Some Good News and Some Bad News
First the good news: According to the Los Angeles Times and the New York Times — both of which cover the Tribune better than the Tribune covers the Tribune — it now appears likely that the Tribune will split its broadcast division away from its newspaper division and sell the broadcast arm to someone else.
According to the LA Times, the Chicago Cubs are part of the broadcast division.
That could mean a newspaper free of its unethical alliance with a baseball team, as well as a break in the newspaper-tv-radio media monopoly that smothers Chicago with mediocrity.
Chances are a new owner for WGN won't be much more colorful or imaginative than Tribune, but at least it will be someone other than Tribune.
Now the bad news: Under this scenario, WGN's unethical alliance with the Cubs would continue, and we really have no assurance that anything substantive would change. After 25 years of collusion between the Tribune and Cubs, can we really expect the newsroom culture to change? Not without a purge. Old habits die hard, and we're talking about a group of people fanatically committed to publicly promoting their strange attitudes as reality.
We would rather see the whole corporation split apart, purged of its unethical tendencies, and rebuilt under new ownership. But that scenario looks unlikely now, and we'll take what we can get.
Also, we can't be certain the Cubs will go with the broadcast stations. The New York Times seems to be under the impression that even if the broadcast division is split off from the newspaper division, the Cubs will go with the newspapers. That's probably because the profitable Cubs could help offset the shrinking value of the newspapers. Yep, dupes and drunks in Wrigleyville, now subsizing "journalism."
According to the LA Times, the Chicago Cubs are part of the broadcast division.
That could mean a newspaper free of its unethical alliance with a baseball team, as well as a break in the newspaper-tv-radio media monopoly that smothers Chicago with mediocrity.
Chances are a new owner for WGN won't be much more colorful or imaginative than Tribune, but at least it will be someone other than Tribune.
Now the bad news: Under this scenario, WGN's unethical alliance with the Cubs would continue, and we really have no assurance that anything substantive would change. After 25 years of collusion between the Tribune and Cubs, can we really expect the newsroom culture to change? Not without a purge. Old habits die hard, and we're talking about a group of people fanatically committed to publicly promoting their strange attitudes as reality.
We would rather see the whole corporation split apart, purged of its unethical tendencies, and rebuilt under new ownership. But that scenario looks unlikely now, and we'll take what we can get.
Also, we can't be certain the Cubs will go with the broadcast stations. The New York Times seems to be under the impression that even if the broadcast division is split off from the newspaper division, the Cubs will go with the newspapers. That's probably because the profitable Cubs could help offset the shrinking value of the newspapers. Yep, dupes and drunks in Wrigleyville, now subsizing "journalism."
Labels: Chicago Tribune, Tribune Company, WGN
posted by Chicago Cubune Watch permalink
