- Nitish Kumar's JD(U) recognised as principal opposition party in Bihar, BJP protests
- SC extends Setalvad's interim bail and asks her lawyer Kapil Sibal not to 'act smart'
- Aero India Show: Stunt planes collide in mid-air, pilots safe
- Swine flu deaths soar to 663, number of cases cross 10,000
- Maratha Mandir brings down curtains on Shah Rukh Khan's DDLJ
'Boston Globe' and 'Washington Post' deals push back against an unhealthy trend in US media
Just when the US media was beginning to look like a depressing combination of Dry Gulch and the Sargasso Sea, with giants like The New York Times groping for a business model, icons like Newsweek vanishing into the ether and lesser mastheads dropping like flies coast to coast, two events have suggested that the US still knows the way. The New York Times sold The Boston Globe to Boston Red Sox owner John W. Henry and The Washington Post accepted a bid from Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. Analysts are a bit bemused, since neither deal makes financial sense.
But it could be that these sales reaffirm an old truth, easily forgotten in the Murdoch era — newspapers are not just about the profit motive. They are also about power, political beliefs, lobbying, activism, community service, even what may loosely be called philanthropy. After the event, it came out that the Globe did not go to the highest bidder. Other interests, including those of the Boston community, were considered. No one except Bezos, who has put up his private money, knows why he wants a paper. Maybe to run a cross-media experiment, maybe to gain influence for Amazon, which many would be happy to pull down a notch. Or maybe it's to save a loss-making icon.