January 18, 2009

Carlos Slim to bailout the NY Times?

The New York Times is the most influential journalistic institution in the world. The NYT decides, in the more marginal cases, for the rest of the news media what is and isn't national news. Obviously, if a jetliner lands in the Hudson River, everybody knows it's news. On the other hand, if a drunken stripper makes incoherent accusations against Duke lacrosse players, it's only news if the NYT decides to run two dozen stories about it, which lets everybody else in the media know that it's Real News Symbolic of Major Social Problems and thus they can sanctimoniously splash this salacious tripe.

The NYT, at present and probably for the future as well, is a big money pit. No doubt it will have to downsize itself tremendously. But likely so will its major competitors, so the NYT's relative influence over the rest of the media is unlikely to decline much.

Meanwhile, as the federal government takes over control of ever more of the decreasing amount of wealth in America, the long term relative value of having a stake in the most powerful news arbiter should be increasing. The NYT is, more than anything else, the chokepoint on political discussion in America, so as politics determines ever more of who gets his hands on America's wealth, the value of the NYT should go up.

The market disagrees, but Mexican telephone monopolist, Carlos Slim, who didn't get to be more or less the richest man in the world by passing up a chance to influence the government, is, not surprisingly, in talks to help bailout the New York Times. Once you've gotten the Mexican government eating out of your hand, the logical next step is the American government.

My published articles are archived at iSteve.com -- Steve Sailer

45 comments:

Anonymous said...

"No doubt it will have to downsize itself tremendously. But likely so will its major competitors, so the NYT's relative influence over the rest of the media is unlikely to decline much."

Downsizing holds a certan amount of risk.

If the Times downsizes too much they will severely hurt their news gathering ability.

Letting go of too many employees could leave them vulnerable to older competitors like the WSJ and Bloomberg or upstart newsources like Politico and the Dailybeast.

rob said...

He's climbing the property ladder. One wonders how much of Mexico's predatory upper-class is preparing to follow their exploited peasants north. Why let American capitalists take your property?

Slim seems to be making a foolish business decision. What more could Mexico's rich possibly want from them? Possibly he sees immigration-reduction on the horizon.

Anonymous said...

"sanctimoniously splash this salacious tripe."

Steve, you are so good. I am such a fan.

The SWPLs who "know" you are an "ignorant racist" and therefore have never read a word you've ever written, don't know what they're missing.

Anonymous said...

I guess you can prepare for even more absurd pro-illegal-Mexican immigration and pro-amnesty arguments from the press, and a robust niche for VDARE.com. If increased absurdity is indeed possible...

Anonymous said...

There must be a few rich arch-conservatives around. I've always wondered why there isn't a paleo alternative to the New York Times, or even the Wall Street Journal. Could you imagine if there was an elite East Coast newspaper that read like Vdare?

Mike in MI said...

Steve da newspaper biz is really getting hammered now. I hate drudge but it really is amusing when he airs American journalism's dirty laundry.

HEre's a drudge link to the NYT pissing/moaning about hard times at the newspapers:

Editors and Publishers in a Revolving Door

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/19/business/media/19paper.html?_r=1&ref=business

I especially liked the stats from LATimes. But of course the'ers no mention of the shrinking number of LA residents who speak english at home in the article. And how about the lack of objectivity and blatant propagandizing which peaked with Obamamania during 2008?

Could those trends have any connection to newsroom layoffs? Any cause & effect action there?

Yes could the liberal newspapers circulation numbers be mimicking left wing talk radio ratings?

Anyone?

Bueller?

Anonymous said...

Is Slim jewish?

headache said...

The SWPLs who "know" you are an "ignorant racist" and therefore have never read a word you've ever written, don't know what they're missing.

I second that!

Steve Sailer said...

Arab. Lebanese Christian. "Slim" used to be "Salim."

Anonymous said...

Mike in MI,
I hate having to register to read s like the NYT. Declining paper numbers fill my heart with joy. Watching the NYT default would be heaven.

Considering the influx of thought-police types lately at iSteve I’m beginning to wonder if there is a post-Obamania underground shift in the political landscape. SWPL's are sobering and meandering to the Steves. Unfortunately they bring along their bad habits (such as complaining about bigotry and holding opinions in contempt etc.) but that will wear off once they get to realise they can free their mind from all the liberal shackles and say what they really think.

Anonymous said...

Um, the Duke lacrosse thing was news not just because an accusation was made, but because the players were actually arrested and charged.

