be able to get teh stoopid to agree we need to approve any incumming messages on teh tubes. Cuzz they culd be frum them damd Muslims!”
But I could be wrong. Have been many, many, many times.
the Left???
there may be some milquetoast fainting-goats who will still rally to the banner of the Party of the Least Worst in 2012, but it is a false equivalency to call them ‘the Left.’
see for example a strong post at Counterpunch today.
“New Deal Liberalism Writes Its Obituary”
…”
In 2012 there won’t be anyone remaining on the Left deluded enough to ‘help’ the Democratic Party ream their constituents as they do whenever they get a chance.
Lord knows, the on-air media types (I’m looking at you, Jabba the Limbaugh) are targeting the FCC’s assistant counsel because they’re terrified the administration is going to bring back the Fairness Doctrine.
And we all know that sh*t ain’t gonna happen.
I was being naively optimistic. My bad.
I think what Limbaugh is really afraid of is that they will actually enforce the law and break up Clear Channel and the other big media companies that are his bread and butter.
The 24-hour news cycle spelled the end of newspapers. Before they even go to press it’s all old news. Newspapers aren’t completely useless though, they still provide a good toilet for my bird.
See Jason Rosenbaum’s piece on the FCC Chairman’s speech today.
The devil is in the details, indeed.
As well as a good way to start the fire in the fireplace, with proper kindling of course.
Being of the other gender, it is not PC for me to type that.
Antitrust? What’s that?
Except for the WaPoo, which no self respecting bird will allow in its cage. You are of course right in large part, though local papers still have a function in providing local news and possibly more in depth coverage, though they have largely abandoned those as well. Nothing spells success like abandoning what you are good at and have little competition for for something you are outgunned at.
There’s snacks?
An alien concept to our current political class.
You could always type it on a Mac.
“There’s snacks?”
How come nobody told me !
I had a parakeet named Mac when I was a kid.
its going to be a quandary for some in 2012, no doubt. But the passing of Teddy Kennedy really brought the old era to a close, and there’s time for some serious re-assessing, if one doesn’t avert one’s gaze from the unpleasant reality of what the (D) party is today.
Rummaging through the old site, I found a link that Jane made to
a piece that Jane Smiley wrote after the 2004 election,
which sadly is more relevant than ever:
So are you big enuf to be bailed out?
We have only had one local paper since the early ’80s. In the absence of competition, quality control quickly went out the window. Whenever they print something of which I have firsthand knowledge I can’t help but notice that it is rife with factual errors. My parents’ and friends obituaries, for instance.
I know what you’re thinking, the information contained in obituaries is submitted by the family, right? Yes it is and yet The News Gazette still manages to fuck it up.
If I had the dough to do all you say I wouldn’t need a bail out
Then again that’s the point isn’t it
Letterman is very funny tonight.
Yes, you now hold the keys to the universe, or at least the U.S. empire part.
“I am concerned that if the direction of the news is all blogosphere, all opinions, with no serious fact-checking, no serious attempts to put stories in context,”
That is just one tremendously fine catch, watertiger. All the standard clichés wrapped up into a few short phrases. This is just like Pelosi’s statement about how she leads while we advocate. It shows not only a contempt for their base but a sense of anxiety. Obama hasn’t clued in yet that it is not our facts but his policies that are fucked up. It says a lot about him though that as his support softens and starts to decline, he is looking to blame us and not those policies.
My mother used to send me obits of parents of my elementary school classmates, long after I had graduated from college. So don’t diss obits, accurate or not.
Oh how right your are. O’s teeing up the progressives as scapegoats for his failures.
Not needing a bailout should not negate your desire to receive one. If you want to be a good capitalist take everything you can get and then ask for more.
Yeah. That is part of the problem with local papers and the industry at large. The bigger problem (related) is their relentless drive to push up profits. I do not know if it is still true, but I read a couple of years ago that newspaper profits were far higher than almost any other business on a percentage basis. In order to feed our parasitical investor class’s insatiable lust for ever greater profits, they started slashing costs. Quality control was one of the casualties. They also cut the things that would have made them competitive: in depth reporting, investigative reporting, and dedicated reporters assigned to particular beats (a consequence of “trimming” news staff, aka gutting the news room). They thus sealed their decent into irrelevance.
People don’t ascend the power ladder as rapidly as Obama by accepting responsibility for their fuck-ups.
O’s up on Letterman.
