Comments about ‘Did liberal politics play a role in sale of the Boston Globe?’

Return to article »

Published: Tuesday, Aug. 6 2013 6:31 a.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
Larceny
Rural Hall, USA, NC

I hope they sue, I really do. That is unacceptable in todays economy to leave money like that on the table. It is insulting, and shows total lack of respect for all involved. If I were a very, very unlucky shareholder in said company, I would want to sue.

A company that is stupid enough to leave 180M+ on the table deserves to be turned on its head and shaken til nothing is left!

SCfan
clearfield, UT

Funny isn't it. Most journalists will claim no political influence in their organization be it print or broadcast. Yet when the threat of some "conservative" influence comes along they cry foul. However, if someone like George Soros bought the paper, no one would worry about the "liberal" influence one bit.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

I guess there couldn't be any other reason but liberal hit job right like say they decided to go with a guy that bought it is from the Boston area and shown a commitment to the local community rather then someone from LA with no other ties to Boston? no its got to be those horrible liberals.

George
New York, NY

Funny how quickly conservatives who always cmplain about sue happy people turn sue happy the second they think they may have been slighted.

2 bits
Cottonwood Heights, UT

SCfan,
You hit on the point I was going to make. It doesn't matter to the vocal leftists when George Soros or Ariana Huffington own news outlets. And of course there's totally no liberal bias in America's network news anyway, BUT... if a news organization is about to fall into Conservative hands... it's a huge problem? If the organization had no bias... then why is it so huge that it may be owned by a Conservative owner?

The news report I watched this morning mentioned that Warren Buffett (well known investor and Democrat) owns dozens of news papers. If the guy from Amazon.com owns one... it's a travesty. But Warren Buffet owning dozones... ho-hum no big deal...

I think it's only natural for people in a news organization to have biases. I don't know any human being that hasn't acquired biases from their life experiences. The question is... can they put their natural biases aside and report objectivley when doing their job? Most can. Some notable example can't.

People with huge biases seem to gravitate to MSNBC, Huffington Post, MoreOnDotOrg, etc. And that's OK.

FreedomFighter41
Provo, UT

Free market means that it can be sold to whoever they want. Sounds like repubs are wanting to circumvent the free market.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

Look how noble some people are when they approve stealing $180,000,000 from the stockholders of the Boston Globe. They problably see nothing wrong with the government wanting to take over Apple for 10 years just as they see nothing wrong with cheating the owners (stockholders) of the Boston Globe of the money that was offered - and rejected. But, those people who approve of loosing $180 million are not concerned because it's not their money. They're not at risk. That money belongs to some "rich guys" who should be stripped of all their money so that lazy citizens can sit back and enjoy life - at someone else's expense.

Hutterite
American Fork, UT

Shouldn't the shareholders be taking someone to task instead of the court of conservative victimhood?

LDS Liberal
Farmington, UT

Ah yes, yet another "Conspiracy Theory".
or should I say, "Conservative Theory"?

joe5
South Jordan, UT

Interesting how perspectives change. If a conservative had sold at a lower price to a conservative, i have no doubt Tolstoy, George, FreedomFighter, et al would be leading the way in decrying such an action. Equally, I have no doubt larceny, SCFan, et al would be championing the owners right to see to whoever he wants.

This is the problem in our political environment today. Nobody has any real convictions of right and wrong. We just have convenient attitudes that are completely dependent on party politics. And despite the fact that our attitudes are floating "with every wind of doctrine," we carry absolute intolerance for those who don't see it exactly the way we do.

What a mess we are in. As a nation, we are fractured - in my opinion, beyond repair. As our children and their children continue to swirl in this eddy that will lead to ultimate destruction, we can at least have the satisfaction of knowing we did it to them because we each view ourselves as omniscient gods and close our ears and hearts to any who disagree.

J Thompson
SPRINGVILLE, UT

A quick search on fiduciary responsibility showed: "The courts stringently examine transactions between people involved in fiduciary relationships toward one another. Particular scrutiny is placed upon any transaction by which a dominant individual obtains any advantage or profit at the expense of the party under his or her influence. Such transaction, in which Undue Influence of the fiduciary can be established, is void."

Some posters have told us that people who own a company should, in effect, just sit back and "take it" when they lose $180 million. If they were offered $50,000 for their house or $500,000, which offer do you think they would take?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I doubt if any of them work for $1 per year to improve the world. I doubt that any of them give fistfuls of money to anyone who askes, but they see nothing wrong with giving other people's money away.

Before this wrings out, don't be surprized if several people are exposed for acting in their own interests and not in the interests of the owners of that newspaper.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

Mike Richards

So IF it turns out to be anything more then sour grapes and that they did take a lower bid how exactly do you propose it be resolved? Should people turn to the courts (government) and sue? Should the government step in and fine them? or should the market decide?

the old switcharoo
mesa, AZ

The sale would have had to be approved by the board of directors who represent the shareholders. Again a conservative conspiracy scare that amounts to nothing.

" if - then" statements are all you have to go on, no facts or even sense. Shameful.

George
New York, NY

@Joe
You may not have doubts but you would still be wrong. I would be shocked if Fox News, lets say, ever decided to sale if they allowed it to fall into the hands of liberals no matter the bid.

Wally West
SLC, UT

I recall concerns when Murdoch acquired the Wall St Journal. That has turned out to be much ado about nothing.

Bezos is a capitalist success story and people moan about his political leanings.

Ask a Miami Marlins fan about Henry's business acumen.

Mike Richards
South Jordan, Utah

@Tolstoy,

When fraud is committed (and fiduciary irresponsibility can easily be shown as defrauding the owners of the gains that would have been seen if the fiduciary had done his job properly), then the court is the proper place to solve that problem. Why do you think that there are lawyers? Aren't they there to protect us from being taken advantage of by those who (appear) to have had a higher duty towards the new buyer than they had to the owners of that newspaper?

Perhaps the best way to solve this problem is to have the fiduciary pay the difference between the price that would have been offered and the price accepted from his own pocket, then the Boston Globe will be owned by someone from Boston and the owners will be paid what they deserve.

CHS 85
Sandy, UT

What's it like to see conspiracies in everything?

joe5
South Jordan, UT

George: So let me get this straight. I'm wrong because ... well, because you would be shocked. No data to support your position. Just you own assumption of your infallibility in knowing that would be the case.

Interesting way to prove my point. Thanks for driving it home.

Tolstoy
salt lake, UT

@mike richards

Here is the thing Mike. IF it turns out that they did sale the globe to a lower bidder then I do not disagree that stock holders should be allowed to avail themselves to the courts. My problem is once again with your relative morality and ethics that seem o constantly drift in the wind. You are one of those that are always decrying government intrusions and people that turn tot he courts when they don't get their way.

George
New York, NY

@joe

I think you see what you want to see Joe. I would be shocked not because I think fox new is some evil entity but because why would they sale to a company that is going to completely change the brand they built? You seem to believe that you have this ability to see evil intent in everyone else yet you are blind to your own assumptions and a belief in your own moral superiority to the rest of us.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments