Jeff Bezos Buys the Washington Post

schwit1 writes with word that Jeff Bezos decided to buy a news paper. Quoting the Washington Post: "The Washington Post Co. has agreed to sell its flagship newspaper to Amazon.com founder and chief executive Jeffrey P. Bezos, ending the Graham family's stewardship of one of America's leading news organizations after four generations. Bezos, whose entrepreneurship has made him one of the world's richest men, will pay $250 million in cash for The Post and affiliated publications to the Washington Post Co., which owns the newspaper and other businesses. Seattle-based Amazon will have no role in the purchase; Bezos himself will buy the news organization and become its sole owner when the sale is completed, probably within 60 days. The Post Co. will change to a new, still-undecided name and continue as a publicly traded company without The Post thereafter." The WaPo Labs team (including CmdrTaco) were not part of the deal, but from the sound of it they will remain part of The Post Co. and haven't been axed.

Comments

Obligatory:

[Anonymous Coward]

"I think it would be fun to run a newspaper"--Charles Foster Kane

Haha, poor Taco

[Anonymous Coward]

"Woohoo! I'm going to work at Amazon! Free Prime!"

"So, wait, what, it's not Amazon? Just the owner of Amazon? Okay! Still pretty great!"

"Ummm... guys... it says he's not buying us... we're just left to rot here on the carcass. Anyone known any good jobs sites?"

Shipping.

[harrkev]

He paid more than $25 for the newspaper. I hope he got free shipping.

Re:Shipping.

[Highland Deck Box]

I heard the purchase price was $247 million, but he bought $3 million worth of pens to qualify for super saver delivery.

Re:Shipping.

[symbolset]

More likely his teen son borrowed dad's iPad that was logged into Amazon.com and accidentally bought the whole newpaper while trying to look up what a "newspaper" was due to the whole one-click thing. I guess that sort of thing happens. After a stern talking to the teen will probably be sentenced to trying to turn a profit on the purchase as an object lesson to be careful touching around on dad's tablet.

Re:Shipping.

[c4tp]

And each edition will arrive 10 days later than he would have liked.

good for journalism

[globaljustin]

The Post has been lagging for years and is often accused of a neo-con bias.

Once it was on par with the New York Times as a 'national newspaper of record' but since the 2000s it has been more like the Wall Street Journal.

I think this sale will be good for journalism because Bezos will bring fresh hype and generate discussion of media ownership and what defines a 'profitable' newspaper. Bezos has shown to have the capacity to see past the horizons that usually limit tech companies...even 'innovative' ones like Apple.

For me Amazon always works. Their mp3's have always had non-DRM options. Amazon EC2 is expensive for what you get but it's legit.

Re:good for journalism

[icebike]

He's keeping the same Chief Editor, so its not clear to me how much it will change.

I expect him to make it free on Kindle. Seems like a long way to go to get content.

Re:good for journalism

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does it seem everyone forgets what was legally available before Apple started iTunes? Apple's biggest contribution wasn't that they have music available. It was that they finally convinced/forced the major music conglomerates to license the music for a sensible price, with sensible DRM, on a per song basis.

Before that you had the pirate mp3 sites and file-sharing programs at one end of the spectrum, and overpriced offerings with horrendous DRM from the publishing houses at the other end. That included physical CDs with rootkits.

The other aspect of iTunes I don't see anymore is that a large fraction of the sale price of a song goes directly to the artist. Before this, they were lucky to get pennies per song, with no way to verify numbers sold.

I don't even use iTunes, or digital music hardly at all. I've only recently added some of my CDs to my smartphone, and that only because my car stereo is broken. But I can remember all the praise for Apple when they broke the music industry's death grip on digital distribution.

Posting AC because I have probably offended someone here, and don't need the grief that brings.

