Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

dixiegrrrrl

(60,010 posts)
Sat Jan 9, 2016, 04:54 PM Jan 2016

Nevada's largest newspaper was sold, paper's own staff not allowed to know who owns it.

This is a remarkable story, beginning Dec. 11th.

The gist: The Las Vegas Review Journal was sold this week for a weirdly inflated price to a company whose backers remained “undisclosed.”
It’s the largest newspaper in the state. Nevada is an early primary state: fourth-in-the-nation.

All the publisher would tell the staff is “They want you to focus on your jobs … don’t worry about who they are,”


So the paper's reporters started digging to find out who their mystery owner was, and why he/she did not want to be identified,
and why they had paid 3 TIMES the value of the paper.

And this happened:
The journalists at the Las Vegas Review-Journal did their jobs, and found out who bought the paper.
Their colleagues around the country were watching and cheered them on. Killer quote: “No matter who owns the Review-Journal,
they don’t own us.”


I will leave you to guess, and go to the blog link to find out.
the implications are grim.

http://tinyurl.com/j7x7fot

On edit.....finding the owner is only half the story, it gets better and better as time goes on, you will want to read it all.
This is All the President's Men stuff.



7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Nevada's largest newspaper was sold, paper's own staff not allowed to know who owns it. (Original Post) dixiegrrrrl Jan 2016 OP
Kinda old news,we already suspected it was Sheldon Aldeson. Wellstone ruled Jan 2016 #1
I thought the Connecticut and the Macau connection was very interesting. n/t dixiegrrrrl Jan 2016 #2
Yes it was to say the least. Wellstone ruled Jan 2016 #6
Thanks. Should be interesting read Liberal_in_LA Jan 2016 #3
In fairness, by definition freedom of speech includes the right to be silent . . . Journeyman Jan 2016 #4
What a fascinating tidbit..... dixiegrrrrl Jan 2016 #5
Completely legal. This is just a single instance of how ruthlessly political Mr Lincoln was . . . Journeyman Jan 2016 #7
 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
1. Kinda old news,we already suspected it was Sheldon Aldeson.
Sat Jan 9, 2016, 05:48 PM
Jan 2016

And old Shelly has already gone through three Editors and or operating Mangers. Got to hand it to the News People,they are not caving in,although their focus of this paper is still Right Wing.

 

Wellstone ruled

(34,661 posts)
6. Yes it was to say the least.
Sat Jan 9, 2016, 07:40 PM
Jan 2016

Adleson is a real piece of work. Waiting for stories from his free Israel News Rag to be reprinted on the RJ. Amazing how people with more money than they will ever need,use it to punish others with out money through Political means.

Journeyman

(15,024 posts)
4. In fairness, by definition freedom of speech includes the right to be silent . . .
Sat Jan 9, 2016, 06:02 PM
Jan 2016

Abraham Lincoln bought controlling interest in a newspaper in the late 1850s, the Illinois Staats-Anzeiger, but kept his involvement a closely held secret for years. He used the newspaper to cull support from the large German population across the mid-West (the West, at that time), directing the Editor to write editorials extolling his character and intent, articles which were then picked up by other German newspapers across the country. Mr Lincoln handily carried the German vote in 1860, after which he quietly divested himself of the newspaper.

Not completely analogous to the current situation in Nevada, and not something I care to see happening (especially given our limited options for news these days), but something I wanted to throw out as historical background.

Journeyman

(15,024 posts)
7. Completely legal. This is just a single instance of how ruthlessly political Mr Lincoln was . . .
Sun Jan 10, 2016, 05:38 AM
Jan 2016

Whenever I hear that "so and so is having troubles getting such and such done," or that "if it weren't for the obstruction of this and that then so much more could be accomplished," I reflect on the examples Mr Lincoln gives, as well as those of the Roosevelt cousins, or James Madison, or even Lyndon Johnson, and realize that most political goals are within reach given the proper persuasion.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Nevada's largest newspape...