Have to say that Clinton was very funny on TDS last half hour.
It’s a good nite for late night TV.
thats all well and good, but have you noticed that the big capitalists, or rather, the corporate class, who are not really capitalists anymore, also purchased control of the Democratic Party, in order to wage “their class war against the middle class and against the regulations that were protecting those whom they considered to be their rightful prey—workers and consumers.”?
Clintontime should have made that clear, and Obama is on pace to outdo Clinton.
Yep. On what planet would Bill Keller get away with hiding BushCo’s wiretapping until the ‘04 election was over, at the express request of the administration? How does he survive such an egregious breach of journalistic ethics?
Why, Earth. The demand for excellence is long passed.
Why does Letterman wear white socks?
Time for me to toddle off. I has innocent young minds to corrupt in the morning. Take care all.
I’ve had it with Obama. If he wants me to watch he’d better do something entertaining like juggling bowling balls.
G’nite.
Think I will head out too, splendid evening to all.
He’s pretty funny too. Not quite up to Clinton, but close.
I’m no Obama fan, as you well know. But let’s lighten up & give credit where credit’s due. The world’s future doesn’t hinge on late nite appearances, but they do provide a respite while the world is going to hell.
Fixed it for ya.
Thanks. Must’ve had a brain fart to have overlooked that crucial point.
As for Pinch Sulzberger, there is a joke in search of a punchline if ever there was one. Pinch at the NYT, Weymouth at the Post, if anyone needed proof that business smarts are not heritable, just look at these two.
Both are driving their papers and publishing empires into the ground because they are both so dad-blamed stupid that the idea that their papers should actually engage in journalism instead of serving as the propaganda voice of our elites would never occur to them.
What is even funnier is that Pinch did such a rotten job that the NYT had to get a $250 million bridging loan from a Mexican billionaire at the beginning of 2009. So natch, he got a real big bonus for doing such a lousy job. And raise your hand if you think the Times lawyers and accountants didn’t know that Pinch and Robinson’s compensation was out of line with company policy. Or is it that their compensation packages were kept from everyone but the board?
Looks like O got rid of W’s favorite rug in the oval office. Or maybe W took it up for his library.
Pinch has a country house almost within spitting distance of mine. He’s a rock climber, and the bulk of the cliffs are owed by the Mohonk Preserve, a nonprofit. I hear from a board member that “pinch” is accurate, as in penny pincher. He rarely contributes very much.
O just pulled the “nobody knew” line on the economy.
Photo? I’d love to see it gone.
But Obama loved the rug.
I agree. Bill Keller has been a really rotten executive editor. Judy Miller happened before he got the job, but he dealt with the aftermath and he did so by keeping on pro-war reporters like Michael Gordon and John Burns. The paper has one or two reasonably good financial reporters but by and large their star financial line-up sucks. I think it was Nocera recently who had an idiot piece about how Lehman going under and causing the financial meltdown was a “good” thing. Stolberg at the White House is almost a byword for vapid reporting. And of course the lack of investigative reporting (with the occasional exception) during the non-stop disasters of the Bush years is really breathtaking. More recently Robert Pear has cemented his role as a sockpuppet for Baucus and the Gang of Six.
As for the editorial side under Andrew Rosenthal, they are somewhat liberal on social issues but he gives David Brooks a prominent forum for his pseudo-everyman bullshit. And as I have often said, any neocon who can scrawl something even in a dead drunk, Andrew Rosenthal will publish it.
And Ronald Reagan was a transitional President.
It was one of those quick photos that Letterman held up that showed Sasha hiding under the couch in the oval office. It looked like a different rug, but I can’t be sure. I’ll google about a bit.
Fixed it for you. Yeah, nobody but us opinionated progressives apparently.
Oh! I did see that! It did look “plain.”
Couldn’t find anything definitive. Some articles say he’s gonna change it, others say he luvs it. Think it calls for an infor email.
Here’s the email I sent, subject “oval office rug”. Will post any response.
I agree! Let’s ask the White House Curator! They have one, and I don’t know his/her name, but it must be on the website. I’ll try to remember to look tomorrow, but if I don’t, let me know.
Oh eCAHN,
You are hilarious!
There doesn’t seem to be a contact us on the WH curator’s site. I sent my email to president@whitehouse.com.
I second that.
OK, let’s see who answers. If not, I have some contacts.
I think you’re being persnickity, and with little reason.
