Amazon ( AMZN) is both repeating history and breaking new ground, but you wouldn't know any of it from reading most of the business media. How so? Glad you asked.In reporting third-quarter earnings Tuesday, down 73 percent and almost comically below expectations, Amazon reverted to its old Ama-bomb form. The company is building out costs with a reckless abandon. Margins are so small that traders need to squint to see them. Amazon is spending money, though, in the hope that it will eventually lead to sales--enough sales to surmount the costs. At several times in Amazon's history, this grandiose build-up in costs has worked. It has--you guessed it--led to increased sales over time. Bloomberg, though, doesn't give a nod to this history. They spend time and space talking about how much money Jeff Bezos lost with the sharp drop in the price of his Amazon's holdings (an irrelevancy to traders) but nothing on history. Investor's Business Daily also ignores history. The Financial Times mentions Amazon's history of investing then surmounting its pile of costs, but fails to mention another important factor: this time might be different. In the past, Amazon has invested in, say, distribution centers--and it's doing that here. But Amazon is also investing in shipping like never before through it's Prime program, which is costing it bundles. And it's selling the Fire, its popular tablet device, at a loss, even as it's also spending to build up all the digital content that it hopes to peddle through the Fire. In other words, Amazon is spending on many different fronts. Just as Amazon's history should not be ignored, neither should these new twists. Too often, the business media ignore one or both.