Climate Change Denier Buys National Geographic

[tay]

It’s bad enough to think of such an esteemed publication getting Fox-ified. But Boing Boing caught this in the NatGeo press release:

"The value generated by this transaction, including the consistent and attractive revenue stream that National Geographic Partners will deliver, ensures that we will have greater resources for this work, which includes our grant making programs that support scientists and explorers around the world,” (Gary Knell, president-CEO of the Society) said."
​

“Rupert Murdoch will be to some large extent controlling a $1 billion organization whose stated mission includes giving grants to scientists,” Boing Boing's Xeni Jardin pointed out. “A climate change denier with now even more power and influence over science grants in the United States."


NatGeo fans are not pleased. Raw Story caught some of the outrage and vows to boycott:

“Rupert Murdoch owning National Geographic is like putting Dr. Kevorkian in charge of a hospice,” photographer James Cooper wrote on Twitter.
​

Climate Change Denier Rupert Murdoch Now Owns National Geographic - NewsHounds

 

[petros]

What is to deny? We are now average again. Hooray for average!

 

[darkbeaver]

It’s bad enough to think of such an esteemed publication getting Fox-ified. But Boing Boing caught this in the NatGeo press release:

"The value generated by this transaction, including the consistent and attractive revenue stream that National Geographic Partners will deliver, ensures that we will have greater resources for this work, which includes our grant making programs that support scientists and explorers around the world,” (Gary Knell, president-CEO of the Society) said."
​

“Rupert Murdoch will be to some large extent controlling a $1 billion organization whose stated mission includes giving grants to scientists,” Boing Boing's Xeni Jardin pointed out. “A climate change denier with now even more power and influence over science grants in the United States."


NatGeo fans are not pleased. Raw Story caught some of the outrage and vows to boycott:

“Rupert Murdoch owning National Geographic is like putting Dr. Kevorkian in charge of a hospice,” photographer James Cooper wrote on Twitter.
​

Climate Change Denier Rupert Murdoch Now Owns National Geographic - NewsHounds

National Geographic has been a crappy publication for as long as I can remember. Great photography but nothint else.

 

[EagleSmack]

Oh no.... what will the alarmists do without NatGeo underfoot!

Looks like I am going to renew my subscription after giving it up a decade ago!

 

[AnnaG]

Well, someone has to own it. There are other scientific sources of news available in case Murdoch messes with the status quo of NatGeo. He may well find that if he does mess with it, he would be messing with NatGeo's circulation (read "profits"), as well.

 

[petros]

It was a nonprofit.

 

[AnnaG]

Not any longer, apparently.

 

[petros]

When are they cutting cheques to members?

 

[AnnaG]

Ask them. How the frack should I know?

National Geographic magazine is now a for-profit business thanks to Fox | The Verge

Anyways, I bet it messes with circulation in the least.

 

[petros]

No biggie. With Africa going Muzzie all the boob pictures are already gone.

 

[darkbeaver]

It was a nonprofit.

Define profit. So is US Aid. Churches.

 

[petros]

Look up the NPO laws.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

I don't care whether Murdock makes money or the fate of National Geographic. But it certainly has gotten some peoples feathers in a knot.

 

[Glacier]

What is to deny? We are now average again. Hooray for average!

The whole premise of the OP is a big fat leftist lie. Rupert Murdoch is no longer the CEO of Fox, so there's lie number 1 (though he is still a co-chair). Fox already owned 50%, and now they are going to 73% so it's not really much of a change. Finally, it was done to make money, not a spread a political message. Ruining National Geographic's reputation by meddling politically would ruin their chances to make money, which is the entire reason why the increased their ownership to begin with.

 

[B00Mer]

Climate Change, it's to late... We're all going to die....

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Climate Change, it's to late... We're all going to die....

Not as long as we hurry and buy carbon credits!

 

[darkbeaver]

Look up the NPO laws.

You have a narrow idea of profit.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Ask them. How the frack should I know?

National Geographic magazine is now a for-profit business thanks to Fox | The Verge

Anyways, I bet it messes with circulation in the least.

From your own article. . .


"The National Geographic Society itself will remain a nonprofit, though its endowment is set to increase to almost $1 billion as a result of today's deal. That investment will let the society "basically double" its investment in science, the society said in a statement."

 

[AnnaG]

From your own article. . .


"The National Geographic Society itself will remain a nonprofit, though its endowment is set to increase to almost $1 billion as a result of today's deal. That investment will let the society "basically double" its investment in science, the society said in a statement."

Well, a society is a society. Society magazines are something else.