Saturday, February 6, 2021

Who Profits From Columbia University's Teachers College?

"Non-Profit" Teachers College of Columbia University's 525 W. 120th St. building. (photo by Bohao Zhao (wikicommons))

 Since January 22, 2021, thousands of Columbia University students of the Upper West Side "non-profit" university have been withholding their tuition payments for the Spring 2021 semester, in support of the following 5 demands:


"1) Columbia must alleviate the economic burden on students by reducing the cost of attendance and increasing financial aid.


- Reduce the cost of attendance (including tuition, fees, and room & board) by at least 10%.


- Increase financial aid by at least 10%.


- Replace the "student responsibility" with grants.


- Offer financial aid for summer classes for all schools at Columbia


- Forgive all late fees and other forms of retaliation for unpaid bills for the duration of the pandemic.


- We also demand that this reduction and increased aid should not come at the expense of instructor or worker pay, but rather at the expense of bloated administrative salaries, expansion projects, and other expenses that don't benefit students and workers.


"2) Columbia must fulfill its responsibilities to the people of West Harlem by committing to provide employment, education & affordable housing, and to end expansion.


" 3) Columbia must defund Public Safety and invest in community safety solutions that prioritize the safety of Black students and West Harlem residents, and repair harm caused by prior racist practices of Public Safety.


" 4) Columbia must commit to complete transparency about the University's investments and respect the democratic votes of the student body regarding investment and divestment decisions. This includes respecting the referendums at Barnard and Columbia College to divest from companies involved in human rights violations, divesting fully from fossil fuels, and respecting the results of future referendums relating to investment decisions; and


"5) Columbia must bargain in good faith with unions on campus around their key demands for improved compensation, benefits, and protections. This includes guaranteeing protections to international students and granting union recognition for MA and undergrad student-workers."


According to the Columbia University students who initiated the 2021 tuition strike:, "these issues are united by a shared root cause: a flagrant disregard for initiatives democratically supported within the community" and the administration of Columbia University President Lee Bollinger's "unilateral decision-making process" which "has perpetuated the existence of these injustices in our community despite possessing ample resources to confront them with structural solutions."


In response to either the threat of a tuition strike or the tuition strike itself, Columbia University's Bollinger "administration announced it would freeze tuition, suspend fees on late payments, increase spring financial aid and provide a limited amount of summer grants to students," according to a Jan. 26, 2021 In These Times article, titled "Columbia Students Wage the Largest Tuition Strike in Nearly 50 Years," by Indigo Olivier. But "students who" were "withholding tuition were surprised when they learned of multiple cases in which $150 late fees appeared in students' accounts last weekend, though they have not been able to confirm whether they are expected to pay this fee," according to the same article.


In These Times also noted that, on Jan. 22, 2021, Columbia's Board of Trustees "finally formalized its commitment to divest from publicly traded oil and gas companies;" but on Jan. 20, 2021, "the Board of Trustees also quietly announced it was lifting its 2006 to 2020 policy of divestment and non-investment in `companies operating in Sudan.'"


Despite calling their Upper West Side-based private schools "non-profit" institutions, some of the administrators and professors of both Columbia University and Teachers College of Columbia University have, in recent years, apparently been pocketing total annual monetary compensations much higher than what most New York City workers who are still employed are paid; or what most Columbia students are likely to earn annually during the current decade.


According to the 2017 Form 990 financial filing of Teachers College of Columbia University (on whose board of trustees Columbia University President Bollinger has sat next to Rockefeller Brothers Fund Chair of the Board of Trustees and former "confidential assistant" to Secretary Richard Riley at the U.S. Department of Education during the first Clinton administration, Valerie Rockefeller, in recent years), for example, between Sept. 1, 2017 and Aug. 31, 2018, "non-profit" Columbia's Teachers College paid total annual compensations that exceeded $198,000 to the following folks:


