Showing posts with label Rupert Murdoch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rupert Murdoch. Show all posts

Saturday, October 13, 2007

The Sam Zell prescription

Of interest to the curious media freak:

Sam Zell, native Chicagoan, Real Estate god, philanthropist, may be exactly what Chicago media and media in general need, or he may be Rupert Murdoch for the Windy City.
Even in Chicago people are unfamiliar with the wealthy founder of Equity Group Investments. Indeed, unlike the ostentatious Murdoch, Zell's takeover of one of the largest newspaper companies in the United States has been relatively quiet. He's really only a tiny blip on the radar for anyone outside the real estate business (of which he is a major player) but he does have a record of generous donations to the University of Pennsylvania's Wharton School and Michigan's Ross School of Business. Make no mistake though, he's serious, and determined. About six months ago I heard him speak at the University of Missouri. Once Zell got the stage he scooped up all the attention in the room, going right into his theories, and opinions on the Real Estate market and the state of Real Estate. I didn't understand all of it but I could see that when cut-throat tactics were necessary, Zell didn't flinch. This is unremarkable for successful businessmen today. The unusual part of Zell is his purchase of Tribune Company in a time when the newspaper business isn't exactly a gold mine. Especially because he has no newspaper or media experience.
Zell's initial approach to Tribune Co., the owner of the L.A. Times and the Chicago Tribune, among others, was met with the usual hostility and hesitant attention. The Chandler family, the owners of Tribune, and one of the four great newspaper steward families would really only give Zell their time if he offered something good, but they were receptive. After a great deal of negotiating, Zell won the family over and completed a buyout deal of Tribune Co. for $8.2 billion (Murdoch's takeover of Dow Jones was $6 billion). Despite a considerable drop in Tribune Company's stock value, Zell hasn't paused once in his decision to buy Tribune.
"I believe Tribune Company is reasserting itself as a national leader in news generation and distribution," Zell said in a statement.
To journalists and journalism critics (including Write No Evil) Zell's sudden media interest has been met with rolled eyes. Another bored billionaire who thinks it might be fun to own a newspaper? This won't end well.
Well, maybe. Actually, the Tribune and the Times haven't exactly been in excellent hands pre-Zell. Tribune and all its newspaper and media holdings have been governed by the Chandler family, which has been itching to escape difficult times in the journalism world and highly business oriented governing shareholders. Ken Auletta's article on the L.A. Times largely revealed the paper's problems coming from demands from Tribune Co. to turn a profit, whatever the cost. The costs have been pretty high, including a considerable portion of the Times' excellent newsroom -including magnificent editor Dean Baquet's- jobs. The paper has also reduced its foreign bureaus and minimized its distribution of the California area. All this thinning is partially from Tribune's demand to turn a profit, and a higher one than the last year. It's also a pride thing though. Corporate leadership at Tribune also feels that anything the Times can do, the Tribune should be able to do, and better. Thus the stripping of the Times' resources.
Zell's coming is actually reminiscent of another time of journalism. A time when the wealthy felt a calling to give back and serve the public. Katharine Graham, of the Graham family which owns The Washington Post Company wrote in her book Personal History about her father's calling to give back to the public:
In line with my father's "map of life," the time was right for him to turn his attention to public service...Even in the announcement about his ownership, there were several key statements that proved to be the underpinnings of Eugene Meyer's Post. It was his aim to improve the paper, and he would do so by making it an independent voice.

This is just one example of the good old days when not only was there a great profit in newspapers but also a greater respect of the role they played among the public. The same kind of calling that "Pinch" Sulzberger's ancestors and the Bancroft family's progenitors felt in owning the New York Times and Wall Street Journal. Today newspapers aren't as profitable, some say they aren't at all -actually they are but shareholders demand a higher profit every year. So Zell's interest may not be in making money here. It may be a wonderful desire to support a historical newspaper in his native city.
Don't get too excited though. Word on the street is that when he visited the Times office he berated the paper for too much attention on foreign news. Zell is either no journalism saint or still new to the craft. Zell reportedly plans to sell the Chicago Cubs and a quarter of Tribune's ownership of Comcast SportsNet. He hasn't mentioned any plans to cut jobs. Zell's deal doesn't go into effect until later this year so it's yet to be seen what he does with the newspaper giant. It could be worse actually. Zell is a Chicagoan with no good fiscal reason for buying Tribune Co. He has a history of giving to excellent academic institutions and both the Republican and Democratic parties, which although it doesn't show strict objectivity, demonstrates a level of bipartisanship. He also hasn't mentioned any plans of putting pictures of naked women in the news section -a step above Murdoch.

