Connect with us

News Print & Digital

Capital Gazette Editor Departs, Cites Newsroom Shooting

Capital Gazette editor Rick Hutzell issued his farewell column over the weekend, highlighting those lost in the attack.

Published

on

It’s been three years since a gunman opened fire on the newsroom in Annapolis, Md., killing five employees. 

Yet, despite the time passing by, an editor for the newspaper says that ordeal continues to affect him, which is why he’s leaving. Capital Gazette editor Rick Hutzell issued his farewell column over the weekend, highlighting those lost in the attack. 

“I wish I could say it’s all been grand, and I’m headed off to retirement,” Hutzell said. “But it hasn’t, and I’m not. The murder of my five friends, Rob Hiaasen, Gerald Fischman, Wendi Winters, John McNamara, and Rebecca Smith, changed me.” 

“I always enjoyed the job. But I became consumed with the notion that it was my purpose to save the paper. A man with a shotgun tried to kill us — to kill me and the newspaper I’ve poured my life into for 33 years. I wasn’t going to let it die.”

Hutzell said he took a buyout from Alden Global Capital, the Capital Gazette’s new owner, after three decades working at the publication. Alden Global Capital bought the media outlet from Tribune Publishing last month.

Hutzell said that he believed it was essential to cover the trial of the gunman, Jarrod Ramos. The latter had a long-standing hatred toward the newspaper, according to The Associated Press.

“One of the greatest joys of my life has been generations of reporters, editors, and photographers who are convinced they have an important contribution to make. My job has been to help give birth to their successes,” Hutzell said.

“Things will change. That is the nature of life. It will be different under new owners and leadership. Some of it will be good; some will be bad. I hope you’ll keep reading it because that is how it will survive and grow.”

News Print & Digital

Elon Musk’s Deal to Buy Twitter “Cannot Move Forward” After Latest Hurdle

Musk tweeted that a deal cannot move forward” without “proof” for a fake account estimate earlier revealed by the company. 

Published

on

A couple of weeks ago, Elon Musk shocked the world when he put forth his $44-billion offer to buy Twitter. However, it seems as though the plan to purchase the social media company has hit a significant roadblock.

Musk tweeted that a deal cannot move forward” without “proof” for a fake account estimate earlier revealed by the company. 

“20% fake/spam accounts, while four times what Twitter claims, could be [much] higher,” Musk said. “My offer was based on Twitter’s SEC filings being accurate. Yesterday, Twitter’s CEO publicly refused to show proof of <5%. This deal cannot move forward until he does.”

There’s no clear direction where the deal goes from here. However, during an appearance on the latest episode of The InterviewNew York Times report Kara Swisher predicted that Musk might have to step back and reconsider his initial offer. 

“He should walk away, pay the billion-dollar breakup fee and then wait until it declines. He could pick it up for $15 billion versus $45 billion. That’s a nice savings. There’s a lot you can do with $30 billion,” Swisher said. 

Now Musk might not walk entirely away from the attempt to buy Twitter; nonetheless, that might take more time than initially, some might have hoped. 

Continue Reading

News Print & Digital

Kara Swisher: Elon Musk “Has to Be” Rethinking Buying Twitter at $54 a Share

Swisher does believe a deal will occur with Twitter seeing Musk as its new owner despite these claims. However, she thinks the entrepreneur might have another idea: reprice the bid.

Published

on

Elon Musk made headlines a couple of weeks ago with his decision to purchase Twitter for $44-billion; however, New York Times reporter Kara Swisher stated on the latest episode of The Interview that the Tesla CEO is having second thoughts. 

“He has to be. This price is too high,” Swisher said. “[Twitter] is not worth $54 a share. It’s crazy. It’s like throwing money down a hole.”

Swisher does believe a deal will occur with Twitter seeing Musk as its new owner despite these claims. However, she thinks the entrepreneur might have another idea: reprice the bid.

“He should walk away, pay the billion-dollar breakup fee and then wait until it declines. He could pick it up for $15 billion versus $45 billion. That’s a nice savings. There’s a lot you can do with $30 billion,” Swisher said. 

Walking away from the deal for the social media company might not be easy. But, either way, Musk is undoubtedly taking a hard look at his bid of $54.20 per share by what Swisher is conveying, wrapping up that her relationship with the possible new owner of Twitter as an “up and down” one.

“We’ve had beefs,” Swisher said. “He hasn’t returned my emails. He usually does. He’s talking to right-wing people. He’s friends with Mike Cernovich. Good for him. He’s making new friends. I don’t care. I have four children; I don’t need Elon Musk.”

Continue Reading

News Print & Digital

New Texas Law Will Make It Illegal to Block, Ban Posts on Social Media Outlets

Texas lawmakers ruled last week that makes it illegal to block, ban, remove, deplatform, demonetize, and de-boost posts on social media platforms.

Published

on

Texas lawmakers have put Big Tech on notice following a ruling last week that makes it illegal to block, ban, remove, deplatform, demonetize, and de-boost posts on social media platforms with 50 million or more US monthly users.

The 15-word ruling will most likely set the stage for an intense debate in the Supreme Court and could further divide a nation struggling to interpret free speech and the First Amendment.

According to MSN, Texas’s law, HB 20, which seeks to address the perceived imbalance, was blocked in December by a district court judge who ruled it was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.

Trade organizations NetChoice and the Computer Communications Industry Association have appealed directly to the Supreme Court, according to The Verge. In a statement, NetChoice counsel Chris Marchese said the law strips private online businesses of their speech rights.

“The First Amendment prohibits Texas from forcing online platforms to host and promote foreign propaganda, pornography, pro-Nazi speech, and spam,” he added.

The Texas attorney general’s that the appeals court made the right decision and said it would continue defending the Texas law.

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2021 Barrett Media.