1. Teachers College President and later President Emerita Susan Fuhrman's total annual compensation was $1,059,181;


2. Teachers College VP Suzanne Murphy's total annual compensation was $533,206;


3. Teachers College's then-newly-installed President Thomas Bailey's total annual compensation was $468,469;


4. Teachers College VP Harvey Spector's total annual compensation was $465,600;


5. Teachers College Provost & Dean Thomas James's total annual compensation was $465,250;


6. Teachers College Professor Sharon Kagan's total annual compensation was $423,098;


7. Teachers College Enid & Lesk Morse Chair Ruth Vinz's total annual compensation was $373,390;


8. Teachers College Professor Andrew Gordon's total annual compensation was $362,407;


9. Teachers College Professor Jeanne Brooks-Gunn's total annual compensation was $356,392;


10. Teachers College VP Janice Robinson's total annual compensation was $350,941;


11. Teachers College's former Vice-Provost William Baldwin's total annual compensation was $334,607;


12. Teachers College Professor Anne Lin Goodwin's total annual compensation was $330,646;


13. Teachers College Assoc. VP Nancy Streim's total annual compensation was $318,679;


14. Teachers College Vice Provost Catherine Embree's total annual compensation was $279,550;


15. Teachers College Chief of Staff Katharine Conway's total annual compensation was $230,181;


16. Teachers College Vice Provost Steven Goss's total annual compensation was $225,955; and


17. Teachers College's former General Counsel Lori Fox's total annual compensation was $198,594.


In 2018 the "non-profit" Teachers College of Columbia University also had over $149 million invested in "non-public equity funds" and over $28 million invested in "private equity and real estate funds," according to its 2017 Form 990 financial filing.


Between Sept. 1, 2017 and Aug. 31, 2018, the total revenues of Columbia University's Teachers College exceeded $241 million, which included over $47 million that came from "contributions and grants" and over $4 million that came from its investment income. In addition, Teachers College of Columbia University spent $1 million on "lobbying" between Sept. 2017 and August 2018.


So, not surprisingly, in July 2020,the privately-controlled Teachers College of Columbia University was awarded $6.3 million in two publicly-funded U.S. federal government grants from the U.S. Department of Education's Institute of Education Science for a "study of the Federal Work-Study program." And in October and November 2020, Multi-Billionaire U.S. Oligarch Bill Gates's Gates Foundation also gave four "charitable" grants, totaling over $1.2 million, to the Teachers College of institutionally racist Columbia University; including, ironically, a $499,000 tax-exempt "charitable" grant "to advance knowledge of which advising reforms disproportionately benefit students of color and students experiencing poverty" and a $100,000 "charitable" grant "to support reporting on racial inequities in education."

Monday, January 4, 2021

Who Profits From `Non-Profit' Columbia University Inc. In 2021?

Columbia University Graduate School of Business Uris Hall (wickicommons)

Located on the Upper West Side of Manhattan, tax-exempt Columbia University claims to be a “non-profit” institution. Yet according to the Trustees of Columbia University’s Form 990 Financial Filing for 2017, between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018, Columbia’s total revenues of $5,888,095,558 exceeded its total expenses of $5,022,865,551 by over $865 million; and the value of “non-profit” Columbia’s net assets increased from $14.6 billion to $15.7 billion during the same period.

Hundreds of millions of dollars are accumulated by “non-profit” Columbia University as a result of its investment of endowment funds in things like corporate stocks and hedge funds, from which it obtains dividends or additional income from selling some of its corporate stocks at stock market prices higher than the prices it paid at the time the corporate stocks were purchased. Between July 2017 and June 2018, for example, Columbia University’s annual income from its investments exceeded $683 million. In addition, during the same period, Columbia University’s annual rental income from its real estate property exceeded $33 million and its annual income from “royalties” exceeded $24 million.

