Likelihood of Success

Ron Coleman’s pretty good blog

What a concept!

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 22, 2008

RealClearMarkets:times-building.jpg

In the last five years, the New York Times has declined in value by an astonishing 70 percent. There is no indication that things will get better any time soon. Indeed, as the specter of recession looms, there is every reason to believe that things will get worse. At some point here in the near future, the market capitalization of the New York Times will fall below $2 billion. At that point, a psychological floor will have collapsed and the company will be in play.

The company that has the most to gain from buying the New York Times is Google. If it proffered a Murdoch-like, no-auction bid of $4 billion, wouldn’t the Sulzberger family have to accept it? Every single class B shareholder would accept the offer. It’s their only exit. It is also likely that Times employees and retirees would enthusiastically support the deal; it’s their only exit as well. So it would all come down to whether the Sulzberger family (smaller in number and not as far-flung as the fractious Bancroft clan that owned Dow Jones) would accept the deal.

The choice for the family would be basically this: double your money or double down on “young Arthur,” as the NYT’s Chairman and CEO is sometimes called.

Yeah, what a choice. What a concept! The article explains that it’s really all about Rupert Murdoch. Fascinating.

The only question is, would such a move be final confirmation that Google has jumped the shark? Or could it just absorb something like this — and be a real estate player in Manhattan fast?!

UPDATE:  Ooh!  Ooh! 

Posted in Gelt, Medialites | 3 Comments »

Individualism versus individuality

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 22, 2008

Over in the discussion at another blog I am having trouble getting some people to recognize that the distinction between individualism and individuality is more than semantic. I am adapting from my comments there to raise the issue here.

Is “individualism” a desideratum at all? I think perhaps it is not. Now, individuality is a fact and is something to be embraced. But individualism is primarily defined thus: “Belief in the primary importance of the individual and in the virtues of self-reliance and personal independence.” That is: Assertion of the primary importance of the individual is primary.Rush home.jpg

There are many paths to living a meaningful life (which is not to say that there is infinite number of paths). Individuality is unique to humans, and God surely must expect us to utilize it in our lives — individuality, that is — but not to make individual expression the purpose of our lives, which is individualism, a sort of narcissism.

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Faith and Works, Heart and spirit, Homo sapiens | 3 Comments »

Universe to implode

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 22, 2008

Matter meets antimatter — David Bowie and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia are invoked in the same post.

Which would be more horrified?  (Don’t answer too fast.)

Posted in Blogophilia, Jocularity | Leave a Comment »

Hed nodding

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 21, 2008

New York Post:

BILL HAS A ‘DREAM’: EX PREZ NODS OFF DURING MLK AWARD PRESENTATION

Wake me when it’s over!

Posted in Jocularity, Medialites | 2 Comments »

What it is

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 21, 2008

I wrote this post on Dean’s World in September, 2006, and I had forgotten about it. While pondering the question again, however, I came upon it. It generated a good discussion there and then, and we hardly resolved the issue, and we never will. I have updated it a little, though, because I’m a little older now.

What is love?

Goethe and merry go round

The easy ones, don’t even tell me about — such as how you love your kids. That’s very real, but let’s face it, it’s basically hard wired, though if you are fortunate, it grows in intensity as your children develop into genuine people whom you can love in the way I mean to ask the question about here.

What is it that makes you stick to people you love — care about their welfare the way you do your own, enjoy watching them eat, bleed red blood for them?

What makes you keep doing all these things no matter how much of that blood you lose?

Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Heart and spirit, Sisyphus | Leave a Comment »

“I Have a Dream (C)”

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 21, 2008

This is one of the first posts on this blog, and remains one of the most-likely to get hit by a search engine. It hasn’t seen the front page in three years, though, so I thought this would be a good day to re-post it:

The online Globe and Mail has an important item on how documentary filmmakers and others are being slammed by the IP equity grab, called “How Copyright Could be Killing Culture”. Okay, maybe “killing culture” is a little over the top. I suppose if more rigorous enforcement of copyright would throw a speed bump in front of the likes of Michael Moore, our modern Leni Reifenstahl, that would put a little chill in the air — but is that killing “culture”?