And it's a good thing it was news, because then people like KC Johnson could get involved and contribute to bringing justice.

Like you, I didn't like the NYT's slant, but the fact that they treated it as news was both good and proper.

-ed

Black Sea said...

Odd that Arthur Sulzberger hasn't been round to Rupert Murdoch looking for a cash infusion.

Anonymous said...

Steve Sailer said...
"Arab. Lebanese Christian. "Slim" used to be "Salim.""


This is interesting. First there's the obvious conflict of interests, Slim's outrageous manipulation of the political landscape in order to obtain the telco monopoly, and the likelihood that same corrupt business practices will be transplanted to the US.

Then there's the interaction at the NYT. I dunno what the deal between the Leb. Christians and Israel is. There used to be Phalangists who cooperated through the South Lebanese Army with the IDF. But anyway, Sulzberger and his co-ethics always used the NYT to further their ethnic interests (breaking WASP hegemony) under the guise of being liberal. Their support for the Mexican invasion was intended to weaken WASP hegemony. But maybe they overplayed their hand. Maybe their allies, who were always meant to be subservient, much like Obama is meant to be subservient, are not going to go along with the plan. And we do know that anti-Semitism is rife in outfits like La Raza and Mexico generally. This is becoming a cauldron of contradicting interests. Much to write about.

jody said...

ah, the duke rape hoax. a national story due strictly to the fact that the men were white and the woman was black.

the reverse, in which black men gang rape white women, actually happens many times every year. yet no national news story.

CJ said...

It might be useful to point out just how much money Slim has got. Googlable estimates of his wealth run from $59 billion to $68 billion, and unlike Bill Gates, that's not dependent on the stock price of one company. If Slim decided that it would be a good thing to own the NYT, how much money could he stand to lose? When you've got $60 billion, then $300 million is only one half of a percent of your wealth. That much money could keep the NYT goiong for quite a while.

Anonymous said...

Slim seems to be making a foolish business decision. What more could Mexico's rich possibly want from them?

Political/social influence. Why else do rich guys buy 'big' newspapers?

Rupert Murdoch bought The (London) Times back in the '80s. He also owns low-grade British tabloid The Sun, that has always turned a tidy profit, week in week out, in many ways it was his launchpad into the global market.

But The Times, thats a paper proper people read. It is, or was the NYT for the UK. If its made him any money then that's probably just a bonus.

Anonymous said...

I understand the NYT/LaRaza link, but what's the NYT getting out of the NYT/NAACP link?

Anonymous said...

I assume this isn't the guy who killed the great Kirsty MacCool, or you would have told us. How many super-rich Mexicans are there?
More seriously, the Lebanese-Christian Arab background does seem significant. Mid East Christians don't want to kowtow to Islam, but when push comes to shove, won't do Zion's bidding either. (Unlike white protestants--my group).

Anonymous said...

Mexican Billionaire's NYT Deal Leaving Sulzbergers on Shakier Ground

http://gawker.com/5134289/mexican-billionaires-nyt-deal-leaving-sulzbergers-on-shakier-ground

The New York Times appears to be on the verge of signing a deal with Mexican billionaire Carlos Slim to invest $250 million in the company. If your last name is "Sulzberger," be concerned.

News of Slim's possible investment broke over the weekend, and now the Times itself says an announcement could come as soon as tomorrow. Slim, one of the world's richest people, would essentially be loaning the struggling newspaper a quarter of a billion dollars in exchange for convertible shares paying him high annual dividends. But he would have the right to convert that stock into common shares—and if he did, he would own about a third of the NYT Co.

The Sulzberger family controls the company through a special class of voting stock, which ensures no one can take over the company simply by buying up regular stock. But historically, the Sulzbergers have always been the largest shareholders as well. With this deal, Slim would be in a position to become a larger shareholder than the family that's run the paper for generations. That would make the dual-class structure—which has already pissed off large investors and caused them to dump their NYT stock—even more tenuous. If Slim were to convert his holdings into regular stock, he would only have to join with one or two other large shareholders to form a bloc representing more than half of NYT stock. The Sulzbergers may be putting themselves in a very shaky position if someone decides it's worth their while to make one more public assault on the stock structure that keeps them in power. [NYT]

Anonymous said...

