Where's our bailout?

[ArnoldBabar]

I know, I know, it's not a new concept, but I was struck by this story:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-02-26-prius-best-value_N.htm

Chrysler and General Motors (GM) took the bottom two spots, respectively, in Consumer Reports magazine's new automaker for reliability, even as the pair seek billions more in federal loans to stay afloat.

The third of Detroit's Big 3 automakers, Ford Motor, fared better at fourth from the bottom, also beating Suzuki.

I know the answer to the question already -- obviously the auto industry has a much bigger economic impact and employs many more people -- but if they get billions from the government for making what even American publications agree is an inferior product, what about us? A free press is supposedly a cornerstone of our nation, and nobody does it better than newspapers. We could be sustained at a fraction of a fraction of what it takes to keep one car company afloat.

It's just such a damn shame to see how little merit -- in both the macro picture and the micro picture -- figures into who makes the sacrifice right now.

 

[Big Circus]

I know, I know, it's not a new concept, but I was struck by this story:

http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2009-02-26-prius-best-value_N.htm

Chrysler and General Motors (GM) took the bottom two spots, respectively, in Consumer Reports magazine's new automaker for reliability, even as the pair seek billions more in federal loans to stay afloat.

The third of Detroit's Big 3 automakers, Ford Motor, fared better at fourth from the bottom, also beating Suzuki.

I know the answer to the question already -- obviously the auto industry has a much bigger economic impact and employs many more people -- but if they get billions from the government for making what even American publications agree is an inferior product, what about us? A free press is supposedly a cornerstone of our nation, and nobody does it better than newspapers. We could be sustained at a fraction of a fraction of what it takes to keep one car company afloat.

It's just such a damn shame to see how little merit -- in both the macro picture and the micro picture -- figures into who makes the sacrifice right now.

Pure devil's advocate here, as this is all in the realm of fantasy. But wouldn't that raise issues of press independence that aren't there with car companies?

 

[ArnoldBabar]

Definitely, it would. Papers would forever have to prove that they were not beholden. Let me write the first editorial, and I'll clear that **** right up. :D

 

[Michael_ Gee]

Governments, national, state, local, democratic or tyrannical, all WANT to live in a world without news-gathering organizations. They all envy jocks who don't talk and post "news" on their personal Web sites.

 

[Pete Incaviglia]

Governments, national, state, local, democratic or tyrannical, all WANT to live in a world without news-gathering organizations.

Winner.

 

[PeterGibbons]

Let all the newspaper fail, bloggers do a better job at reporting the news anyway!!

Oh wait.... where will they get their content?

 

[Batman]

Considering there are those in the newspaper industry who think people should always pay for workroom meals while covering games, I can't even imagine the uproar a government handout would raise.

 

[SixToe]

I'd rather be an unemployed journalist than to have financial assistance from any government.

Along these lines, what if a newspaper were offered tax breaks by a city to build its new headquarters downtown and promise to have employees working there instead of from home or on the road (within reasonable distance)?

 

[GlenQuagmire]

All the bailouts in the world won't mean crap if we have the same people in power making the same stupid decisions based on greed.

The term "black hole" comes to mind.

 

[Batman]

All the bailouts in the world won't mean crap if we have the same people in power making the same stupid decisions based on greed.

The term "black hole" comes to mind.

At Gannett, that's an "African-American hole".

 

[novelist_wannabe]

I'd rather be an unemployed journalist than to have financial assistance from any government.

If you're an unemployed journalist, you may well be taking financial assistance from a government in order to feed and/or house your family, assuming you have one. Come to think of it, I'm sure there have been employed journalists who have received government assistance in order to feed their families. I understand the ethic here, but you still have to eat.

 

[SixToe]

I'll spell it out anyway.

I would rather be an unemployed journalist than work for a news organization that takes government financial assistance to remain operational. News organizations should not receive government money to keep the doors open and presses running.

As for being unemployed, if I had to take government assistance to help my family then I would. That's a different topic.

 

[Stitch]

I'll spell it out anyway.

I would rather be an unemployed journalist than work for a news organization that takes government financial assistance to remain operational. News organizations should not receive government money to keep the doors open and presses running.

As for being unemployed, if I had to take government assistance to help my family then I would. That's a different topic.

Food stamps, WIC, and even Section 8 aren't a problem in my book because you're not beholden to someone to get it. All you have to do is make less than the income limit. I wouldn't have a problem with a bailout that is general enough in scope to not be limited to newspapers.

I don't see newspapers getting a bailout. I see more bankruptcy filings where newspapers can be protected from the crushing amount of debt service that they have to pay.