Why isn't this a HUGE conflict of interest?

[kanrok]

At Hollinger, Big Perks in A Small World
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59784-2003Nov18.html

Richard Pearle heads Hollinger Digital, a venture capital arm of Hollinger, Intl. It seems that Hollinger Digital put $2.5 m into a company called "Trieme Partners." Trieme Partners aims to cash in on the military and homeland security buildup. Guess who Trieme's managing partner is? Yep, none other than Richard Pearle!

Someone please explain why this is not big news.

[onebigbadwulf]

1. you're asking 2 questions

1. It is a huge conflict of interest


2. It's not a big news story because news is based on ratings and sales- not objective truth seeking. This will continue happen as long as the media is a business sponsored by other businesses based on ratings.

Michael Jackson and Kobe will always takes priority to political cronyism. We need our own BBC in a locked tax trust fund. It's the only way to get these stories.

[billyf65]

2. They are thieves...

Well, you sure wouldn't hear about it in the Sun-Times.

Had to read all about Conrad Black's thievery in another paper.
All I hope is that when they get new ownership (if they get new ownership), idiot conservatives like Mark Steyn, the Freakish Betsy Hart, the idiotic Bill O'Reilly and others are dumped.

Strangely, as pro-war as the paper is, it came out in favor of same-sex marriage on the ed page today.

Go Bears.

Go, Juaron (and don't leave town without John Shoop).

[kanrok]

3. You are correct, sir

Welcome to DU, billy. :hi:

[tom_paine]

4. Because in Imperial Amerika, conflict-of-interest is no longer

against the law for Imperial Family Capos, buttons, assorted allies and contributors (depending on the contribution amount, of course).

In fact, after seeing Ken Lay and his multi-billion-dollar-fraud, Rush and his drug habit, not to mention Scarborough and his murdered intern, one wonders if ANYTHING is against the law for them