The linked article says “the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2019 is a project of the News Media Alliance,” and let’s assume that’s true.
The Alliance’s board of directors includes representatives or executives from the New York Times, Hearst, the Minneapolis Star Tribune, GateHouse Media (owns 150+ small newspapers), the Philadelphia Inquirer, News Corp, Lee Enterprises (45+ daily newspapers), Landmark Community Newspapers, the Los Angeles Times, Community Newspaper Holdings (20+ newspapers), the Washington Post, Dow Jones, McClatchy, Tribune Publishing Company, Gannett, etc.
As a first principle any legislation that the New York Times wants should be opposed, so that’s a good starting point. Here it looks like they want the ability to cartelize with their pals, do a bit of friendly intra-industry price fixing, and then put the screws to “Online Content Distributors” presumably Yahoo, Google, Facebook, etc.
It is possible that federal antitrust laws go too far and, in normal times, the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2019 might be a good idea. But these are not normal times. It would be foolish for so-called conservatives to reward their enemy (and the New York Times has certainly proven itself to be that) with a political giveaway.
How about adding a friendly amendment to Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2019: Its antitrust-exemption benefits flow only to publications that voluntarily agree to stricter libel rules when lies are maliciously directed at a public figure? Like President Trump? Yep, they’re gonna love the New Rules…
The linked article says “the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2019 is a project of the News Media Alliance,” and let’s assume that’s true.
The Alliance’s board of directors includes representatives or executives from the New York Times, Hearst, the Minneapolis Star Tribune, GateHouse Media (owns 150+ small newspapers), the Philadelphia Inquirer, News Corp, Lee Enterprises (45+ daily newspapers), Landmark Community Newspapers, the Los Angeles Times, Community Newspaper Holdings (20+ newspapers), the Washington Post, Dow Jones, McClatchy, Tribune Publishing Company, Gannett, etc.
As a first principle any legislation that the New York Times wants should be opposed, so that’s a good starting point. Here it looks like they want the ability to cartelize with their pals, do a bit of friendly intra-industry price fixing, and then put the screws to “Online Content Distributors” presumably Yahoo, Google, Facebook, etc.
It is possible that federal antitrust laws go too far and, in normal times, the Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2019 might be a good idea. But these are not normal times. It would be foolish for so-called conservatives to reward their enemy (and the New York Times has certainly proven itself to be that) with a political giveaway.
How about adding a friendly amendment to Journalism Competition and Preservation Act of 2019: Its antitrust-exemption benefits flow only to publications that voluntarily agree to stricter libel rules when lies are maliciously directed at a public figure? Like President Trump? Yep, they’re gonna love the New Rules…