FROM David Carr
TV Debates: Moving the Needle in an Age of Fragmentation Despite $2.5 billion already spent on TV commercials, almost 70 million viewers tuned in to this year's first presidential debate , this year's biggest TV audience except for the Super Bowl. Given the recent hype, tonight's second confrontation might draw even more. In this fragmented age of YouTube, Facebook and Twitter, what's the attraction? David Carr, business columnist and culture reporter at the New York Times , has some answers. If you're tuning in to tonight's town hall debate, why not join KCRW's live chat ?
New York Times on the Tribune Company's 'Bankrupt Culture' Real estate mogul Sam Zell had no media experience when he bought the Tribune Company , which owns the Chicago Tribune, Los Angeles Times, TV and radio stations and other media properties. Less than a year later, the Tribune Company filed for the largest bankruptcy in the history of American media. Some 4200 people have lost their jobs. Others have left not for financial reasons but because of what today's New York Times calls a work culture featuring "sexual innuendo, poisonous workplace banter and profane invective [that have] shocked and offended people throughout the company." David Carr wrote the story.
Is Venezuela becoming a dictatorship? Venezuela may have the world's largest oil reserves, but it's a nation in trouble… economically and politically. Is a populist promise to rescue democracy turning out to be a prelude to dictatorship?
Trump's ethical conflicts pile up as transparency diminishes President Trump's refusal to reveal his income tax returns is just one example of a lack of transparency that could be hiding conflicts of interest. Other conflicts are already obvious from his appointments. And he's being sued for using his job to increase his profits.
Will the march for science politicize objective research? Protesters are gathering all over the country for tomorrow's Earth Day March for Science. Since President Trump has proposed massive cuts in basic scientific research, will the movement be perceived as partisan politics — whether scientists themselves like it or not?