Re:good for journalism

[datavirtue]

Simple. Bezos answers to Bezos and Amazon answers to stock holders. Now Bezos can easily afford the post, float the content to Amazon (which enriches him as well, since he owns part of it) and the stockholders and pundits have nothing but good things to say about the whole thing. I would have done the same thing. Had he purchased it with Amazon money a whole freaking slurry of controversy and weeks of discussions would have ensued among various stakeholders and finance media. Who wants that? This may be a result of the trend of the stock market acting short-term. It is much easier for Bezos to purchase it and "sell" the content to Amazon than it would be to field the angst over Amazon purchasing it and trying to monetize it.

Re:good for journalism

[phantomfive]

He will keep the same editor as long as he writes what Bezos likes... Well, that is the way Murdoch does it.

Murdoch's strategy is to provide content that draws in the masses. Fox News is conservative because he thought he could make a profit on it that way. If you look at Murdoch's political beliefs, in general he seems more liberal (he believes in Climate Change, for example).

In short, Murdoch tells his people to write what makes money. Not what is right. And that's exactly what, for example, Bill O'Reilly does.

Re:good for journalism

[readin]

The Post may lean left less than it used to on international affairs, but it is still very far to the left on everything else and is hardly comparable to the Wall Street Journal which actually leans right on most things. As a conservative I long ago learned to live with the fact that most of the news media leaned left. The WP did so, but at least seemed to make an effort to focus on the reporting rather than the propaganda. However their reporting on illegal immigration seemed so deliberately dishonest and manipulative that I was glad to cancel my subscription.

Re:good for journalism

[cusco]

NY Times is liberal? Not in my lifetime (52 years).

The Washington Post, the NYT, and the rest of the major news sources bend over backwards to not piss off the PTB and jeopardize their access. The NYT was one of the first to 'embed' (more like 'in bed') reporters with military units in exchange for printing Pentagon news releases unedited as "news stories". They regularly print CIA disinformation in exchange for "exclusive" interviews with important politicians (a practice which is entirely illegal when the propaganda is directed at US citizens, BTW). Project Mockingbird was headquartered at the Washington Post, and counted its largest membership at the NYT.

They are occasionally guilty of printing the truth on controversial topics like AGW and international money laundering, and I suppose that could be seen as liberal. It's too bad you've swallowed the neocon bait hook, line and sinker. Hopefully you're less gullible on other topics.

I remember

[djupedal]

...when newspapers feared the rise of the internet. Now we have all the new money buying one outright. Is Jeff going to keep it going out of nostalgia or dig a hole and give it a quiet burial out of regard for the old guard? Or will it become his personal editorial platform...

Reasons to buy any newspaper:
- Foreign bureau access
- Subscriber base
- Political posture
- Brain trust
- Support a specific community
- Keep a tradition going
- Take control of an adversary or adversarial outlet

I'm going with the political angle on this one...

Re:I remember

[SavvyPlayer]

Three more reasons for Jeff to buy any newspaper:

  - Augment the Prime program with new premium content.
  - New (free or free w/Prime) content for Kindle
  - Show NYT and WSJ how to properly model a digital subscription program as they have clearly not yet figured out just how overpriced they are for a nearly zero-overhead distribution medium.

Editorials

[ebno-10db]

Expect lots of pro-H1B editorials. No wait, they already have those.

Could be worse - at least it's not Murdoch.

I choose not to be cynical

[goldcd]

The first batch of internet-made billionaires seem to be a reasonable nice bunch (by which I can only mean agree with my ideals).
They made more money than they knew what to do with, and quite a few of them have decided to take that wad and make a mark on the world with it.
I have no f'in idea if Elon will die on Mars, if Bill will eradicate Malaria, or if Jeff can generate unique editorial content to shape his country - but there's a little part of me that's just screaming 'yes'. He's not done it to make money, he's done it because he wants to - god knows, but I want to see what happens when journalists have a platform, the prestige and a backer with large piles of fuck-you-world money.
I just have a feeling that this is a bigger deal than Murdoch buying MySpace for twice the money.

Re:the end of journalism. see All the President's

[Anonymous Coward]

"the only reason that we ever found out about Nixon abusing the FBI to persecute his political opponents was because the Washington Post owners were willing to challenge the government."

Too bad they only do this when a republican is in the white house.

Coming Soon!

