Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old August 5th, 2013 #21
littlefieldjohn
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 8,048
littlefieldjohn
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alex Linder View Post
NYT sells Boston Globe to John Henry

Why Didn't the Boston Globe Sell to the Highest Bidder?

This weekend, The New York Times Co. sold the Boston Globe to John W. Henry, the owner of the Boston Red Sox. Henry paid $70 million. (Or negative $40 million, by more realistic calculations.) Oddly, several other bidders made higher bids than Henry. Why did the NYT Co. leave that money on the table?

http://gawker.com/why-didnt-the-bost...der-1032049882
Quote:
Quote:
After purchasing the Boston Globe in 1993 for a then-record $1.1 billion, the financially troubled New York Times just announced it sold the 141 year-old paper to Boston Red Sox owner John Henry for a mere $70 million.

That's a straight 93% loss. Figuring in two decades of inflation would only make it worse -- as does the fact the Times retains the Globe's pension liabilities, estimated at over $100 million.
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journal...3-percent-loss
 
Old December 14th, 2013 #22
Alexander M.
Senior Member
 
Alexander M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,231
Alexander M.
Default Exposing the Criminal Liberal Bias of America's Newspaper of Record

http://crimesofthetimes.blogspot.com/
__________________
Experience molds perception.
 
Old May 16th, 2014 #24
Roy
Perception Manager
 
Roy's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,794
Roy
Default NYT's Swan Song and Death Twitch

I read about 1/2 of this leaked internal report. It basically laments the rise of digital media and how the NYT's isn't adapting fast enough to changing times.

Ironically, as it makes a case for the turn to digital, it published the report itself on dead-tree media. All crooked and with muddy photos while wondering why they are going extinct.

One of the turn-offs to the NYT's is the arrogance, like on page 46 of the report.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documen...l#document/p46
Quote:
They [WSJ & CNN] have serious quality lapses as a result, but also big wins and a growing and engaged audience.
The Times has considerations our competitors don't - namely the promise that everything they [read] has been carefully vetted. We are one of the few outlets where even the comments meet this standard.
Let's parse that. First of all, they talk of "quality". A quality comment is something that is interesting to read, not necessarily grammatically correct. Again, ironically in the very paragraph they lament the low quality standards of their competitors, they make a typo themselves, leaving out the word 'read'.

Also, they totally miss the idea that everyone is tired of leftist bullshit drivel blaming the White man for every problem they can think of. What they're saying is that they moderate the comment section to suit their jew-leftist agenda, and they are proud of it from a "quality" standpoint.


When they aren't getting political, the content is OK, but it's the rest of the stuff that makes the paper unreadable.
It's like going to a nice party, but one guest smells like piss from 10 feet away and is pissing in the punch-bowl. The get-together is ruined.


NYT's is singing their Swan Song, but then again swans are beautiful. Perhaps it's better to call it their death twitch.

Last edited by Roy; May 16th, 2014 at 12:27 PM.
 
Old May 17th, 2014 #25
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roy View Post
I read about 1/2 of this leaked internal report. It basically laments the rise of digital media and how the NYT's isn't adapting fast enough to changing times.

Ironically, as it makes a case for the turn to digital, it published the report itself on dead-tree media. All crooked and with muddy photos while wondering why they are going extinct.

One of the turn-offs to the NYT's is the arrogance, like on page 46 of the report.

http://www.documentcloud.org/documen...l#document/p46


Let's parse that. First of all, they talk of "quality". A quality comment is something that is interesting to read, not necessarily grammatically correct. Again, ironically in the very paragraph they lament the low quality standards of their competitors, they make a typo themselves, leaving out the word 'read'.

Also, they totally miss the idea that everyone is tired of leftist bullshit drivel blaming the White man for every problem they can think of. What they're saying is that they moderate the comment section to suit their jew-leftist agenda, and they are proud of it from a "quality" standpoint.


