Posted on 12/14/2017 2:01:21 PM PST by DoodleDawg
President Trump on Wednesday spoke with 21st Century Fox CEO Rupert Murdoch about an agreement whereby Fox will sell most of its entertainment assets to The Walt Disney Co. for $52.4 billion.
Why it matters: Trump and Murdoch are old pals, but this conversation could raise accusations of political favoritism when it comes to regulatory approvals. Not only for Disney/Fox, but also for AT&T's attempted takeover of Time Warner.
White House Press Secretary Sarah Sanders did not explicitly say that Trump supports the Disney-Fox deal, but did say that he believes it "could be a great thing for jobs." Reality check: Disney said in an investor call today that it expects to achieve $2 billion in "cost synergies" by 2021, which often is corporate-speak for layoffs.
If Trump does favor the deal, that would be in contrast to his feelings about AT&T's $85 billion deal for Time Warner, which he opposes.
One big difference between the two is that Time Warner owns a cable news network that Trump believes is too critical (CNN), while 21st Century Fox owns one that he favors (Fox News). There is no evidence that Trump's antipathy toward CNN caused the Justice Department's objections, but AT&T reportedly plans to investigate the matter. The call to Murdoch could be used to buttress such a theory, particularly if the Justice Department permits Disney/Fox to proceed.
(Excerpt) Read more at axios.com ...
Why? Presidents have often voiced similar opinions - we might have been wise to listen to Ike’s warnings about the military-industrial complex, for example..
They just talked about golf and their grandchildren.
I have been through a few mergers and acquisitions. They will cut jobs in a NY second. I have no idea what this "great thing for jobs" comment came from. Having said all that I am not necessarily opposed to such mergers but to characterize them as great for jobs is a bit naive.
I disagree that Presidents have injected themselves into large mergers like this to the extent that Trump has. He's pretty much guaranteed the AT&T-Time Warner merger will go through by threatening them over CNN. And with this one, his comment about how it will be a job creator when mergers like this always result in job losses will give the Democrats something to beat the Republicans over during the elections.
I thought monopolies were illegal. And did I hear correctly...they’re buying movies and entertainment television? Is Murdoch keeping FOX News and FOX Business? Otherwise, there’s just OAN. And you can’t get that without Direct Tv in most markets.
Disney . . .a company that has sold out to the devil . . .pawning its anti-God mores on not only the youth of America but people around the world.
Exactly Fox News is NOT, repeat NOT being sold.
So the false dichotomy is just that.
The writer is terminally ignorant . Your post does not speak real well about you
I'll just have to learn to live with your disapproval.
That’s a little too mercenary for me. Free enterprise allows even the little guy to start a business and have a life. That’s not socialism. That’s the American Way. If my aim is to sink every other business but my own, I’m a pretty greedy guy. And it certainly doesn’t mesh with our JudeoChristian values.
There are simply too many news agencies and media companies in too few hands. Bust up the monopolies.
President Trump on Wednesday spoke with 21st Century Fox CEO Rupert Murdoch...This is just hypercritical anti-Trump crap. How and when? Did one call the other on the phone, did they bump into each other in the produce dep't, does anyone seriously think Trump's one-sentence response means favoritism? Because, y'know, that would EXACTLY LIKE what Peter Strzok did. IOW, this sounds like DNC talking points being disseminated by the lying media shills.
Going to read this later, to find out what people think of Disney buying Fox. Homosexual Agenda trying to regulate conservative minds?
It is Axios
I don’t think Fox News is included.
.
The rise of a monopoly is the end of competition and the death of a free and open market. The holder of the the monopoly can then raise prices to a level that extracts an economic rent from the market while simultaneously preventing other competitors from entering the market. This is similar to how OPEC is able to increase production, lower the price of oil, drive fracking and oil sand companies out of business, buy them up, shut them down, artificially create shortages, and then raise prices up to an exploitive level that ultimately causes trade imbalances, economic downturns, and wars.
This nonsense about anti-trust and "evil monopolies" is a bunch of liberal lie nonsense put forward by Progressives in the early 20th century.
Quite the contrary, the monopolies that came out of the industrial revolution and the artificially high prices they extracted from the market as well as the unnaturally low wages they paid their workers are the reason that the socialist policies of the twentieth century became popular enough that they could be passed into law and inflicted on our nation and the rest of the world. Although this historical fact conflicts with the theoretical libertarian ideal, monopolies create popular support for socialism and other leftist ideologies that oppress people and give greater control to the leftist elite. It is no coincidence that almost every monopoly is controlled by a liberal Democrat. Minimal regulation that keeps the market open, safe, and competitive creates the best long-term outcome for businesses, workers, consumers, and a healthy overall economy.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.