Some of the $5.8 billion in annual revenues that the administration of Columbia University pocketed between July 2017 and June 2018 was then passed on to “sub-recipients” of Columbia’s tax-exempt government and foundation grant money like NYU, Johns Hopkins University, Duke University, University of Pennsylvania, M.I.T., Harvard University, Stanford University, Northwestern University, University of Pittsburgh, Yale University, University of Michigan, Georgetown University, Emory University, California Institute of Technology, University of Chicago, Cornell University, JH Piego Corporation and The Rand Corporation for “research,” in the form of “sub-recipient” grants. The Columbia administration, for example, gave:

$2,225,976 in sub-recipient grant money to NYU;

$1,985,135 in sub-recipient grant money to Johns Hopkins University;

$1,849,519 in sub-recipient grant money to Duke University;

$1,835,855 in sub-recipient grant money to University of Pennsylvania;

$1,524,713 in sub-recipient grant money to M.I.T.;

$1,285,545 in sub-recipient grant money to Harvard University;
 
$1,276,330 in sub-recipient grant money to Stanford University;

 $1,139,952 in sub-recipient grant money to Northwestern University;

 $1,098,060 in sub-recipient grant money to University of Pittsburgh;

$960,611 in sub-recipient grant money to Yale University;

$863,723 in sub-recipient grant money to University of Michigan;

$741,411 in sub-recipient grant money to Georgetown University;

$736,807 in sub-recipient grant money to Emory University;

$685,038 in sub-recipient grant money to California Institute of Technology;

$622,477 in sub-recipient grant money to University of Chicago;

$609,593 in sub-recipient grant money to Cornell University;

$511,313 in sub-recipient grant money to JH Piego Corporation; and

$329,639 in sub-recipient grant money to The RAND Corporation.

And much of Columbia University’s $5.8 billion in annual revenues between July 2017 and June 2018 was used to provide total annual compensation payments to some Columbia University administrators and professors that exceeded by a lot the annual average salaries paid to most people who live on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Total annual compensation payments that exceeded $450,000, for example, were made by Columbia University to the following university administrators or professors:

Columbia University Executive Vice-President of Investment Management Peter Holland received a total annual compensation of $6,523,075;

Columbia University Clinical Professor David Silvers received a total annual compensation of $4,225,843;

Columbia University Professor of Surgery Craig Smith received a total annual compensation of $4,119,778;

Columbia University Professor of Surgery Lawrence Lenke received a total annual compensation of $4,119,778;

Columbia University Professor of Surgery Kiehyun Riew received a total annual compensation of $3,343,152;

Columbia University President Lee Bollinger received a total annual compensation of $2,648,682;

Columbia University Professor of Surgery Ronald Lehman Jr. received a total annual compensation of $2,455,483;

Columbia University Executive VP for Health Sciences Lee Goldman received a total annual compensation of $1,930,675;

Columbia University Provost John Coatsworth received a total annual compensation of $834,731;

Columbia University Senior Executive VP Gerald Rosberg received a total annual compensation of $801,407;

Columbia University Executive VP for Finance and IT Anne Sullivan received a total annual compensation of $786,051;

Columbia University Executive VP of University Development and Alumni Relations Amelia Alverson received a total annual compensation of $778,731;

Columbia University Executive VP of Arts and Sciences David Madigan received a total annual compensation of $765,451;

Columbia University General Counsel Jane Booth received a total annual compensation of $707,781;

Columbia University Executive VP of Facilities David Greenberg received a total annual compensation of $551,922; and

Columbia University Trustees’ Secretary Jerome Davis received a total annual compensation of $464,575.

In addition, 5,716 other administrators or faculty members of “non-profit” and corporate tax-exempted “Columbia University Inc.” each individually received--between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018--total annual compensations that exceeded $100,000.

According to its Form 990 financial filing for 2017, between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018, "non-profit" Columbia University was also the "direct controlling entity" of business firms like the following:

Merit Energy Partners LLP;
Sanjeevini Investment Holding;
GCM Grosvenor Blue LP;
India Equity Fund Limited;
Canaan Resources Partners Drilling Fund;
Vectra Energy Drill Fund LLP;
Star Asia Opportunity Fund;
Fathom Knowledge Network; and
Freezer Box Inc.