The point of the article, flagged by Tech Law Advisor, is nonetheless well taken. On the road yesterday morning, I listened to the entirety of the “I Have a Dream” speech on the Imus show (and, indeed, wondered about permissions — or does Imus need them?). The speech is breathtakingly beautiful, compassionate, stirring, patriotic; it is a truly appeal to America’s better self. (What a contrast to the self-parodic tropes of King’s imitators.)

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in 1999 that the speech was not “generally published” for purposes of waiver of copyright, and that the King estate had the right to enforce its copyright in the speech. It is interesting to learn that King himself filed the copyright for the speech (albeit a month after he gave it — one of the issues in play in the case). According to the Globe and Mail article, however, for the makers of the King documentary Eyes on the Prize to renew their copyright clearances, they would need between a quarter and a half a million dollars. Evidently they won’t or can’t do it, so untold numbers of schoolchildren (who, please God, are prevented from listening to Imus’s show) won’t be exposed to the documentary, the speech, or this compelling version of the MLK story.

(Read the rest of this post here.)

Posted in Americana, Gelt, Heart and spirit | 2 Comments »

Antiques alignment

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 21, 2008


Antiques juxtaposition

Originally uploaded by Ron Coleman.

A big, jumbled-up antique store can make for some very odd juxtapositions.

Posted in Americana, Ars Longa, Suburbia | 2 Comments »

Invisible server capacity

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 21, 2008

Instapundit links to the Heritage Foundation, and …

UPDATE: Oops. The link seems to have killed Heritage’s blog — at least, it’s showing an “exceeded CPU quota” at the moment. That should fix itself soon.

“Fix itself soon”?  I’ll have to try that one with the Missus one of these days.  Wow, talk about your faith in the “invisible hand“! Well, it is the Heritage Foundation, after all…

Posted in Jocularity | 4 Comments »

Race traitor?

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 20, 2008

Can you opt out of negritude? Alan Wolfe in Slate:

Although he was accused of being one, [Randall] Kennedy defends the idea of labeling a person who betrays a cause, or, for that matter, a race, as a sellout. Sometimes it is necessary for a group, in the interests of cohesion, to defend itself in a less than pleasant way, even to the point of coercion. One reason the much-praised Montgomery bus boycott was successful was because those African-Americans tempted to break it were threatened with physical harassment. Compared to that, William Hannibal Thomas made truly harmful comments about his own race and was met not with violence, but with calls for ostracism, two reasons that Kennedy concludes it was justified to call him a sellout.

Kennedy, however, also believes that “choice is always an element of racial citizenship.” Just as one’s citizenship in black America can be revoked by the group, one must also have the right to resign from the group. There is always, as a result, a fine line to walk between group solidarity and individual integrity.

Choice about racial or ethnic “membership”? It is certainly appealing, the idea of being able to choose who you “really are,” and very American. In college I decided that it wasn’t going to work for me. (It’s actually rather pathetic to see watch Eastern European Jews pretend to be Ivy League WASPs, though one of them, Ralph Lifshitz, made a fortune selling the idea.) It frequently doesn’t work out too well at all – just ask the late an unlamented Bobby Fischer, or Michael Jackson.

Posted in Americana, Sisyphus | 1 Comment »

Grand Central arches

Posted by Ron Coleman on January 20, 2008


Grand Central arches
Originally uploaded by Ron Coleman.

I’m always fascinated at the juxtaposition of arcs and right angles in architecture. And being rather metaphor-minded, my first thought when reconsidering this picture a few days after it was taken was that those soft, sensitive curves just couldn’t cut it without those broad-shouldered perpendicular members to hold them up.

This is idiotic, of course. Stiff old columns are yesterday’s news. The innovation of the load-bearing arch was what revolutionized architecture. It is the “soft,” curvy arches that are the real toughies, and the ones you can really count on to keep everything elevated and the roof from tumbling down.

Posted in Ars Longa, Heart and spirit, Metropolis | Leave a Comment »