"Or Would GM Be Going Bankrupt?"

001, just take a look at all the debt on GM's financial statements and that will answer your question.

But the hype sent sales into the tailspin and this is the result...It took them over the edge.

Just look back and read the majority of the headlines last September...Two themes...They don't have cars people want and they don't have enough hybrids.

Toyota has enough hybrids but that hasn't helped them.

001

You are right the media did jump on the bandwagon, but pull their annual filings from 2007, 2006, 2005, etc. and you will still see a company saddled with tremendous expenses and debt.

You are right about the media bandwagon creating self-fulfiling prophecies. But people in general are also to blame. It seems to me that people already have their minds made up about things, and they tune in to the channel that will tell them what they want to hear. Their crackpot ideas are reinforced by the talking head in the box, and they behave in a way that causes things to happen. This goes for those on the left and right. It's a vicious cycle.

Great point!

001

"the left leaning outlets (which in today's world are most)."
Who would that be? Fox, Wall Street Journal, NY Post? Maybe CNN, owned by mega giant corporate TimeWarner (the third largest media company in the world). Or MSNBC? Oh yeah, they're owned by General Electric, I'm sure they're really left-leaning too. Surely not even the NY Times can be considered left leaning now, after their dismantling of the Gore campaign in 2000 and their drumbeat to the Iraq war. Nope, I'd say the myth of the left wing media is dead and buried.

http://www.webpan.com/dsinclair/myths.html

Dude, just because Al Gore didn't get elected (that was his dumb fault) and looking at how most New Yorkers like their news, to the left, liberal outlets like the L.A. Times, MSNBC and the like have horrible ratings and are fringe lunatic basins that constantly try to form the news in "their image." Try this: look at any news stations or listen to NPR, or any "informative" outlet and see how many times bad news is reference to anything left or even if the word "progressive" is used in anything bad or corrupted. You won't. Please, I want to be proven wrong.

Al Gore, like is totallly inept. I'm glad we had time to see what kind of nut job he is. No Al, the world hasn't ended. Look at his brainy quotes:

"I've been a part of the discussions on the strategic reserve since the days when it was first established." However, President Ford established the Strategic Petroleum Reserves when he signed the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) on December 22, 1975 — two years before Al Gore became a congressman

It was Gore's moment to shine before donors who ponied up $2.8 million. But he wound up egg-faced when he compared electing a Republican as president to rejecting an Oscar-winning team in favor of the producers of the Hollywood clunker ''Howard the Duck.'' One of the evening's hosts, Jeffrey Katzenberg, was a driving force behind ''Howard the Duck.'' The crowd tittered.

"During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet" Gore said when asked to cite accomplishments that separate him from another Democratic presidential hopeful, former Sen. Bill Bradley of New Jersey, during an interview with Wolf Blitzer on CNN on March 9, 1999.
Gore supported technological advances related to the advancement of the Internet, but to say that HE took the initiative in creating the Internet is a bit much.

Which is it Al? Articles paint you as a techie nerdie type with early, and possibly fairly substantive knowledge of computers and networks, but you can't use a computer? You used Arpanet in the 70's but now have trouble turning on a computer?

"A zebra does not change its spots." - Al Gore, attacking President George Bush in 1992.

Vice President Al Gore, wowed by the Bulls, said: "I tell you that Michael Jackson is unbelievable, isn't he. He's just unbelievable." Michael Jordan was playing.

These are just a few. A gaffe is every now and then. Just because he won a Nobel Prize doesn't make him inept. Savants are gifted, but they are still mentally handicapped. See what you want.

Can someone be inept and win a Nobel Prize? Well let's see, Jimmy Carter also won a Nobel Prize. Does that answer your question?...And yes, the NYTimes is the epitome of liberal media (and journalistic malpractice) along with MSNBC, CNN, NBC, ABC, CBS, TIME, NEWSWEEK, LATIMES, and on and on and on. Of all the mainstream media only Fox, Washington Times and WSJ qualify as leaning right.

maybe it's the people freely flinging the word "inept" at Nobel laureates who happen to have politics differing from their own, who are TRULY INEPT in evaluating peoples' worth in the global scheme of things?

or do they actually believe the Nobel selection committees are ALSO inept, but they themselves are unrecognized geniuses?

Amen

NY Times, LA times, Tribune Group and most major newspapers, MSNBC, CNN, NBC, CBS, ABC, Google News, Yahoo News, etc. not just my opinion...opinion of most independent news analysts

001

"opinion of most independent news analysts"

001, I generally like your stories on this site (unlike 9 and J, arghhh). But I would expect more attributions than just "most independent news analysts." That's like Fox News favorite, "Some say..." Prove me wrong if you can. Who are these analysts? Rand operatives, Fox contributors, who? I gave a source, and it didn't take long to find it.

The only individuals that never see a left leaning press, are those that agree with that viewpoint, or truly can't make out the difference.

I heartily concur 1995.

The media (most, but not all) definitely has a liberal bias, and anyone who doesn't see that is deluding themselves. The media (most, but not all) grabs an issue and wrestles it until it is completely overblown, creating a crisis where there is none. Asserting that the media is not liberal because it did not challenge the invasion of Iraq is foolish -- the media has reported nothing but bad news from Iraq for what, six years now.
Get a grip.

"but they weren't questioning getting involved in the first place, while every liberal in this country knew iraq had nothing to do with terrorism." Except, of course, for all the liberals in congress that voted for authorization to use force. (ex. your current sec. of state, Hillary Clinton) And don't forget that her husband, Bill, and Al Gore both agreed that Iraq was trying to acquire WMD. How quickly and conveniently those on the left forget.

1UAW, I think you are trying to take the noble road by saying "It dose not matter from wich side the news comes from the key here is that bad news sales and good news don't" I wish it was true. News is to be reported, not opinionated. It's sad when you have to go to number of news outlets on both sides to get the real news. I filter ALL news coming out of the main steam media for me and my kids and a great number of parents feel the same in steady growing numbers.

Media was all in hopes of not blowing things out of proportion...although we all know that the matrix created by the media is not real anyways... but don't listen to me double 001. -peralb

Without the media, we would still be believing the banks and GM is making money or is in good shape.

American companies in general are top heavy and the people at the top are overpaid.Does 1 person need to make 10 mil a year!!!!It's know wonder everything has finally gone to shit and don't bother blaming the UAW , they don't control the financial institions or Wall st.

The media isn't about the truth anymore, the more they dramatize something the more copy they sell. They don't care who they are hurting.

Thats the problem with freedom of the press.

Regardless if the prices went up or down...still GM would lose money right away. GM has never showed any signs of innovation based on their designs. They were a one sided company that was always on the status quo.