And in addition, the Cayman Islands-based FPCM Inflation Linked Opportunities Ltd. investment firm was another business firm in which Columbia University was also the "direct controlling entity," between July 1, 2017 and June 30, 2018.

Perhaps it’s now time for the Upper West Side’s “non-profit” Columbia University to finally begin to start paying a fair share of municipal, state and federal taxes during the 2021 fiscal year?

Wednesday, November 18, 2020

The AP News Trust's Pre-1990's Hidden History Revisited: Conclusion

Wikicommons photo by Alterego

A September 1979 Progressive magazine article by former AP reporter Samuel Day Jr., entitled “A `Clarification’,” revealed “how Westinghouse helped the AP rewrite a nuclear article.” As Progressive magazine noted:


“…A story about a little-known and controversial new atomic reactor began moving on the wires of the Associated Press to newspaper offices across the country on Tuesday, July 3. The story, filed in advance for publication on Sunday, July 15, dealt with an experimental device called the `fast flux test facility [FFTF]’ in the desert of central Washington…The story went on to tell about the big facility that Westinghouse Corporation is building in the sagebrush of the Columbia River Basin to pave the way for the nuclear power plants of the future…There was one thing that neither wire editors nor newspaper readers knew: AP’s report on the problems of Westinghouse’s FFTF had been reviewed, rewritten, and re-edited with the help of the Westinghouse Corporation…The story was revised in New York in consultation with the Seattle bureau, which forwarded a detailed critique by Westinghouse…”


In a 1986 Nation (12/6/86) column, Alexander Cockburn also revealed that AP. apparently attempted to suppress news about the emerging Contragate scandal at the request of Oliver North and/or the Reagan White House. According to Cockburn:


“On March 16, 1985, the AP’s Middle East bureau chief Terry Anderson, was kidnapped in Lebanon…Later that year, two AP reporters based in Washington, Robert Parry and Brian Barger, began investigating shady dealings by the contras and the activities of Oliver North. They amassed damning detail from a multiplicity of sources, including Federal officials indignant at what they perceived to be the Reagan Administration’s complicity in drug trafficking by the contras…


“…Among those aware of Parry and Barger’s research, it was no secret that the two were frustrated by what they considered to be unwarranted and extraordinary caution exercised by their superiors at AP notably by the Washington bureau chief, Charles Lewis…In fact, the story finally put on the wires on January 19 was a shrunken version of earlier drafts, having fallen victim to an editorial prudence that seemed inexplicable. Details were cut, names excised and the story finally put on the wires at the bottom of the news cycle…Oliver North—was in contact with their superiors at AP...As one person working in the Washington bureau at the time remarks: `Lewis insisted on editing the [Parry and Barger] stories while talking to North. That was a clear conflict of interest and he should have been smart enough to step aside.’”


The AP has also apparently not been too interested in transmitting much news over its wires which challenges the accuracy of the U.S. Establishment’s “Report of the President’s Commission On The Assassination of President John F. Kennedy.” The Warren Report, which AP published in the 1960s, contained “an introductory note” by AP Special Correspondent Saul Prett which stated the following:


“Did one unbalanced mind rob us of a President and another, of his murderer? And if we say that and if we see that, are we then close to sensing that the sick of the world, though unknown to each other, may form as dangerous a conspiracy as any political plot from the left or from the right?


“…The Commission was appointed by President Johnson. It was headed by the Chief Justice of the United States, composed of distinguished citizens, and had at its disposal all the investigative resources of a proud government. Here, then, are its answers…”


In the early 1990s, AP still seemed to reflect a pro-U.S. Establishment political bias in its editorial policies. Among the AP-provided news stories New York Newsday printed in its May 18, 1993 issue, for instance, was one headlined “Lawmakers: Clinton’s AIDS, Cancer Research Plan Hurts Other Programs,” which began with the paragraph “President Bill Clinton’s plan to raise spending on AIDS and breast cancer research shortchanges other federally funded research into diseases such as Alzheimer’s, diabetes or strokes, some lawmakers complained last week”—but failed to include any quotations from either AIDS or women’s health activists in the news story.