When they aren't getting political, the content is OK, but it's the rest of the stuff that makes the paper unreadable.
It's like going to a nice party, but one guest smells like piss from 10 feet away and is pissing in the punch-bowl. The get-together is ruined.


NYT's is singing their Swan Song, but then again swans are beautiful. Perhaps it's better to call it their death twitch.
They just fired or demoted jew Jill Abramson (sp?) too.

Yeah...they see their filtering as upholding standards. Only for spelling and grammar, not for content. Whole political point of internet is you can get material excluded by older media. The NYT's not observing Linder's Law: simply by looking around, you can see the readers are always to the white/right side of the editors. NYT thinks everybody has or should have the mindset of a jew living in NYC. They don't and they shouldn't! NYT simply turns everything into leftist print-Muzak then wonders why it's numbers drop.
 
Old November 10th, 2014 #26
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,338
Blog Entries: 34
Alex Linder
Default

Sheldon Adelson Asks Haim Saban to Help Him Acquire New York Times Co., Fight Episcopalian / Maronite Control of the Media

By Steve Sailer on November 10, 2014
From IsraelUSA.net:



Sheldon Adelson Challenges Haim Saban to Team Up and Buy The New York Times

By: Joseph Gelman| Posted: November 9, 2014 6:30 PM

In a spirited public discussion between two of America’s richest men and largest political donors, at the IAC [Israeli American Council] conference in Washington DC, multi-billionaire Sheldon Adelson openly challenged his more left-leaning counterpart and friend, billionaire and media mogul Haim Saban, to jointly purchase the New York Times away from the Sulzberger family, because of the Times’ open hostility towards Israel.

The subject came up in a pubic discussion about media bias and Israel. Saban marveled at how Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos had purchased the Washington Post for a mere $250 million, which Saban called “bupkis,” and that he was sorry that he did not try to buy it himself.

Do you think Lebanese-Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim (net worth approaching $70 billion) regrets the $200 million he put up to financially rescue the New York Times Co. in 2008? He now owns 17% of the company’s stock.


Saban and his Mighty Morphin’ Power Rangers

At that point Adelson pounced on Saban and challenged him on the spot to join with him to buy the New York Times from the Sulzberger family.

Saban expressed an openness to the idea, but was concerned that the Sulzberger family would not sell. Adelson dismissed that concern, “You pay significantly more than it’s worth, then the non-family shareholders have the right to bring a suit between the real value and what’s been offered.”

The issue they’re talking about is, I believe, that the New York Times Co. has both voting and nonvoting shares, with the Sulzberger family dominating ownership of the voting shares.

For the Sulzberger family’s interesting ethnic, religious, and ideological history, which included converting to Episcopalianism at one point, see here.

Adelson at Macau Sands casino

Adelson suggested that he and Saban team up and make them an offer that cannot be refused; “There’s only one way to buy it, money…. but it’s not going to be one of those deals where I put up 10 times more than you” Adelson said.

Saban expressed an interest… and then the panel moved on to other subjects.

Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson together are worth well over 40 billion dollars and are more than financially capable of buying the troubled New York Times. The mere suggestion of such a move has put traditional liberal outlets like the Daily Beast into a virtual meltdown. Clearly, this discussion will continue in a more private setting. The discussion was dead serious in tone and was video taped in front of an audience over 700 people at the Washington Hilton today (Nov. 9) at around 12:00 noon.
 
Old July 13th, 2015 #27
Alexander M.
Senior Member
 
Alexander M.'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 3,231
Alexander M.
Default Jew York Times Publishes Article Complaining About Whiteness of National Parks

U.S. national parks attracted nearly 293 million visitors in 2014—a record high. But in a country boasting a sub-65 percent White population, nearly 80 percent of the national park visitors are White. Which is not okay.

Non-Whites just collectively lack interest in national parks. What’s to blame? Why, White racism, of course!

http://www.dailystormer.com/jew-york...ational-parks/
__________________
Experience molds perception.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:49 AM.
Page generated in 0.10203 seconds.