Rupert Murdoch already tried to buy a major NY metro area newspaper, and lost...last year he made a bid on Newsday, the only major paper on Long Island. Newsday, a Democratic ally of long standing, is the key to the (relatively new)continuing dominance of the Democratic party on Long Island.
Murdoch was outbid by the Dolans, who also own Cablevision, which operates the major television news station on Long Island. It was worth it for them to bid high (did they have help?)because now the two major sources of newspaper and TV news on Long Island will be controlled by one family.
They owe the Democratic leader of the State Assembly, Sheldon Silver, bigtime for halting Mayor Bloomberg's plan to establish a sports staduim in Manhattan, which would have killed off Madison Square Garden, another Dolan property. Maybe Murdoch has had enough.

Anonymous said...

"The New York Times is the most influential journalistic institution in the world."

A rare example of Steve succumbing to American parochialism.

The BBC is far more influential worldwide. It is also solvent-- and expanding rapidly into allied and internet media.

But then that's what you can get with "socialized broadcasting".

neil craig said...

You are right about how much the news is what is on TV & newspapers rather than vice cersa. Sometimes the agenda is clear as in all the reporting of alleged (& false) atrocity allegations before the Kosovo bombing & the refusal to report the thousnads mudered, often dissected for European hospitals, since then. Sometimes it is just timing such as massively covered child murders during the "silly season" & their invisibility when Congress is in session.

Of course the ultimate reason the MSM is downsizing is the blogsphere so a blow for freedom there.

Boils said...

Wouldn't one like to know what sort of income taxes Slim pays to the Mexican government? Likely it is nothing.

Hence no socials benefits in Mexico. Hence illegal immigration to the U.S. Hence the U.S. taxpayer is financing Slim.

Ain't it grand? Ain't it graind.

Anonymous said...

"Mid East Christians don't want to kowtow to Islam, but when push comes to shove, won't do Zion's bidding either. (Unlike white protestants--my group)."

Yeah, I kinda like those Leb Christians. Seem like a plucky crowd. Women aint bad looking either. And they even have fashion shows down there with babes really thinly dressed. You'd imagine this would bring out the bearded crazies. No wonder the moolahs and sheiks liked to go to Beirut for some drinking and whoring in order to get away from the bore of the rigid life in Saudi and whatever other virtuous places. I also read somewhere that Israel is wary of the comeback of the commercial class in Beirut. Somebody even suggested this was a main reason Israel likes to keep the placed bombed. And Asad likes to keep his dirty fingers in their till. Leb. Christians have a reputation of being zany businessmen. Seems they don’t have that many friends.

bjdouble said...

Why has no Mexican demagogue run against the wealthy outsider? Each Mexican pays more in taxes to Slim than to the Mexican government, due to his extensive telecom monopoly, aka Taco Bell.

Lucius Vorenus said...

Anonymous: If Slim were to convert his holdings into regular stock, he would only have to join with one or two other large shareholders to form a bloc representing more than half of NYT stock.

Yeah, but how do they get around the fact that they have no vote?

Isn't it kinda ironically hilarious how the NY Times just so happens to have the least-democratic shareholder structure of any major corporation in the country?

Anonymous said...

ed said:

"Um, the Duke lacrosse thing was news not just because an accusation was made, but because the players were actually arrested and charged."

No, many serious crimes occur with actually guilty accused that don't become news, and many that should become news do not, such as this: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/12/21/BAQT14SAK1.DTL . The difference between this and the Lacrosse lynching is that, for obvious ethnic-power reasons, the Times decided to make one news and not the other.

Anonymous said...

Anonymous said:

"I understand the NYT/LaRaza link, but what's the NYT getting out of the NYT/NAACP link?"

The same thing that Jews have always taken from their aliances with NAMs: the weakening of the white majority. Oh, you didn't know that the NAACP was founded (for all intents and purposes) and run by Jews for its first 60 years? Neither did I until recently, not that either the obscurity of the truth nor the truth itself were a surprise. I always thought the NAACP was founded by people like Thurgood Marshall, but, but . . .

From Wikipedia:

The Jewish community contributed greatly to the NAACP's founding and continued financing. Jewish historian Howard Sachar writes in his book A History of Jews in America of how, "In 1914, Professor Emeritus Joel Spingarn of Columbia University became chairman of the NAACP and recruited for its board such Jewish leaders as Jacob Schiff, Jacob Billikopf, and Rabbi Stephen Wise." [1] Early Jewish-American co-founders included Julius Rosenthal, Lillian Wald, Rabbi Emil G. Hirsch and Wise.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NAACP

Anonymous said...