Downtown telephoned in the early 1990s the then-office of an AP corporate spokesperson named Mike Bass at 50 Rockefeller Plaza in Midtown Manhattan, and attempted to ask him for AP’s official response to the criticism that its news service is editorially-biased. Bass was unavailable for comment, but the AP employee who was screening his calls replied: “Before I can find someone to answer that question, they’ll want to know the name of the person who made this criticism.”


After Downtown replied that U.S. academics involved in media studies like Michael Parenti have made this criticism, the AP employee informed Downtown that AP spokespeople would need to know some specific ways in which their news service was being criticized for being editorially-biased, before they would respond to Downtown’s inquiry.


When Downtown noted that AP has been criticized for slanting its news reports by not interviewing enough of a variety of sources, slanting its coverage of nuclear power issues to please Westinghouse, and slanting its coverage of the Contragate scandal to please the Reagan Administration, the AP employee said she’d try to obtain an official AP response by the end of the day.


But when Downtown telephoned AP at the end of the day, it was again told by another AP employee that no one at AP was available for comment.


So if you’re still waiting for the institutionally racist AP News Trust to use its special influence to provide U.S. newspaper and newspaper website readers, radio listeners and TV viewers with much variety in news items, much investigative reporting about Big Media conglomerates, the super-rich, the CIA and the JFK Assassination Conspiracy, or much daily news about U.S. antiwar and anti-imperialist left radical activists, you may end up waiting a long, long time for the news—despite AP’s extensive network of leased satellite circuits, submarine cables and radio transmissions.

Associated Press/AP Board of Directors in 21st-century

 (end of article)

(The following article originally appeared in the July 7, 1993 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative weekly, Downtown).

 

Monday, November 16, 2020

The AP News Trust's Pre-1990's Hidden History Revisited: Part 6


Wikicommons photo by Alterego

The editorial policies of the institutionally racist AP have long been criticized by U.S. antiwar radicals for their pro-U.S. Establishment political biases. In 1912, for instance, U.S. antiwar radical presidential candidate Eugene Debs wrote the following in a letter of protest to the general manager of AP:


“Pardon me if I give you just an instance or two of my personal experience. During the heat of the Pullman strike, when the Pullman cars were under boycott, the Associated Press sent out a dispatch over all the country that I had ridden out of Chicago like a royal prince in a Pullman Palace car while my dupes were left to walk the ties. A hundred witnesses who were at the depot when I left testified that the report was a lie, but I could never get the Associated Press to correct it. This lie cost me more pain and trouble than you can well imagine, and for it all I have to thank the Associated Press, and I have not forgotten it.


“During the last national campaign, at a time when I was away from home, the Associated Press spread a report over the country to the effect that scab labor had been employed to do some work at my home. It was a lie, and so intended. I had the matter investigated by the chief union organizer of the district, who reported that it was a lie, but I was never able to have the correction put upon the wires. That lie is still going to this day, and for that, and still others I could mention, I have also to thank the capitalistically owned and controlled Associated Press.”


After his expose’ of the U.S. meat packing industry in the best-selling 1905 muckraking novel, The Jungle, created some popular pressure for passage of some kind of pure food law, Upton Sinclair attempted to interest AP in sending more news about the unhealthy practices of this industry over the AP wires. But although “The Associated Press was the established channel through which the news was supposed to flow,” according to Upton Sinclair’s The Brass Check, “the channel proved to be a concrete wall…as thick as all the millions of dollars of all the vested interests of America can build it.” According to Sinclair, “I first telephoned, and then sent a letter by special messenger to the proper officials of the Associated Press, but they would have absolutely nothing to do with me or my news” and “Throughout my entire campaign against the Beef Trust, they never sent out a single line injurious to the interests of the packers, save for a few lines dealing with the Congressional hearings, which they could not entirely suppress…”


In a 1937 article, Fortune magazine also noted that in 1926 “an AP reporter, at the insistence of Assistant Secretary of State Olds, wrote a dispatch about the `specter of Mexican-fostered Bolshevik hegemony’ in-between the U.S. and the Panama Canal” which proved to be “a piece of utter claptrap.” Fortune also observed that former Nation publisher Oswald Garrison Villard once declared the AP wire service “constitutionally incapable of doing justice to the underprivileged.”

