"Amazon Chief's Deal [to buy Washington Post for $250 million] Doesn't Involve Online Retailer but Shows Media Power Shift [to incredibly rich people]"

--Wall Street Journal, owned by another billionaire, Rupert Murdoch

Summary: It seems reasonable to conclude that a weakness in just about every sector is the temptation of pertinent groups or group members to take money from the rich (in exchange for something)

EACH AND EVERY TIME the media is paid -- one way or another -- by a rich stakeholder or corporation (whose financial contribution is considerable) objectivity is necessarily lost, especially when there's possibility for renewal or withdrawal (condition for future payments). For well over a decade we've stressed and repeatedly demonstrated this point with regards to Microsoft and the Gates Foundation. They literally bribe the media, but they shrewdly disguise that as "advertising" or "charity" (or more euphemistically -- "supporting journalism"). This corruption of the media hasn't been sufficient apparently (controlling the narratives), so nowadays they also bribe the competition, including the Linux Foundation and OSI. How to best tackle this? Probably call them out and shun them. They're becoming tools of Microsoft occupation. They help Microsoft hijack the competition's voice. Don't let them become our voice.

The situation isn't unique to technology. Earlier this morning we named IP Kat as an example. It's part of the general rot of journalism; it's becoming an extension of the PR industry. ⬆