RIP Richard Mellon Scaife

Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Status
Not open for further replies.

YankeeFan

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2004
Messages
55,078
Richard Mellon Scaife, the Pittsburgh philanthropist and reclusive heir to the Mellon banking fortune, whose support for right-wing causes laid the foundations for America’s modern conservative movement and fueled the 1998 impeachment of President Bill Clinton, died on Friday. He was 82.

Mr. Scaife’s death was reported by the The Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, a newspaper he owned. No cause of death was given.

http://nyti.ms/TTzwBb
 
I believe this is the guy who funded and essentially created the Arkansas Project to perpetuate the conspiracy theory about the Clintons murdering Vince Foster and similar irresponsible nonsense. Sorry to speak ill of the deceased, but a billionaire douchebag he was.
 
We really need someone around here to vet the RIPs.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
heyabbott said:
Good riddance

I certainly wasn't a fan of the guy, but this is disgraceful. Somebody died. If this is all you can think of to say, you really should shut up.
 
YankeeFan said:
wicked said:
One less two-newspaper town on the horizon.

I believe he created a trust to fund the newspapers for a long time.

That is my understanding as well, but the question is how much money did he put it. If the stories I've heard are correct, the Trib has been losing a lot of money for a long time.
 
Guy inherited $500 million from his family and yet sought to overturn the will of the American electorate for his own selfish gain.

RIP, billionaire douchebag.
 
Baron Scicluna said:
Guy inherited $500 million from his family and yet sought to overturn the will of the American electorate for his own selfish gain.

RIP, billionaire douchebag.

Dude supported abortion rights and marriage equality. Was against the Iraq War. Gave generously to schools, cultural institutions and hospitals.

He loved and supported newspapers.

And, he supported Libertarian causes.

But, in your mind, despite agreeing with you on so much, he's a selfish douchebag.
 
YankeeFan said:
Baron Scicluna said:
Guy inherited $500 million from his family and yet sought to overturn the will of the American electorate for his own selfish gain.

RIP, billionaire douchebag.

Dude supported abortion rights and marriage equality. Was against the Iraq War. Gave generously to schools, cultural institutions and hospitals.

He loved and supported newspapers.

And, he supported Libertarian causes.

But, in your mind, despite agreeing with you on so much, he's a selfish douchebag.

There was good and bad to the man. The "loved and supported newspapers" is a bit overly kind to him. He used his newspapers to push his own agenda. Not all media is that way, but it is absolutely fair to say that of Scaife's possessions.

That said, the responses by 'yab and Baron on this thread are repugnant.
 
outofplace said:
The "loved and supported newspapers" is a bit overly kind to him. He used his newspapers to push his own agenda. Not all media is that way, but it is absolutely fair to say that of Scaife's possessions.

In the history of newspapers in America, owners pushing their own agenda is far more common than not.

And, that includes the biggest papers in the country, up to and including the present day.

If you don't think the Times, Post, Trib and Journal were used by the Ochs-Sulzbergers, the Grahams, the McCormicks, and the Bancrofts, to push their own agenda, you are kidding yourself.

Newspapers have historically been founded to give the owner a voice, and influence.
 
YankeeFan said:
outofplace said:
The "loved and supported newspapers" is a bit overly kind to him. He used his newspapers to push his own agenda. Not all media is that way, but it is absolutely fair to say that of Scaife's possessions.

In the history of newspapers in America, owners pushing their own agenda is far more common than not.

And, that includes the biggest papers in the country, up to and including the present day.

If you don't think the Times, Post, Trib and Journal were used by the Ochs-Sulzbergers, the Grahams, the McCormicks, and the Bancrofts, to push their own agenda, you are kidding yourself.

Newspapers have historically been founded to give the owner a voice, and influence.

I know that is what you believe, that all or most media outlets are biased. Just as I have a more informed opinion that you are incorrect, based in part on the fact that you can't back up your claim. That said, I don't think this is the place for that argument.
 
YankeeFan said:
Baron Scicluna said:
Guy inherited $500 million from his family and yet sought to overturn the will of the American electorate for his own selfish gain.

RIP, billionaire douchebag.

Dude supported abortion rights and marriage equality. Was against the Iraq War. Gave generously to schools, cultural institutions and hospitals.

He loved and supported newspapers.

And, he supported Libertarian causes.

But, in your mind, despite agreeing with you on so much, he's a selfish douchebag.

Also accused the Clintons of multiple murders without a shred of evidence.
And no, "Too many people they know have died under 'suspicious' circumstances for it to be a coincidence," is not evidence. It isn't logical, either.
 
Smallpotatoes said:
YankeeFan said:
Baron Scicluna said:
Guy inherited $500 million from his family and yet sought to overturn the will of the American electorate for his own selfish gain.

RIP, billionaire douchebag.

Dude supported abortion rights and marriage equality. Was against the Iraq War. Gave generously to schools, cultural institutions and hospitals.

He loved and supported newspapers.

And, he supported Libertarian causes.

But, in your mind, despite agreeing with you on so much, he's a selfish douchebag.

Also accused the Clintons of multiple murders without a shred of evidence.
And no, "Too many people they know have died under 'suspicious' circumstances for it to be a coincidence," is not evidence. It isn't logical, either.

I'll tell you what, you say he accused the Clintons of multiple murders without a shred of evidence, right?

Would you like to back up that claim with some evidence?
 
outofplace said:
I know that is what you believe, that all or most media outlets are biased. Just as I have a more informed opinion that you are incorrect, based in part on the fact that you can't back up your claim. That said, I don't think this is the place for that argument.

Which part is incorrect?

That papers historically have served to push the owner's agenda, or that it continued up until and to the present day? Or both?
 
YankeeFan said:
Baron Scicluna said:
Guy inherited $500 million from his family and yet sought to overturn the will of the American electorate for his own selfish gain.

RIP, billionaire douchebag.

Dude supported abortion rights and marriage equality. Was against the Iraq War. Gave generously to schools, cultural institutions and hospitals.

He loved and supported newspapers.

And, he supported Libertarian causes.

But, in your mind, despite agreeing with you on so much, he's a selfish douchebag.

Which is why I said RIP, not RIH.
 
YankeeFan said:
outofplace said:
The "loved and supported newspapers" is a bit overly kind to him. He used his newspapers to push his own agenda. Not all media is that way, but it is absolutely fair to say that of Scaife's possessions.

In the history of newspapers in America, owners pushing their own agenda is far more common than not.

And, that includes the biggest papers in the country, up to and including the present day.

If you don't think the Times, Post, Trib and Journal were used by the Ochs-Sulzbergers, the Grahams, the McCormicks, and the Bancrofts, to push their own agenda, you are kidding yourself.

Newspapers have historically been founded to give the owner a voice, and influence.

50+ years ago, this was mostly true.

And then, most papers strived to at least have their reporting be objective, even if their opinion section was slanted.

Now, some still strive for objectivity in reporting. Others, mostly conservative papers (Wall St. Journal, NY Post, San Diego Union-Tribune) don't even pretend to be objective in their reporting any longer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top