Associated Press/AP Board of Directors in 21st-century

 (end of part 6)

(The following article originally appeared in the July 7, 1993 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative weekly, Downtown).


 

Saturday, November 14, 2020

The AP News Trust's Pre-1990's Hidden History Revisited: Part 5

 

Wikicommons photo by Alterego

As Downtown (6/24/92) previously noted, former Watergate Scandal investigative reporter Carl Bernstein, in an unpublicized 1977 Rolling Stone magazine article entitled “The C.I.A. And The Media,” wrote that: “Other organizations which cooperated with the C.I.A. include the American Broadcasting Company [ABC], the National Broadcasting Company [NBC], the Associated Press…”


Like other institutionally racist Big Media organizations,  the institutionally racist AP also has a long history of discrimination against women. A study by Lucy Komisar, cited in Women And The Mass Media by Matilda Butler and William Paisley, revealed that in 1970 at AP there were “no women in management positions and no women heading any of the 38 domestic or 6 foreign bureaus” and at AP’s then-Midtown Manhattan office there were only “7 women out of 52 editors and reporters” in 1970. Women And The Mass Media also noted that in 1972 Time magazine reported that U.S. women were only “11 percent of Associated Press’s nationwide news staff of 1050.”


The same book also revealed that “in 1973, the Wire Services Guild charged the Associated Press [AP] with discriminating against its female and minority members” and that “In May 1978, the EEOC found that AP did discriminate by not recruiting, hiring and promoting women” and “did not hire minorities as newspeople.” Women And The Mass Media also noted that “EEOC data for the end of 1977” showed that “males are 100 percent of the assistant bureau chiefs, 98 percent of the bureau chiefs, 97 percent of the correspondents, 90 percent of the news editors, and 85 percent of the newspeople.”


As late as the early 1990s, about 88 percent of AP’s U.S. bureau chiefs were still male, as were 75 percent of AP’s U.S. correspondents. All but two of the seats on AP’s board of directors were also still filled by men. And AP’s chairman, vice-chairman, president and general manager, as well as its six vice-presidents, were still all men in the early 1990s. 

Associated Press/AP Board of Directors in 21st-century


 (end of part 5)

(The following article originally appeared in the July 7, 1993 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative weekly, Downtown).

Thursday, November 12, 2020

The AP News Trust's Pre-1990's Hidden History Revisited: Part 4


Wikicommons photo by Alterego


The historical origins of institutionally racist AP go back to 1848 when six Downtown Manhattan daily newspaper publishers, led by New York Herald publisher James Gordon Bennett, decided to share the telegraph costs of news-gathering and, thus, reduce their individual newspaper news-gathering costs. As then-Boston Globe publisher General Taylor said in 1900:


“Mr. Bennett called the other newspaper proprietors together and proposed that they take a [telegraph] report of two hours and divide the expenses. That was the origin of The Associated Press.”


But Bennett, like AP, was never too famous for either the quality of his journalism work or for using the special influence he possessed in the world of Downtown Manhattan journalism to promote equal rights for African-American people and the radical democratization of U.S. society. As The Early Black Press In America, 1827 to 1860 by Frankie Hutton recalled:


“In particular, the New York Herald founded by James Gordon Bennett in 1835, said to be one of the most profitable newspapers of its time, was criticized as being such poor journalism as to `vitiate all correct tastes, corrupt all the social and moral habits, and morally degrade human beings.’ Bennett had no qualms about using violent and sensational news to sell his newspaper…”


And, in his Bennett’s `New York Herald’ and The Rise Of The Popular Press book, James Crouthamel asserts that “Bennett was consistent in defending the rights of the South and its institutions of slavery,, in his belief in Negro inferiority and in his view that the antislavery movement was the major threat” and “consistent with his belief in Negro inferiority Bennett opposed extension of the franchise to blacks and integrated education in the North.”