But what about the downside? I became a devoted NYTimes reader at the age of 13, having just discovered politics, and continued so until the late 1980s, when I could no longer take the multi-cult stuff that was then beginning to peak. Changing a whole way of life was a slow process, first dropping the weekend edition and then one day at a time. But I had not connected the dots to the Times' classical music radio station, WQXR, until now. QXR, too, has been my passion since pre-teen days and there's hardly a day of my life when I have not listened to it for a period of time. Today, I awakened to Beethoven's Fifth, and realized that I had not heard it for years, and then remembered that it was probably on QXR that I heard it for the first time.

The point is, as the Times dies, so is WQXR dying. We got a shock a few weeks ago, when, without fanfare (at least I didn't hear any), the Times dropped the station's overnight announcers. They have fired staff right and left. The midnight-overnight show had been an institution (especially under "Nimet" who left last year). So, there I was, one AM morning around 2:30, waiting to hear the name of the composer of the previously played piece, when, instead, a canned voice (of a daytime announcer) came on, telling listeners to go to the QXR website, if they wanted the names of the music played. I almost fell out of bed. Our live, 24-hours-a-day station is about to depart.

The level of commercials now broadcast is degrading. I never thought I'd live to hear a "fish oil" (yes!) commercial on the venerable station of the New York Times. Live announcers begin at 5:30 am, and the other morning when Jeff Spurgeon came on, he opened with the cheeriest voice - just a paraphrase: "Hello everyone, we're so glad to have you listening, you don't know how glad we are!"

So, there's the downside to losing that most negatively influential newspaper.

Victoria

Anonymous said...

A Russian oligarch wants to but London's Evening Standard, a newspaper that has seen it's sales plummet in recent years.

The editors, who are of course pc, have not noticed that few amongst our large Ethnic population actually buy their paper.

I wonder if someone has told Mr Russki this?

Anna Sahyouni said...

"The same thing that Jews have always taken from their aliances with NAMs: the weakening of the white majority. Oh, you didn't know that the NAACP was founded (for all intents and purposes) and run by Jews for its first 60 years?"

Yes, it couldn't possibly be that a group of Jewish do-gooders took a look at the American black population and thought "These people could use some 'advancement'."

Anonymous said...

The important thing about a Mexican Arab billionaire taking over the NY Times is that the Jews are bad.

Eric said...

Of course the ultimate reason the MSM is downsizing is the blogsphere so a blow for freedom there.

This is clearly wrong. The deathblow to newspapers came from craigslist. Classified ads and auto ads were the main revenue streams coming in to a newspaper. Without the classifieds they just can't afford the cost of the newsroom. The price you pay at the stand barely covers the cost of printing, if that.

It will get much worse, too, since the auto companies will be scaling back large buys.

The blogosphere has had absolutely zero effect on the bottom line. I'm not saying it has no effect at all - clearly they hate it, but that ill will doesn't derive from economic considerations.

People don't go into the news business to make money, they go into journalism because it gives them the biggest megaphone. They want to be Murrow taking down McCarthy, or Walter Cronkite declaring the Vietnam war unwinnable. And they have a sense of entitlement to that megaphone, because they went to J-school and they put in their time writing obituaries and crime blotters. Bloggers are the interlopers who didn't do any of that.

David Davenport said...

Letting go of too many employees could leave them vulnerable to older competitors like the WSJ and Bloomberg or upstart newsources like Politico and the Dailybeast.

Nope, young Internut enthusiast, you're wrong. The NY Times' core subscribers are older ppl. who want a paper newspaper. They are venerable readers such as:



I never thought I'd live to hear a "fish oil" (yes!) commercial on the venerable station of the New York Times.


Fish oil not kosher?

////////////////////////////////////////////

Other commenters have commented that real estate ads during the now defunct real estate boom gave American newspapers their last uptick in advertising. Real estate ads are dwindling now.

Anonymous said...

1) Craigslist is the internet. The magic of craigslist is that it deliver ads and classifieds in a much more effective way than newspapers...just like the blogosphere can deliver news. Without the internet, Craigslist would not exist.

2) The Sulzbergers are Presbyterians.

Anonymous said...


"Mid East Christians don't want to kowtow to Islam, but when push comes to shove, won't do Zion's bidding either. (Unlike white protestants--my group)."

Yeah, I kinda like those Leb Christians. Seem like a plucky crowd.


Plucky, with good business sense, and a good grasp of reality. I was at a business function with some Lebanese, Armenian, and Coptic Christians, and one very loud Western fundamentalist preacher. The major sticking point was Israel, of course.

Another one was, "We laugh at how much time you waste foaming at the mouth over this Harry Potter. We Levantine Christians have too many real enemies to have the luxury of inventing imaginary ones."

nzconservative said...

