Who cares. Spoiled rotten rich kid that never worked a day in his life.
How come in this era of openness, no one says that David Copley was gay? Didn't he himself ever acknowledge that fact? Also, since he sold the U-T, didn't he live most of the year on a huge yacht anchored in foreign ports?
The U-T San Diego obit on David was most curious. I'm not sure you could call it an encomium, but it did sound like something that would have been written about him if he had still been the owner/publisher of the paper. No, there was no mention of his sexual orientation, and only a fleeting comment about his time spent in the Mediterranean. That means they neglected to mention his $33 million yacht and the cost of its upkeep. There was a time when the Copley Press was talking poor-mouth, and yet he appeared in the society pages of his paper with the "beautiful people" on the Riviera. But it did describe his home and that of his mother, both in La Jolla. And finally, there was no mention of his "fire sale" of assets in recent years, dismantling the media and cultural empire of his father and mother. A truly tragic figure. As SurfPup says, RIP.
It's interesting that everything I've read about David Copley since his death is either "pro" (his philanthropy) or "con" (his self-indugence), but no one seems to remember the moment that defined his true character.
David Copley was rich because his mother Helen (then a secretary at the San Diego Union) married Jim Copley, and Jim Copley adopted David. Neil Morgan, then an editor at the San Diego Union, was the matchmaker who fostered the union between Helen and Jim.
And what did David do after he took over the paper? In an act of supreme ingratitude, he fired Morgan - "Mr. San Diego," an award-winning journalist and civic booster who changed the course of Helen's (and therefore David's) life.
I think it's a waste of time to discuss all the ways that David Copley wreaked havoc in his own life. The firing of Neil Morgan was the defining moment that showed the true nature of his deeply flawed character.
You make a good point. Morgan was a very interesting guy, and not always an honest journalist--his boosterism of San Diego was often over-the-top--but he deserved better from U-T top management. A graceful retirement of the old boy was in order, not a dismissal.
Business friendly is just code for corporate welfare. It's ok if the rich get welfare but not the poor.
"Then don't go there" is unconstitutional.
Ian Anderson 5 p.m., Feb. 8
Marty Graham 3:30 p.m., Feb. 8
Daniel Powell 3 p.m., Feb. 8
Don Bauder 12:30 p.m., Feb. 8
Various Authors 9:18 p.m., Feb. 7
Ruth Newell 8:48 p.m., Feb. 7
Daniel Powell 1 p.m., Feb. 7
© 2016 San Diego Reader. All rights reserved. No part of this site may be reproduced without our written permission.
Each newsletter subscription means another chance to win!