[msobkow]

One-click micro-transaction articles. :P

Re:Read a newspaper for yesterday's news

[R3d M3rcury]

If you want instant, as it happens [...]

Fortunately, "instant, as it happens" is frequently inaccurate and generally a waste of time.

I'm not in Venice, CA. No one I know is in Venice, CA. So I don't really need "instant, as it happens" information on things that happen in Venice, CA. I can certainly wait until the next day to find out what happened. I'd rather have accurate information the next day than misinformation now.

$250M

[malacandrian]

He paid $250M? Doesn't he know it's only $1.99 on Kindle?

Re: $250M

[Chris Mattern]

The Washington Post isn't available on Kindle, but it is available on the iPad

I expect that will change. Quickly.

Missing Option

[SteveFoerster]

I'm going with the political angle on this one...

I don't think so. I think the sales of the Boston Globe and the Washington Post this week show that old guard newspapers are now conspicuous consumption options for the super rich.

Bezos might drag Washington Post into the 20th Cen

[leftie]

They'll fight being dragged out their New Guilded Age kicking and screaming the whole way.

Content for the Kindle

[Virtucon]

All with Amazon branding to boot for a mere $250 mil. With the Boston Globe just getting sold for $70M it seems as though Newspapers are cheap enough.

Now Bezos can pump the WP articles onto Kindles royalty free. It's a bit of a shame though, I do like the WP and had a subscription when I lived in DC.

Wash. Post will have Amazon-quality communication?

[Futurepower(R)]

If you would like to know what sort of communicator Jeff Bezos is, look at Amazon.com. It's an annoying mess.

But maybe Jeff Bezos has a plan? No: Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos Buys Washington Post for $250 Million. Quote: "I don't want to imply that I have a worked-out plan, ..."

I joked with my wife about her criticism of me for buying something at a dollar store for $1 without a good plan of how I would use it.

Something about being a billionaire makes people crazy. I guess it's because they have no friends, or they think everyone wants to be with them because of their money.

Another quote from Bezos: "This will be uncharted terrain and it will require experimentation."

It's a sad, sad day for the employees at the Washington Post. It's a sad, sad day for the United States. I love the U.S., and I'm sad.

Better than nothing

[SuperKendall]

I'm not sad. I'm interested to see what form the experimentation will take.

Basically any kind of unplanned seat of the pants experimenting is superior to the existing newspaper plan of trying to have the ship grind down the iceburg until they can pass through.

Re:Better than nothing

[MightyYar]

A few years ago when the Times bought the Boston Globe a friend and I mused that they could probably give every subscriber an e-reader that updates on a cellular network and/or WiFi and dispense with the dead tree stuff altogether. Of course, old people and some old-at-heart young people still love dead trees, so you sell your press operations with a long-term leaseback on the capacity. If you really execute well, you could even have had a repository for other published works on the same e-reader, and you could make a killing selling people content on their "free" tablet.

The thing that I find amazing is that Bezos is the one to launch a successful e-reader, and he did it the hard way! No subscription base to start from, no content to sell initially. Bezos had to convince people to buy the damn things at or above cost, not get them for free with a subscription they were already paying for. He had some huge disadvantages, but he wasn't stuck in the dark ages, and new he is buying the newspapers with his pocket change... just for his amusement. Adapt or die, indeed.

Re:Read a newspaper for yesterday's news

[MightyYar]

Yes, I think I agree. While I have the same impulse as any other human to want to know what the hell is going on right now, I have come to realize that I'm probably getting dumber by watching "real-time coverage". Unless the event is happening near me, I probably don't need to know until they get it all sorted out. The Boston bombing coverage was just... awful. CNN kept reporting that they had suspects in custody and whatnot and then retracting it. Terrible.

Better than nothing, but not nearly enough.

[Futurepower(R)]

"I'm interested to see what form the experimentation will take."

In my opinion, that does not show sufficient insight into the real challenges.

Jeff Bezos had an idea of selling books on the internet. He hired some people to write the software. He was excellent at believing fully in the idea and doing whatever it took to make it a success. He got enormous benefits from being first. But, that is basically all.