Obama is plainly happy with Bush’s interpretation of the Constitution – why shouldn’t he like the rug?
Just a mouse click away.
Speaking of mouses, I came across an almost catatonic one in my kitchen tonight. I stepped over him twice while emptying the dishwasher, assuming he was dead from the poison food. Having completed that task, I got a paper towel, used it to grab the mouse by the tail to throw outside, and he twitched the entire time. Sometimes it pays to be a masochist.
Persnickety is my middle name. (Or maybe stubborn. I report, your decide.) How else can I have any fun in life if not to tweek those in power?
oye!
This year has been particularly bad for mice, owing to the rain, I think. I never had mice inside the house or garage in the summer until this year. They built a nest inside the motor of my riding lawn mower in no time flat. It’s full scale war.
The blogosphere waits with bated breath.
OK, my denial runs deep. Perhaps Obama was tipping his hat at the St. Petersburg Times (non profit) and wagging his finger at Drudge and FoxNews?
Yeah, I’m not real happy with him right now, but this isn’t why…
ew! can you get a cat?
we had mice in my college apt. until my roomie and I got a cat. problem solved.
Not this year, but some time ago, I had mice nest in the electric burners of my stove. I caught them taking cookies from a high chair, to the top of the electric burner.
Heh. Unlike W, I didn’t even get an autoreply. So don’t hold your breath. After all, the blogosphere is not responsible.
Digby and Greenwald setting aside column-inches for the rug exposé.
While you’re at it, if you can get an answer about the
stimulusscrewjobtaxcut, you could do a diary.If you go to google images and type in ”obama oval office rug” there are some pictures.
Oh, gimme a stinkin break, watertiger … Is Firedoglake now the next Drudgereport and Foxnews.com?
I thought people here were smarter and more progressive than this.
Did you actually READ the friggin dumbass BLOG from TheHill that quote came from???
Obama did NOT endorse the bill. And the bill you mention is NOT A BAILOUT.
How is allowing a newspaper to restructure as a non-profit a BAILOUT???
I thought people were supposed to like having a president open to ALL ideas. But instead everytime he says he’ll listen, bloggers like this freak out and accuse Obama of doing something that he’s only giving an ear to.
Been thinking about a cat, but I had one, Jezebel, who is completely unreplaceable. She was awesome. Lived outdoors until age 15, then retired, declawed to the city for her remaining 6 years. I’m afraid another cat will fall short, and possibly coyote fodder. But I’ve put out feelers. Your make me want to renew efforts to get one. I luv cats.
Interesting cat story. The opera house and ballet theater in St. Petersburg, Russia, in 1998, stank of cat piss. Was an interesting cultural insight into wonderful buildings that they couldn’t afford to maintain in a reasonable rodent free environment.
I think I’m going to try this stuff.
Does anyone remember the print interview with Michelle Obama during which she proudly stated that when she was interviewing for her job in Chicago she asked if the interviewer would be willing to discuss the job with her then fiancé?
That’s pretty dramatic. I try to stop it before that kind of drama unfolds.
Let me know if it’s a smell that human noses can pick up. See my 99.
But did you find one that definitively said the rug was the same or different? Prez’s routinely change the rug, at least since FDR, but what did O actually do? Enquiring minds want to know.
[dipping toe in The Lake. Seems a wee bit choppy. O well, Dive In, Kelly!]
Howdy!
I found this that said that Bush had a rug partly designed by Laura costing $62,000, sunburst pattern and that it was going to stay through the Obama Presidency, so 3 1/4 more years.
http://www.rugrag.com/post/Bus…..arpet.aspx
:-) Sounds like a job for eCAHN.
It could be argued that the people who got enormous options…
during the papers demise are looking to cash in, or at the very least, justify their existence by claiming an industry-wide slump.
That said, welcome to the Lake.
Hey Kelly! Welcome to the fight.
I ask you – what isn’t?
Howdy, back at you. We don’t bite, much. *g*
Here is a site with great Oval Office rugs of the past.
http://www.whitehousemuseum.or…..istory.htm
So the photo on Letterman that made it look like a different rug was probably because of the camera angle. Problem solved.
Howdy Ho there, CE.
[dons boxing gloves, looks around]
I think Obama’s quote about blogs is the most important part of the post.
I almost forgot the rug link. Put it in at #111.
