7 ms·

Trump tends to frequently call the Washington Post "the Amazon Washington Post." I wonder if this anti-trust scrutiny could be a way to leverage Bezos into toni

Trump tends to frequently call the Washington Post "the Amazon Washington Post." I wonder if this anti-trust scrutiny could be a way to leverage Bezos into toning down WaPo.

R_haterade 9y ago
If it did, that would be bezo's plan in buying the paper backfiring spectacularly.
- bitJericho 9y ago
  Bezos never intended to leave the paper alone. The fact that Wapo abandoned Snowden is evidence of that. Bezos is the biggest liar. Just read any of his company wide emails and you'll see how bad of a liar he is.
  - R_haterade 9y ago
    I ain't even mad. Life is about finding out exactly how much you can get away with.
    - bitJericho 9y ago
      You don't have to destroy everyone around you to have a good time ;)
    - bobthechef 9y ago
      Might makes right!
  - R_haterade 9y ago
    Bezos' plan was always to have a mouthpiece to spout propaganda. Why else invest in a dying medium? Same with Carlos Slim and the NYT. This isn't rocket surgery.
    - komali2 9y ago
      Would the same argument apply to Rupert Murdoch and Fox News?
  - komali2 9y ago
    Can you link to some specific examples that to you demonstrate that Bezos is a liar?
    - bitJericho 9y ago
      For example, when he pretended that he didn't know about the working conditions of the warehouses. He knows exactly what's going on with every detail of the company. He personally oversaw the design of the entire Amazon system, including the warehouse. His letter is absurd on its face. http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-responds-nyt-report-amazon-working-conditions-2015-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-responds-nyt-repor...
SapphireSun 9y ago
The crazy thing is, the deal should be getting scrutiny anyway. This would be Trump doing his job. The thing that should worry us more is the concentration of power of a single individual owning Amazon and the Washington Post represents. Why should a corporate deal affect a newspaper watching out for the interests of the public? It seems insane. That's because it is.
- heartbreak 9y ago
  Well the President is also flat out wrong when he calls it the "Amazon Washington Post" because Amazon doesn't own the Washington Post. Perhaps we should fix the President's blatant misinformation ability before we go preventing someone from founding/buying/inheriting particular businesses.
  - SapphireSun 9y ago
    Jeff is CEO of Amazon and owns the Post. While the President is technically inaccurate, I'm not sure he is de facto inaccurate.
    - mtanski 9y ago
      Facts or accuracy are not a strong suit of the current guy in office. /s Also, he doesn't seam to care much for independent journalism... which WaPo is. Anytime Amazon is discussed in the WaPo, they do mention in interest of disclosure that Jeff Bezos is the owner of WaPo and Amazon. Got karma to burn so why not.
      - striking 9y ago
        > Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - cgy1 9y ago
      Remember Trump also accused Amazon of "not paying internet taxes," so facts are not his strong suit. (Although he is correct only in that there is no such thing as internet taxes)
dajohnson89 9y ago
If you read the article, you'd see that Democrats are the ones pushing for more scrutiny.
- Zigurd 9y ago
  Marcia Fudge, quoted in the article, is also anti-net-neutrality. Minority leaders are often the targets of strategic influence campaigns on issues like net neutrality. It's possible this is a similar situation.
  - dajohnson89 9y ago
    Possibly -- but AFAIK liberals are generally the ones who favour busting up large corporations.
  - JustAnotherPat 9y ago
    link? "In April of 2011, the House voted on a measure to prevent recent FCC rules regarding net neutrality from taking effect. The measure passed 236-174. Marcia Fudge voted against the resolution and therefore approved of the FCC rules regarding net neutrality."
    - Zigurd 9y ago
      https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/newsfromunderground/dvLbQXU1mPs/fK-v95JOLQ8J https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/newsfromunderground/dv... It's possible she was successfully pressured to change her position. My point was more about corporate efforts to drive wedges between Democrats.

