SL Tribune Now a Nonprofit

[OGHoosier]

1 hour ago, Valentinus said:

Right. That's not news. I'm saying that churches cannot be left out from under the banner of commercial enterprise. 

By these standards, the definition of commercial enterprise is so broad that it ceases to have meaning. 

[Scott Lloyd]

12 hours ago, Valentinus said:

But they are strong and evident characteristics that make up commercial enterprise. Of course this isn't a lesson on the ontology and expansive definition of the term. No one was claiming that.

I've no interest in starting a thread. All that needed to be said about it has been said.

 

12 hours ago, Valentinus said:

Right. That's not news. I'm saying that churches cannot be left out from under the banner of commercial enterprise. 

More of the fallacy of false equivalence. You and Analytics must be using the same field manual. 

[Scott Lloyd]

Inadvertent repetition of a post. Please disregard the repetition.

 

. 

Edited November 8, 2019 by Scott Lloyd

[CV75]

On 11/4/2019 at 12:24 PM, smac97 said:

Interesting:

I have mixed feelings about this.  Thoughts?

Thanks,

-Smac

From what I have seen, it identifies more as anti-prophet than non-profit.

[Damien the Leper]

3 hours ago, Scott Lloyd said:

 

More of the fallacy of false equivalence. You and Analytics must be using the same field manual. 

Ok, Scott. If you say so.

[Jeanne]

1 hour ago, CV75 said:

From what I have seen, it identifies more as anti-prophet than non-profit.

😟

[blarsen]

On 11/4/2019 at 6:52 PM, 2BizE said:

Without the SLtrib, the Dez News would turn into the North Korean Chronicle.  The Dez News rarely shows multiple points of view.  Always the church’s point of view. 

I would sure be loath to believe that. 

Actually, they have a very Neoconservative, etc., point of view, and only dropped getting most of their national/international news from the NYT, NYT NS, WaPost and AP. in the last few years, currently limiting this input largely to AP . . . which, of course, itself has a decided leftist/neocon slant.

Even after dropping these sources, the Chief Editor is on record in praising the Chief Editor of the Washington Post and William Kristol, a principal neoconservative, who, btw, tagged Evan McMullin to run for President, who was intensely supported by the DesNews.

[blarsen]

On 11/6/2019 at 6:29 AM, Scott Lloyd said:

Is part of this new non-profit arrangement that the Tribune will receive government funding? That was not my understanding. 
 

The tax-exempt status would be under the doctrine that education is one of the functions for eligibility as a 501(c)3 organization. As such, the Tribune could no longer endorse political candidates, although it could still editorialize on issues of the day (presumably a thing that would fall under the education function).

But editorializing can certainly grade into " participat[ing] in, or interven[ing] in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office " (Johnson Amendment portion of 501(c)(3) ).  So theoretically, this would force the Trib to be non-partisan . . . at least as non-partisan as NPR 😉 .

But w/Trump's EO discouraging the Treasury Dept. from enforcing the Johnson Amendment, maybe no effect at all, unless his EO mentioned non-enforcement only in the context of 501(c)3 religious organizations.

[Scott Lloyd]

3 minutes ago, blarsen said:

But editorializing can certainly grade into " participat[ing] in, or interven[ing] in (including the publishing or distributing of statements), any political campaign on behalf of (or in opposition to) any candidate for public office " (Johnson Amendment portion of 501(c)(3) ).  So theoretically, this would force the Trib to be non-partisan . . . at least as non-partisan as NPR 😉 .

But w/Trump's EO discouraging the Treasury Dept. from enforcing the Johnson Amendment, maybe no effect at all, unless his EO mentioned non-enforcement only in the context of 501(c)3 religious organizations.

I think you raise a valid point. The non-profit status could conceivably inhibit the newspaper from editorializing on any number of issues. 
 

As a practical matter, though, I think NPR is fairly left leaning. 

[blarsen]

33 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

As a practical matter, though, I think NPR is fairly left leaning. 

I was being ironic, of course, with:  " at least as non-partisan as NPR 😉 "