Managing world communications is extremely different. It is necessary to manage the people. It is necessary to appeal to reporters and know how to avoid their excesses. Every writer needs editors. Those editors must have an enormous amount of social insight. Both reporters and editors must be fascinated with the way the world works.

And there are far bigger challenges. A newspaper requires deep, detailed understanding of the world around us. Jeff Bezos does not have sufficient social sophistication. He has never managed anything as complicated as a communication company producing stories throughout the world.

For example, is the present Al Qaeda alert an attempt by people in the U.S. government to sell citizens on the NSA? Why does the media talk about Snowden rather than try to understand if the NSA is doing other things that are being hidden from citizens?

Who will run for president in the next election? It is necessary to start building relationships now.

How does a newspaper manager interest U.S. citizens more in the workings of the U.S. government? Many stories about politics are poorly written and focus on less important issues. What can be done about that?

In my opinion, Jeff Bezos has never shown the kind of abilities that are required.

Re:Better than nothing, but not nearly enough.

[cusco]

Are you under the impression that he's buying the company without its staff? Yes, a newspaper needs reporters and editors and printers. Guess what? The Washington Post already has those things!

Have you looked at the state of modern "journalism" in the US? It's a travesty, worse than the official government newspapers of many countries, today's "journalists" are essentially stenographers for the PTB. In many cases what is printed is nothing more than a slightly re-worded version of the official press release. In some cases they don't even bother with a re-write, and yes, I'm referring to "articles" printed in the Washington Post, New York Times, LA Times and Chicago Tribune. (Still better than the "news stories" written, recorded, and distributed free of charge by industry and government organizations and broadcast on cable TV, but not much.)

Bezos lacks an understanding of how the world works? What planet are you living on? Here on Earth his company has operations in over 80 countries, is at the leading edge of the cloud computing revolution, has created several different markets for goods and services that never previously existed, has a logistics system that spans the planet, and generates more profit than the tax revenue of most countries.

You object that newspaper owners need to do things like get people interested in how the government works, reveal the reasons for the official spin on certain stories, and the like. Good points, but the CURRENT ownership isn't doing any of those things, and in fact has a history of cooperating with propaganda operations against US citizens dating back to the 1950s. Don't forget that Phil Graham freaking **RAN** the Project Mockingbird for the CIA.

All in all, I don't think that Bezos can do a worse job of running the Post than the Grahams currently are doing. At worst he might bankrupt it a few years earlier, at best he might make it into the sort of newspaper it always claimed to be.

Re:Read a newspaper for yesterday's news

[TheLink]

Even on Slashdot many people post before reading or researching anything ;).

And it's not like the editors make submissions more accurate - sometimes it seems as if they add errors to get more useless posts.

Re:Matter of Perspective:

[cusco]

I start out assuming that the truth should be the goal of journalists. Perhaps naive of me, I know, but that's my own bias. The simple fact that the truth about most problems our society faces today is only faced by liberals, while conservatives either ignore or deny them, is a serious issue. If journalists were more concerned about publishing the truth rather than currying favor with the powerful we would see a lot more discussion on the issues.

Re:Matter of Perspective:

[Hartree]

You're assuming that your own perspective is "the truth". I don't even assume that about myself. I've seen myself be disastrously wrong too many times.

However, if you have a direct line into some incontrovertible source of truth, that's great. I hope it serves you well.

Sadly, though, the fundies think they are tuned in to "the truth" as well. I don't think they are right.

Bezos may want the delivery system

[OurDailyFred]

We know that Amazon has been looking for a way to have urban same day delivery for some purchases. Who has a somewhat efficient same day delivery system already in place? Newspapers do, and their equipment and certain systems may be adaptable to a system for delivering parcels at other times, or perhaps even in conjunction with dropping off the bales of papers and putting parcels in a secure facility at the same time.

The same-day delivery system could be the savior of daily newspaper deliveries, and it could become a profit center for newspapers - who would be part of the system of delivering Amazon packages.

Bezos thinks out of the box, and this is certainly an out of the box (so to speak) solution.

F.