By the 1870s, around 200 U.S. newspapers were utilizing the AP wire service to secure international news and national news by telegraph for their readers, without having to hire their own national and foreign correspondents. As a result, according to Development of American Journalism by Sidney Kobre, by the 1870s “control of the wire service meant that someone might shape the thinking of newspaper readers everywhere.” And, in fact, during this period “a handful of men in charge of the monopoly” apparently fabricated AP news on occasion whenever it dealt with politics, economics or other controversial issues, according to AP, The Story Of News by Oliver Gramling.


Around this time, the original Downtown Manhattan newspaper publishers-dominated AP began calling itself “United Press.” Later in the 19th-century, a competing news-gathering wire service organization—the Associated Press [AP] of Illinois—was established by rival Midwestern newspaper publishers which came to replace the original AP/”United Press” organization. As a result, in 1893 the Associated Press [AP] of Illinois was reorganized as a national press association, with the name of “Associated Press [AP],” under a revised set of rules. Following an adverse Illinois court decision, the AP was again reorganized as a New York-chartered non-profit cooperative in 1900.


Between 1900 and the early 1940s, “nearly all newspapers which took membership in it were guaranteed that no newspaper that might later be established in their respective cities would be permitted to join the national Associated Press without the consent of The Associated Press members in those cities” and “the promise of exclusivity was considered by all members to be a `franchise’ and that is what they called it…,” according to Kent Cooper And The Associated Press: An Autobiography. Led by newspaper publisher E.W. Scripps, however, those newspaper publishers who were denied the right to print AP news because a local A.P.-affiliated competing newspaper already held the AP “franchise” in their cities organized a competing news agency wire service in the U.S.—United Press—in the early 20th century.


But after the AP board of directors refused to allow the Chicago Sun to join the AP and publish AP-furnished news in Chicago in the early 1940s, the Department of Justice finally prosecuted the AP for violating the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. A federal court then found AP guilty and the AP News Trust’s board of directors was forced to discontinue its policy of allowing AP-affiliated newspapers to monopolize the printing of AP-furnished news items in each U.S. city. In the early 1940s, the AP also began to furnish its regular news report to radio stations, instead of just to newspaper subscribers.

Associated Press/AP Board of Directors in 21st-century


The Ochs-Sulzberger Dynasty’s New York Times apparently relied heavily on its AP-provided copy during the early part of the 20th century, before it became as lucrative a media operation as it was in the 1990s. According to former AP Executive Director Kent Cooper, New York Times 1990's publisher Sulzberger’s great-grandfather—Adolph Ochs—once said the following with regard to AP:


“I owe more loyalty to the Associated Press than I can express. For when I bought the New York Times, with its Associated Press membership, I had no money left with which to buy special correspondence. So the New York Times reached prosperity practically on The Associated Press news service alone. Though we now spend a great deal for our own specials, The Associated Press still remains our prime reliance. Therefore, for the property value the New York Times has now become, I owe most to the Associated Press."


In the late 1950s, AP’s United Press competitor in the U.S. took over the Hearst media empire’s International News Service to form United Press International [UPI]. But by 1985, UPI was facing financial bankruptcy, in part “because the AP reaped so much more revenue from newspapers it could engage in never-ending price wars to woo away UPI. broadcast clients,” according to Down To The Wire: UPI’s Fight For Survival by Gergory Gordon and Ronald Cohen. The same book also noted that “as UPI. had shriveled AP had grown, its budget soaring toward $300 million a year.” And as the New York Times (8/26/91) also noted, in 1991 UPI was again on the verge of bankruptcy due, in part, to the “competition from AP” which had “squeezed UPI’s revenues”—until the Saudi royal family decided to purchase UPI in 1992.

 (end of part 4)

 The following article originally appeared in the July 7, 1993 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative weekly, Downtown).

