Losing money over principled stands for freedom is inconcievable to the corporate class which includes the NY Times and this author. The article reads like these people would sell out their own mothers to avoid a loss and that's a normal position to take.
Getting fired by big media is a rite of passage for uncorrupted, honest journalists. Especially in the US.
duxup•4mo ago
But let's say you wanted to stand up, what would you do? Sue? Courts are supposed to be the route you go.
The majority in SCOTUS has effectively given Trump default win after default win saying his decisions stand while the legal process plays out...
This has reached absurd levels with things that can't possibly provide any citizens any kind of protection. Tariff impacts, science cuts, your business goes under, your job cut, doesn't matter if years later SCOTUS says 'LOL that was bad, sorry...'
So imagine being ABC (let's just say they want to fight) and the FCC takes you off the air ... SCOTUS says "yeah too bad going to have to be off the air while the legal process plays out", you're out of business at that point.
SCOTUS decided Trump was more equal than others and has chosen the winner is Trump by default so far. There is no option for these orgs or citizens no matter what the law says.
ripe•4mo ago
> The business world of the 1950s and 1960s was a clubby, inbred place and its apotheosis was the boardroom — especially the bank boardroom. The country’s biggest banks populated their boards with chief executives from a wide range of industries in order to keep tabs on the economy. When they gathered around a conference table, the executives tended to agree on matters large and small.
This establishment had many bad aspects, including racism and sexism, but the result was a unified front, and they couldn't be bullied so easily by an out-of-control president.
This all changed with shareholder capitalism, with every company for itself. As a result, they can no longer stand up to Trump.