A few months ago, I had seen comments (as this entry states) at statesman.com from people who expressed hope that McClatchy would buy the American-Statesman from Cox. At this point, I'm ready to say that I don't believe that this will happen.
McClatchy (per 2008 up-and-coming blog finalist McClatchy Watch) apparently has its own problems at present. First of all, it is selling a large daily (the Miami Herald) itself, with similar results as Cox has had. The Herald just raised its prices in an effort to stay afloat, but there is speculation that it will eventually be merged into another paper.
In the meantime, in an era when many conservatives, right or wrong (and I believe they're mostly right) are seeing a lot of biased media*, one McClatchy paper, the Anchorage Daily News, has spent way too much time and resources trying to paint Alaska Governor Sarah Palin in the least favorable light possible. McClatchy Watch links to a couple of e-mail exchanges that the ADN editor decided to make public, and the comments appear to support him overwhelmingly. With that said, I believe most of the comments are by rabid liberals parroting the same talking points over and over (to which I say: Sarah Palin is not a moron, and she is not a bimbo. Is she perfect? No, and I haven't forgotten my promise to Mike "M1EK" Dahmus that I intend to write in depth about her at some point. But in the meantime, note that almost none (if any) of the commenters bother to debate actual policies.)
My point in all this: McClatchy is hemorrhaging subscribers, as are a lot of newspapers. They are not going to be the saviors of the Statesman.
*Sure, dissenters, use Fox News as your counterargument. I'll concede it to a point. Does it really cancel out every other form of media? Its bias doesn't even match that of MSNBC at this point.