What I meant by "not so simple" came after those words. Commercial forces and technology don't explain everything. Whatever destiny holds in store for them (da-dum!), newspapers right now are still fairly influential in creating and sustaining conventional wisdom.
Yes, owners (outright like the Barclays thru Press Holdings, or publicly traded like Murdoch) do choose editors, and thus editorials (and more) - but the slant of the paper has to have an audience. I don't think content is a wrapper for delivering editorials, it's a wrapper for advertising products and services. The 'conventional wisdom' is marketing ;-)
But I know we'll have to agree to disagree on this one. You can't be me, I'm taken
But I still don't see (in your picture) why wealthy businessfolk like to own newspapers if it's such a constraining and unprofitable deal - unless there's another side to this, which is influence in the political debate.
I see most of the major media owners as engaged in a charade of influence. You can't be me, I'm taken