"just like the blogosphere can deliver news."

Just a small fly in the ointment- bloggers don't get paid.

Bloggers can provide interesting opinion, but unless they can find a way of making money out of blogging they can't deliver news.

Basically all that's happening is that news journalism is turning into a kind of third-world bazaar, with thousands of increasingly underpaid hacks in a variety of mediums providing an increasingly low quality product.

headache said...

"Of course the ultimate reason the MSM is downsizing is the blogsphere so a blow for freedom there."

Hope you are right. The MSM sure had enormous influence in getting Obama into office. I no longer pay money for crap I don't want to hear. The only investment I make is buying a conservative weekly. And the blogs. Unfortunately that’s harder than you can imagine since in many western countries the MSM have their hands deep in the public trough. BBC lives off a system of government mandated subscription fees. Same for public TV and radio in Germany. These parasites would be bust if they had to finance their own ramblings. Don't know about the alphabet media in the US.

headache said...

"Basically all that's happening is that news journalism is turning into a kind of third-world bazaar, with thousands of increasingly underpaid hacks in a variety of mediums providing an increasingly low quality product."

Ahem, that sure don't apply to Steve!

Anonymous said...

Yes, it couldn't possibly be that a group of Jewish do-gooders took a look at the American black population and thought "These people could use some 'advancement'."

Well these days if Jewish people want find somebody who could use some 'advancement' they could always take a trip down to Gaza.

Anonymous said...

Anna said:
Yes, it couldn't possibly be that a group of Jewish do-gooders took a look at the American black population and thought "These people could use some 'advancement'."
-------
Well, this is what we're supposed to believe. But, instead, it went more like this: A group of Jewish do-gooders, always looking for means to undermine the hated gentile establishment, figured out a clever way to plant wedges between whites and their aggrieved former slaves. Worried about the work of the educator Booker T. Washington, who was succeeding in convincing thousands of blacks to take the same economic route as those taken by immigrants, instead of raising hell with the white folk in protests and demonstrations, the good Jews dragged W.E.B. Du Bois, a nemesis of Washington, into their newly formed "civil rights" organization, to add credibility to the destruction of Washington and his efforts.

The NAACP was formed for Jewish interests, and only incidentally for anything else.

See:
Booker T. Washington: Legacy Lost
Booker T. Washington: True Believer
and see Marcus Garvey's comment on the NAACP at bottom of this article:
Without Commerce and Industry, The People Perish
And this article will show that, long before slavery was officially over, there were blacks fighting against what the NAACP would eventually succeed in bringing the country big time, i.e., aggrieved, dependent blacks:
The Proper Means of Elevating Ourselves

-- Victoria

Epicurean said...

Yes, it couldn't possibly be that a group of Jewish do-gooders took a look at the American black population and thought "These people could use some 'advancement'."

Well these days if Jewish people want find somebody who could use some 'advancement' they could always take a trip down to Gaza.

Gods save the Palestinians from the kind of "advancement" the Reform Jewish do-gooders forced upon black Americans!

Lucius Vorenus said...

Victoria: ...But I had not connected the dots to the Times' classical music radio station, WQXR, until now. QXR, too, has been my passion since pre-teen days and there's hardly a day of my life when I have not listened to it for a period of time...

Victoria - go here:

http://152.46.7.128:8000/wcpe.mp3

and you will never look back.

Anonymous said...

Headache said...

Don't know about the alphabet media in the US.

PBS, Radio Free Europe, and NPR are state funded. The others are funded by large advertising buys from large corporations like GM, Coca-Cola, Gillette and General Electric. To put it another way Corporate America pays for the left-wing crap on broadcast TV and in the daily paper. Cable TV is partially financed by the viewers.

Here in the States the corporate media and Corporate America are part of the same interlocking complex.

headache said...

Thanks for that info Ronduck,
It took me quite a bit of effort to get out of the fangs of the government media tax here in Germany. They use this money to fund public radio and TV, which is used to suppress patriots and advance multiculturalism, Muslim invasion and destruction of Christian institutions.

You have to basically prove you have no TV, radio or internet. You see, these geniuses figured out that you can even listen to radio and watch TV over the internet, so they tax that too. They even tried taxing cell phones because in the new ones you can do that stuff too. So I bought a cell phone for old folks, you know with large buttons and only text and few features. Now they routinely drive past my flat with antennae and check whether I have a radio or TV running. Since all the public stuff is crap anyway, why would I bother?