Wednesday, November 11, 2020

The AP News Trust's Pre-1990's Hidden History Revisited: Part 3

 

Wikicommons photo by Alterego

In the 1990s, among the Big Media representatives who sat next to each other on the institutionally racist AP board of directors to discuss how AP could best serve as a tool of their supposedly competing Big Media enterprises were the following wealthy people:


New York Times Company Director and Chattanooga Times Publisher Ruth Sulzberger Holberg;


Newhouse Media Conglomerate Advance Publications/Newark Star-Ledger/Parade magazine/Vogue/Conde’ Nast/New Yorker Owner Donald Newhouse;


Times-Mirror/Newsday Vice-Chairman and Los Angeles Times Publisher W.Thomas Johnson;


Knight-Ridder/Philadelphia Inquirer Chairman of the Board James Batten;


Cincinnati Enquirer Chairman of the Board and Fifth Third Bancorp director William Keating;


WJTV Broadcasters of Mississippi Chairman and United Missouri Bancorp Director David Bradley;


Providence Journal President and Director Stephen Hamblett; and


Hibernia Corp./Hibernia National Bank of New Orleans and South Central Bell-Birmingham Director Joe Dorsey Smith. Jr.


[And in 2007, the AP board of directors then included the following wealthy folks:


MediaNews Group Vice-Chairman and CEO William Dean Singleton;


McClatchy Company Chairman, President and CEO Gary Pruitt;


Chicago Tribune Company Chairman, President and CEO Dennis FitzSimons;


Hearst Corporation President and CEO Victor Ganzi;


Arkansas Democrat-Gazette Publisher Walter Hussman Jr.;


New York Times Regional Media Group President and CEO Mary Jacobus;


Washington Post Publisher and CEO “Bo” Jones;


Lee Enterprises Inc. President and CEO Mary Junck;


E.W. Scripps Company President and CEO Kenneth Lowe;


Gannett Company Retired Chairman Douglas McCorkindale;


Newhouse Media Conglomerate/AdvanceNet Chairman Steven Newhouse;


ABC News President David Westin; and


Cox Newspapers President Jay Smith. ]


Although the Washington Post-Los Angeles Times News Service and the New York Times Service were supposedly set up to compete with A.P. for media outlet subscribers and readers, representatives of the parent companies of both the Washington Post-Los Angeles Times News Service and the New York Times Service also sat on the A.P. board of directors, ironically. And, coincidentally, neither the Washington Post-Los Angeles Times News Service nor the New York Times Service has apparently been too eager to provide their subscribers with news that is too critical of the A.P. News Trust’s special influence. 

Associated Press/AP Board of Directors in 21st-century


[In 2020, the AP now includes the following wealthy folks:


Newhouse Media Conglomerate Advance Publications Director and Senior Executive Officer Michael Newhouse, who also sits on the board of Charter Communications (which owns Spectrum Networks);


Hearst Media Conglomerate President, CEO and Director Steven R. Swartz (whose media conglomerate owns 33 television stations and at least three daily newspapers/newspaper websites);


E.W. Scripps Company Vice-Chairman Richard A. Boehne (whose media conglomerate owns 60 local television stations);


Gannett Company/TEGIA Inc. Media Conglomerate Former President and Director and Wellesley College Trustee Gracia C. Martore, who also sits on the corporate board of FM Global and the corporate advertising industry's Omnicom Group;


Graham Media Group President and CEO Emily L. Barr (whose media firm owns 7 television stations), who also is the National Association of Broadcasters Chairperson for Television; and


Cox Media Group Former President Bill Hoffman (whose former media conglomerate owns 3 newspapers and around 86 radio stations), who also is a  member of the National Association of Broadcasters TV, ABC News and the Zionist movement's Anti-Defamation League [ADL] Southern Region boards as well as the current president of Hoffmann Communications Inc.]

(end of part 3)

(The following article originally appeared in the July 7, 1993 issue of the now-defunct Lower East Side alternative weekly, Downtown. )