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.


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • icon
    JoeCool (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 10:59am

    GAAAAAAHHHHHHHH!

    The likely outcome is that we'll get to have our rotten cake and eat it too

    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/

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 11:20am

    That's a nice merger you have that. Would be a shame if something were to happen to it...

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 11:21am

    This i what is great about Trump

    "Trump Hopes To Use AT&T Time Warner Merger As 'Leverage' Over CNN"

    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!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 11:55am

      Re: This i what is great about Trump

      The trick is to have one or more corps keeping the other one or more corps in line via threats of law suit. Without any government to make laws, well - you have anarchy. Is that what you want?

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 12:18pm

        Re: Re: This i what is great about Trump

        ha ha... when I talk about the nature of politics and big business you claim that I am asking for anarchy.

        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!

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 12:44pm

          Re: Re: Re: This i what is great about Trump

          No please tell us again about the one fact about George Washington that you know. We really aren't tired of you banging on about it.

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        • identicon
          Anonymous Coward, 13 Jul 2017 @ 7:11am

          Re: Re: Re: This i what is great about Trump

          How is that a strawman?

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Stosh, 12 Jul 2017 @ 11:39am

    Challenge for today:

    Remove the company and politician names and make the case for consumer's benefit in total consolidation of media and internet company giants.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 4:20pm

      Re:

      So your challenge is to remove the context from the story and make the case for something that isn't the point of the story.

      Sounds like you should just write your own story.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 11:58am

    So, our tin pot dictator wants to control mergers?

    I doubt he is able to spell conflict of interest much less know what it means.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • icon
      Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Jul 2017 @ 12:07pm

      Re:

      He does know what it means. It means that when there is a conflict, it must come out in his interest.

      /s

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 12:57pm

        Re: Re:

        And if there isn't any conflict happening, then by golly conflict will be created. Because if you can create the conflict, you can also remove it & show what a wonderful leader you are solving the problems that never really existed in the first place.
        It works elsewhere in the world for other leaders so I see no reason why it won't work in the USA.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      • identicon
        Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 3:33pm

        Re: Re:

        I think he knows, at least his lawyers do, exactly what conflict of interest means and he, or they, are dancing at the edge deftly so far. We'll see if they can keep it up. I dob't think D.T.jr. has the stuff. He should be totally sidelined.

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      JEDIDIAH, 13 Jul 2017 @ 11:18am

      He didn't start the fire.

      Don't kid yourself. Both parties do nothing but rubber stamp this stuff. That's why we're even having this discussion to begin with.

      I would be shocked if there were any real resistance to this merger regardless of who won the last election.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 12 Jul 2017 @ 1:59pm

    Worth noting...

    ...is that attempting to block the merger is just a normal policy decision.

    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.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Cowardly Lion, 13 Jul 2017 @ 9:31am

    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.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Shop Now: Copying Is Not Theft
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.