Trump tends to frequently call the Washington Post "the Amazon Washington Post." I wonder if this anti-trust scrutiny could be a way to leverage Bezos into toning down WaPo.

R_haterade 9y ago

If it did, that would be bezo's plan in buying the paper backfiring spectacularly.

bitJericho 9y ago
Bezos never intended to leave the paper alone. The fact that Wapo abandoned Snowden is evidence of that. Bezos is the biggest liar. Just read any of his company wide emails and you'll see how bad of a liar he is.
- R_haterade 9y ago
  I ain't even mad. Life is about finding out exactly how much you can get away with.
  - bitJericho 9y ago
    You don't have to destroy everyone around you to have a good time ;)
  - bobthechef 9y ago
    Might makes right!
- R_haterade 9y ago
  Bezos' plan was always to have a mouthpiece to spout propaganda. Why else invest in a dying medium? Same with Carlos Slim and the NYT. This isn't rocket surgery.
  - komali2 9y ago
    Would the same argument apply to Rupert Murdoch and Fox News?
- komali2 9y ago
  Can you link to some specific examples that to you demonstrate that Bezos is a liar?
  - bitJericho 9y ago
    For example, when he pretended that he didn't know about the working conditions of the warehouses. He knows exactly what's going on with every detail of the company. He personally oversaw the design of the entire Amazon system, including the warehouse. His letter is absurd on its face. http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-responds-nyt-report-amazon-working-conditions-2015-8 http://www.businessinsider.com/jeff-bezos-responds-nyt-repor...

SapphireSun 9y ago

The crazy thing is, the deal should be getting scrutiny anyway. This would be Trump doing his job. The thing that should worry us more is the concentration of power of a single individual owning Amazon and the Washington Post represents. Why should a corporate deal affect a newspaper watching out for the interests of the public? It seems insane. That's because it is.

heartbreak 9y ago
Well the President is also flat out wrong when he calls it the "Amazon Washington Post" because Amazon doesn't own the Washington Post. Perhaps we should fix the President's blatant misinformation ability before we go preventing someone from founding/buying/inheriting particular businesses.
- SapphireSun 9y ago
  Jeff is CEO of Amazon and owns the Post. While the President is technically inaccurate, I'm not sure he is de facto inaccurate.
  - mtanski 9y ago
    Facts or accuracy are not a strong suit of the current guy in office. /s Also, he doesn't seam to care much for independent journalism... which WaPo is. Anytime Amazon is discussed in the WaPo, they do mention in interest of disclosure that Jeff Bezos is the owner of WaPo and Amazon. Got karma to burn so why not.
    - striking 9y ago
      > Please don't bait other users by inviting them to downvote you or proclaim that you expect to get downvoted. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
  - cgy1 9y ago
    Remember Trump also accused Amazon of "not paying internet taxes," so facts are not his strong suit. (Although he is correct only in that there is no such thing as internet taxes)

dajohnson89 9y ago

If you read the article, you'd see that Democrats are the ones pushing for more scrutiny.

Zigurd 9y ago
Marcia Fudge, quoted in the article, is also anti-net-neutrality. Minority leaders are often the targets of strategic influence campaigns on issues like net neutrality. It's possible this is a similar situation.
- dajohnson89 9y ago
  Possibly -- but AFAIK liberals are generally the ones who favour busting up large corporations.
- JustAnotherPat 9y ago
  link? "In April of 2011, the House voted on a measure to prevent recent FCC rules regarding net neutrality from taking effect. The measure passed 236-174. Marcia Fudge voted against the resolution and therefore approved of the FCC rules regarding net neutrality."
  - Zigurd 9y ago
    https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/newsfromunderground/dvLbQXU1mPs/fK-v95JOLQ8J https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/newsfromunderground/dv... It's possible she was successfully pressured to change her position. My point was more about corporate efforts to drive wedges between Democrats.