If half the Staff at the LA Times quits, does anyone notice or would it lead to a more competitive news arena?

Kathleen Miles over at Huff Po admits that the preferred choice for takeover would produce a middling to bad results

“It is likely that the Beutner coalition sees an LA Times purchase not just as a business investment, but as a local vanity project and perhaps an occasional outlet for their own interests. That’s generally how it goes with newspaper owners.”

However that is much worse than if the irrationally vilified Koch Brothers assumed the reigns

“That may not be wonderful, but it’s far better that than what the Koch brothers would likely turn the Times into — namely, a national bullhorn for conservative causes like lowering taxes and lessening regulation.”

But what the left is really worried about is that their simple supply chain for biased reporting will be broken and the ramifications will be felt

” The LA Times largely decides what is LA news. The opening segment of LA’s public radio programs, such as AirTalk and Which Way, LA, is generally a story on page one of the Times that day. All LA news outlets follow and cover at least some of what the Times reports.

So if the agenda at the Times changes, the agenda at the other LA news outlets will change — unless those news outlets are watching carefully. LA has to worry more about the stories that the Times stops covering than stories that are covered with a bias.”

Its interesting to note that there’s no bias now at the Times based on what stories are chosen or not chosen to be covered according to this article and that the worst that could happen is.. dare say it ..competition

“If the Times‘ editorial page is filled with the Koch brothers’ libertarian opinions, other journalists in LA will need to step up and voice opposing views.”

I cannot imagine a worse disaster than the Koch brother’s saving a bankrupt newspaper. We wouldn’t want a marketplace filled with competing opinions.  That’s just crazy talk.