Sunday, May 6, 2007

Missed the Boat

Thomson Corp. and Rupert Murdoch came, they saw, but will they conquer?
This last week saw both Thomson Corporation, an information company, and Rupert Murdoch, owner of News Corporation, bid for ownership of the Reuters PLC which owns the Reuters newswire service and Dow Jones Co. which would include its financial newswire service Dow Jones Newswires and The Wall Street Journal. Both are sizable bids, Thomson's is over $16 billion and Murdoch's bid is $5 billion. Neither bid is entirely good news as it means two more major publicly traded news companies would come under control of a few people (Thomson Corp is run and owned by the wealthy Canadian Thomson family) or even one person (Rupert Murdoch, the Darth Vader of the news industry), increasing the commonality for partisan news and a media mainly interested in entertainment and profit. Both The Wall Street Journal and Reuters carry a long history of strong, ethical reporting with as few blemishes as possible. Reuters is one of the oldest newswires in the world (the oldest being the French Agence France-Presse) and the Journal is one of the oldest financial newspapers in the world. Both are major players in their field, the Journal being the most widely circulated newspaper in the U.S. and Reuters having been the largest financial newswire in the world until recently -Bloomberg LP currently holds the number one spot.
Under the circumstances though, the situation couldn't be better. While the majority shareholders of Dow Jones, the Bancroft family, along with former publisher Jim Ottoway jr., and the Journal newsroom all passionately oppose the governance of a media overlord infamous for implementing his opinion in a field ideally devoid of opinion, Reuters officials are in peaceful negotiations with Thomson about combining. This is unsurprising, Murdoch is the leader of an empire of misinformation news and Thomson Co. is an information company with a history of owning the premiere method of getting news. At one time it owned a number of newspapers and broadcast news channels, but now, under Kenneth Thompson -the son of Thomson Co.'s founder- the information conglomerate has shifted to financial services among other things. The appeal of Reuters to Thomson Co. seems obvious. Murdoch's lust for Dow Jones is similar, he seeks to gain its financial news service which completes the triad of major competitors in the financial news industry alongside Reuters and Bloomberg. But Murdoch has also eyed the Journal longingly for some time now.
It's hard to say whether the Thomson Reuters union is for the best. Reuters recently survived a disastrous period of poor investments and decline that helped open up the market for Bloomberg. Joining forces with Thomson might prove beneficial. Thomson Co.'s field is not far off from Reuters, its clients are different though. Thomson's data is usually used by institutional investors buying securities while Reuter's information is bought by brokers and sellers.
Still, many financial professionals and Wall Street employees prefer to hear from multiple news services and less competition means less sides to voice an opinion. But accuracy in financial news is probably far more financially valuable than other news fields so that may not prove problematic.
Murdoch's bid is an entirely different story. The reason there is so much opposition of acquisition by Murdoch on Dow Jones' part is because Murdoch is widely regarded as a partisan fop fumbling his ownerships and ruining world wide news (News Corp owns Fox and all its affiliates). Why should The Wall Street Journal, praised by both liberals and conservatives for being a highly objective newspaper, want to taint that record in a day and age where objectivity is such a rare sight?
Murdoch's timing demonstrates his incompetency. His bid comes not long after real estate mogul Sam Zell, who is completely inexperienced in newspaper ownership, bought Tribune Company which owns major newspapers like the Chicago Tribune and the Los Angeles Times and plans to increase its revenue by firing a portion of the Tribune newsroom. So when the Journal newsroom sees an probably damaging owner enter the game and then see the same thing coming their way, it's no surprise that they would resist.
In the past, newspapers and news sources were commonly owned by publishers or editors-in-chief. Today it's whoever feels like adding a newspaper to his or her collection of businesses. Hopefully Dow Jones will successfully stave off Murdoch. As for Reuters, may the best outcome occur.