Trump Hopes To Use AT&T Time Warner Merger As 'Leverage' Over CNN
from the the-peanut-butter-and-jelly-of-bullshit dept
On the campaign trail, you might recall that Donald Trump threatened to block AT&T's $89 billion acquisition of Time Warner, insisting that the deal was "an example of the power structure" he was fighting, because it would deliver "too much concentration of power in the hands of too few." Granted he subsequently appointed an FCC chairman in Ajit Pai who's little more than a rubber stamp for companies like AT&T, and nominated an antitrust boss already on record stating he has no real problems with the merger, leading most analysts to believe the deal will be approved anyway.
There are of course a number of legitimate reasons to block the deal, including concerns that AT&T will make licensing access to necessary programming more difficult than ever for streaming video competitors. Or the fact that AT&T's using its dominance in wireless to give Time Warner content an unfair advantage over competitors via usage caps and overage fees (aka "zero rating"). It would be foolish to think a company with such a rich history of anti-competitive and anti-consumer behavior wouldn't use this greater size and leverage anti-competitively.
But these are complicated nuances it's not-terribly-likely the current President actually understands. Instead, his focus in recent months has been the fact that he doesn't like Time Warner-owned CNN's critical coverage of his administration, and, according to the New York Times, hopes to use the deal as "leverage" to force CNN to soften its critcism of the President as part of his broader assault on the media:
"White House advisers have discussed a potential point of leverage over their adversary, a senior administration official said: a pending merger between CNN’s parent company, Time Warner, and AT&T. Mr. Trump’s Justice Department will decide whether to approve the merger, and while analysts say there is little to stop the deal from moving forward, the president’s animus toward CNN remains a wild card."
Other news outlets noted that the Trump administration is also contemplating demanding the ouster of current CNN boss Jeff Zucker in exchange for approving the deal. The news was quick to result in letters to the DOJ from several Senators who claimed Trump was "interfering" in an approval process that should be left up to regulators and the DOJ to decide:
"Any political interference in antitrust enforcement is unacceptable," Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar wrote in a letter to Attorney General Jeff Sessions. "Even more concerning, in this instance, is that it appears that some advisers to the President may believe that it is appropriate for the government to use its law enforcement authority to alter or censor the press. Such an action would violate the First Amendment."
If you're at all familiar with the ethical behavior over at AT&T (like the times it ripped off a program for the hearing impaired or made bills harder to understand to help criminals scam its own customers), it would certainly be in character for AT&T to agree to trample the editorial firewall between itself and CNN to get the deal done -- it just wouldn't be stupid enough to put any such agreement in writing. As the net neutrality fight makes clear, telecom giants aren't particularly concerned about the whole free speech thing (check out Verizon's first foray into tech content, for example).
AT&T's also a world-class expert at making utterly bogus claims when it comes to its latest megamergers, consistently claiming such deals will lower prices, expand broadband coverage and create oceans of new jobs (telecom megamerger history makes it abundantly clear the exact opposite almost always occurs). Given some similar expertise over at the Trump camp, there's an incredible opportunity for some amazing bullshit here; an opportunity Trump likely won't want to waste by continuing what's become an arguably unhealthy fixation on CNN.
The likely outcome is that we'll get to have our rotten cake and eat it too: a torrent of bogus job and broadband expansion promises the likes of which we've never seen before -- and a CNN left bridled by a meddling new corporate parent focused exclusively on currying favor in the Trump administration to anti-competitive benefit. Just think of the incredible potential for synergies...and bullshit.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: acquisitions, bullying, donald trump, first amendment, free press, freedom of expression, leverage, mergers
Companies: at&t, cnn, time warner
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
You pushed my button. I'll cut-n-paste in the comment I have pre-prepared for when people do this.
Nice article, but... You used the one phrase that pushes my buttons: "You want to have your cake and eat it, too!"
Well duh! What good is having cake and not being able to eat it?!?! What kind of sick bastard hands you cake and then tells you "You can have this cake, but eating it is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN!" The whole point of having cake is to eat it.
No, the PROPER way to say what is INTENDED is "You want to eat your cake and have it, too!" That makes a LOT more sense. Once you've eaten the cake, it's gone and no amount of crying will allow you to have it afterwards.
People have this saying backwards, and I won't rest until people use it in the correct fashion! Given this rant, I feel this is mandatory:
http://xkcd.com/386/
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
And why do people say "head-over-heels"?
Your head is supposed to be over your heels!
If your head is over your heels, that is completely normal!
Now, if you went heels-over-head, that would be unusual!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This i what is great about Trump
The pure and unbridled objective of ALL politics. When your politicians says they are not like this and then says... let's regulate....
ha ha haaaaaaa.... most politicians are just little trumps with weaker spines!
This is why regulation leads to capture, and why politicians like it, and why politicians don't enforce laws so you will give them more power with more laws with which they will use to control the market more.
The businesses have already figured it out, just pay the politicians and you get your way, like a racket. Pay for that protection baby! I bet you would hate to see your precious Internets destroyed right? Now give us more power to regulate, BEG FOR IT!
mwuhahahahahaaaaaaa!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: This i what is great about Trump
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: This i what is great about Trump
Give it a rest Mr. Stawman please!
The Founding Fathers "THEMSELVES" made the same general statements and yet they still setup a government and regulated a few things. O wait... I keep forgetting you guys don't know who they are. My bad!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This i what is great about Trump
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: This i what is great about Trump
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Remove the company and politician names and make the case for consumer's benefit in total consolidation of media and internet company giants.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Sounds like you should just write your own story.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I doubt he is able to spell conflict of interest much less know what it means.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
/s
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
It works elsewhere in the world for other leaders so I see no reason why it won't work in the USA.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
Kelly Ann?
Is that you?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
He didn't start the fire.
I would be shocked if there were any real resistance to this merger regardless of who won the last election.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Worth noting...
However, threatening to block the merger in an attempt to curtail CNN's First Amendment rights is an abuse of the power of the office, and as such is quite clearly an impeachable offense.
Not that impeachment will happen: Trump could kill, cook, and eat a baby on the White House lawn and the spineless Republican members of Congress would furrow their brows and go on cable news to "express concern", then ignore it entirely in order to put party ahead of country.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worth noting...
"The merchants knew perfectly in what manner it enriched themselves. It was their business to know it. But to know in what manner it enriched the country was no part of their business."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Worth noting...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Billy Rubin
"...it just wouldn't be stupid enough to put any such agreement in writing."
That's where Trump comes in. He's the new Midas - everything he touches turns to shit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]