I’d guess part bluster, but with what remains of American journalism has been busy filing FOIA and other related inquiries, it is going to get tougher for those who like to fund things to do so anonymously. I do think this relates to the world of television, inasmuch as a lot of money has been funneled into so-called new media without evidence of a lot of profit. Generally speaking, investors don’t like to pour money into something without return, so if they aren’t making a financial profit, one has to speculate what other potential profit could be made by controlling media.
On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 11:41 AM Tom Wolper <[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 3, 2018 at 2:10 PM Steve Timko <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Can't tell if this is legal bluster or real. >> >> >> https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/nra-financial-trouble-706371 >> / >> > > My first thought is bluster as the NRA has a reputation for being a well > run nonprofit and well run organizations are built to weather adverse > times. When an organization gets in trouble they talk to their megadonors > first and then try to make up any shortfalls with a direct appeal to their > members. They don't admit to being in trouble, they make an appeal to keep > up the fight or announce a new campaign, even if the money will just be > going into the general fund to cover a deficit. But the article says the > NRA overspent by $46 million last year and a well run organization doesn't > do that, especially when they have a political agenda and their party runs > the White House and both houses of Congress. Also if they want to cut > expenses to help out they announce the cuts, not put out an alarm that they > might have to cut them. Really, nobody will miss the print magazine or NRA > TV if they go away. I suspect they can't justify the budget money spent on > them. > > After the Parkland shooting, when the GOP shrugged their shoulders and > made it clear that they were not going to move a muscle to restrain assault > weapons, it makes sense that NRA opponents would look to affect the > organization where they could: namely their banking and insurance. Remember > that the NRA has a relatively small membership with outsized influence and > a large majority of Americans favor some level of gun control and pressure > can be put on banks and insurance companies. > > What the NRA is asking the court to do is force the banks and insurance > companies to do business with them. It seems to go against conservative > doctrine to ask the government to get involved in this way but these are > interesting times. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "TVorNotTV" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- Kevin M. (RPCV) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TVorNotTV" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