[found an old roach in a funny place; the coffee spot in my built in cabinets! be back in a moment. Or not. You know how these things go. :) ]
Damn. No subpoenas!
Thanks for the link. Funny how tastes change. Owning an historic house, I have strong opinions on what is appropriate and what isn’t but when it comes to the oval office, all bets are off.
Surely you jest. I’m no Marcy Wheeler. I like to poke people and get a response. Not into follow thru.
Hey, let’s be prepared. Did I spell this right?
Are you secretly John Conyers?
Any resemblance between the living and the dead is purely coincidental.
pfffft
oh newt, what a card you are!
Hey Chris!
Being disgusted with Congress for a long, long time – I consider it skepticism, but cynicism isn’t far off.
That’s my story.
Your traveling shoes broken in?
Got an autoreply to my prez email. Completed the new form, requesting a response. Will let you know. I’m holding my breath.
If every president buys a new rug, why was Bush using Reagan’s rug? Did Clinton’s rug have cooties?
Cool! I like GHWB decor best.
I didn’t see that W used Reagan’s rug in that article. It said Laura helped design it.
Oh hey ecahn, glad you’re still here. I had toddled off to read about the emmies :) I had two cats. their reigns overlapped and they each had distinct personalities, that’s for sure.
Anyway, I wanted to let you know I saw your kitty comment. Be sure to drop by Southern Dragon’s Caturdays.
Check the second picture in the link – it shows Bush on Reagan’s rug.
Funniest thing in Hugh’s link – In the ’60s LBJ laid a wood grain linoleum floor in the oval.
He seems to be settling in with the idea of two wars going on so what’s a little attack on the only surviving fact based media?
The Orwellian Bush years continue.
One of the things we miss about the blogosphere is how much of the facts are drawn from the NYT, WaPo, Guardian and other print newspapers who have full-time reporters covering the facts of an issue and originating the coverage. The blogosphere just hasn’t developed a news service capability yet. We are continually have to deconstruct facts out of better or worse reporting in the print media. For some print reporters this is easy because they are fact-based. For others, there’s a lot of reading between the line.
HuffPo has done an interesting experiment during the Iran election crisis. They sourced everything that they could find in reports, YouTubes, posting on blogs, postings on Twitter to create a narrative of what was going on in Iran. What they proved is how difficult it is to get the facts from a closed society using the internet alone as a communications medium.
If basic reporting is Obama’s concern, he is right that there is a shortage of good straightforward reporting. But most straight-forward reporting is buriedn in the back pages or dropped during editing because it doesn’t have “impact”.
That said, there is no justification for another gratuitous slap at the blogosphere. And there certainly is analysis and opinion pieces in the left blogosphere that are more professionally crafted than much in the print media.
Thanks for this, Tarheel. People choosing to turn this into yet another Three Minutes’ Hate need to be realistic about the costs of journalism. As Don Hewitt said, his biggest regret about the success of 60 Minutes was that it made people think that journalism had to be profitable — that it had to make money — when in fact it’s always been subsidized because it is so expensive.
Congratulations! I always request a reply. Have yet to receive even a bot.
The real issue underlying mainstream media complaints about the blogs is that the Internet has made the traditional media business model obsolete and, with it, the media’s power base.
Freedom of the press has always belonged only to those that own one in this country. The media business has always been able to count on the cost of setting up a press (or a transmitter) to hold down competition and on the limited geographic range of their product to insure a captive audience. These two factors gave them an advertising market and made pay-for-content a viable proposition,while making ownership/control politically attractive.
The Internet swept both of these cornerstones of the media business away. Almost everyone can own their own press and pump out electrons at almost no cost. The range of each person’s output is limited only by language and the quality/appeal of their work. Suddenly the local newspaper’s reporting has to compete with a twitterer in Iran and a housewife in Iowa. Horror of horrors, the twitterer turns out to be more timely and accurate and the housewife turns out to be wiser and a better writer, even if she didn’t have a journalism degree.
More importantly, the Internet offers no natural, alternative bases for the traditional limited competition/captive audience model. Even if the traditional media were able to do away with net neutrality, the network cannot readily be made to favor a few players the way it once did.
Hence the MSM whining for entitlements and handouts. It’s over and they can’t change. But it’s not because they can’t master the technology needed to do journalism anymore. It’s because they can’t make a lot of money at it. Journalism just became a fully commoditized product. Talk is now well and truly cheap, and the media types aren’t in it for the ideas.