A slow, painful death is an ugly thing to watch. How long do you think it will take to make them publicly funded?
1 posted on
03/02/2009 4:29:39 AM PST by
deaconjim
To: deaconjim
Personally, I think many of them are operating as “non-profits” now, they just don’t have that status with the IRS.
2 posted on
03/02/2009 4:30:36 AM PST by
deaconjim
(Because He lives...)
To: deaconjim
newspapers are not vital to democracy, freedom of speech is.
3 posted on
03/02/2009 4:31:02 AM PST by
driftdiver
(I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
To: deaconjim
Already posted and discussed, here:
Idea of non-profit newspapers floated I write this not as the posting police but rather to illustrate how newspapers are just so inefficient at delivering news that we already heard about yesterday. Printed newspapers are this generation's buggy whip.
4 posted on
03/02/2009 4:33:15 AM PST by
NonValueAdded
(May God save America from its government; this is no time for Obamateurs)
To: deaconjim
Newspaper have no legitimate role in our society if they can't support themslves. If the product they are selling can't be sold at a profit, they deserve to die.
My town does just fine without a town crier; I suspect your does too. That role disappeared when it no longer served a purpose. There is no role for an obsolete technology riven with an oppressive political agenda. Good bye
6 posted on
03/02/2009 4:40:57 AM PST by
muir_redwoods
( O.B.A.M.A. = One Big Asinine Mistake, America)
To: deaconjim
"By endowing our most valued sources of news we would free them from the strictures of an obsolete business model and offer them a permanent place in society, like that of America's colleges and universities," he wrote in a recent opinion piece in The New York Times. Will the government give us "subscription" aid so we can all afford the "right" to have a newspaper forced upon us? (Sarcasm off)
7 posted on
03/02/2009 4:41:59 AM PST by
CPOSharky
(Zero: I don't care about the country as long as I'm in charge. Forever.)
To: deaconjim
"By endowing our most valued sources of news we would free them from the strictures of an obsolete business model and offer them a permanent place in society, like that of America's colleges and universities," Yeah Right!
As it is, government budgets are brimming with secret and hidden "grants" to nonprofits. If you think the "media" is biased now as a private-sector entity, just wait till they have a true financial allegiance to the gubmint.
8 posted on
03/02/2009 4:45:36 AM PST by
ROCKLOBSTER
(RATs...nothing more than Bald Haired Hippies!)
To: deaconjim
Just nationalize the NYT and rename it Pravda.
9 posted on
03/02/2009 4:50:29 AM PST by
NewHampshireDuo
(Earth - Taking care of itself since 4.6 billion BC)
To: deaconjim
vital role in a democracy.American daily newspapers no longer play a vital role in democracy. They do play a vital role in the rise of communism in America.
Since American daily newspapers are now just another arm of big government, it seems logical big government would want to financially support them.
Subsidizing daily newspapers will not solve their biggest problem:
Few want to read them.
Their biggest support base CANNOT read them due to their functional illiteracy.
To: deaconjim
I do not want newspapers to take my tax money and use it to tell me that I am wrong. If they can’t make it in the market, they have no business continuing operations.
11 posted on
03/02/2009 4:59:48 AM PST by
gridlock
(BTW, Mods... It might be time to add "Barack" and "Obama" to spellcheck)
To: deaconjim
The New York Times now has a problem familiar to sluts everywhere. They have been giving it away for so long, nobody wants to pay for it when they go to sell it.
12 posted on
03/02/2009 5:01:38 AM PST by
gridlock
(BTW, Mods... It might be time to add "Barack" and "Obama" to spellcheck)
To: deaconjim
How is management going to sell the idea to the shareholders?
“I have this great idea. It’s too hard to make a profit so let’s just quit trying. Brilliant no?”
Well guess what boys, even non-profits that loose a ton of money go out of business.
14 posted on
03/02/2009 5:06:25 AM PST by
DManA
To: deaconjim
How long do you think it will take to make them publicly funded? If we publicly fund them then they are by definition no longer a "free" press.
15 posted on
03/02/2009 5:09:41 AM PST by
The_Victor
(If all I want is a warm feeling, I should just wet my pants.)
To: deaconjim
one idea gaining attention the endowment model is drawing renewed attentionUh-oh, another one of those inanimate objects being operated like a hand puppet by an AP reporter. This one is "gaining attention" all by itself, as if the reporter were not responsible for focusing attention on it by writing about it. A truly honest AP reporter would have said, "One idea that we AP reporters would like to promote is to have rich people donate lots of money to the newspapers so that they will keep funding the AP. Otherwise we here at the AP are all gonna get laid off as the newspapers tank." |
16 posted on
03/02/2009 5:14:28 AM PST by
Nick Danger
(www.swiftvets.com)
To: deaconjim
What a shame Obama just made non-profits pretty much obsolete by taking about deductions for donations.
18 posted on
03/02/2009 5:30:20 AM PST by
autumnraine
(Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose- Kris Kristoferrson VIVA LA REVOLUTION!)
To: deaconjim
As sharp revenue reductions put the future of many U.S. newspapers in doubt, one idea gaining attention is the conversion of newspapers into tax-exempt nonprofits supported by large endowments. Ubumbu's Ministry of Propaganda, paid by the Taxpayer, like NPR.
19 posted on
03/02/2009 5:36:26 AM PST by
Gorzaloon
(Roark, Architect.)
To: deaconjim
National Public Re-education, that’s just what we need. We already have an NPR.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson