Rep. Steve King calls Sunday's health care vote sacrilegious "to take away the liberty that we have right from God," and Glenn Beck agrees that it is the work of "a group of people that have so perverted our faith and our hope and our charity, that is a--this is an affront to God."
Just the kickoff for a foaming-at-the-mouth festival in Murdochland as Peggy Noonan in the Wall Street Journal applauds Brett Baier's sassing of the President on Fox News, while disclosing that "Fox is owned by News Corp., which also owns this newspaper, so one should probably take pains to demonstrate that one is attempting to speak with disinterest and impartiality, in pursuit of which let me note that Glenn Beck has long appeared to be insane."
Her column accompanies another Journal piece titled "Whether or Not Congress 'Deems,' Public Is Steamed" asserting that "brawling" on health care "has fed a public unhappiness with the institution of Congress that now borders on disgust."
How strongly their master, the former Australian Rupert Murdoch, feels about fomenting revolution here is reflected in the fact that, although he recently starting charging readers for such gems online, both links were available free at the time of this writing.
The start of the decisive health care weekend promises to be a test for First Amendment purists as well, as Fox News et al pull out all the stops in what used to be called advocacy journalism but has morphed into anarchic attacks on a president and his party.
How far all this has gone can be judged from the news that Bill O'Reilly is now seen as a moderate.
"You've become in some ways the voice of sanity here," Jon Stewart noted during a recent appearance on O'Reilly's show, which is "like being the thinnest kid at fat camp."
But this weekend, the fat kids will be gorging.
Showing posts with label Rupert Murdoch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rupert Murdoch. Show all posts
Friday, March 19, 2010
Sunday, April 26, 2009
Obama's Bad 100 Days
As good newspapers die across the country, Rupert Murdoch is keeping alive one of the worst, the New York Post, to publish such gems as this weekend's "100 Days, 100 Mistakes" of "Obama's short, error-prone time in office."
Using such unimpeachable sources as Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Murdoch's own Sky News, the President is accused, among other acts of malfeasance, of overusing the teleprompter, sending his daughters to a private school, not adopting a dog from an animal shelter and having Rahm Emanuel criticize Rush Limbaugh.
No. 100 is telling a Democratic congressman who voted against the stimulus bill, "Don't think we're not keeping score, brother."
Murdoch apparently is, too, and journalism buffs are breathlessly awaiting the lists of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal.
Using such unimpeachable sources as Glenn Beck, Sarah Palin and Murdoch's own Sky News, the President is accused, among other acts of malfeasance, of overusing the teleprompter, sending his daughters to a private school, not adopting a dog from an animal shelter and having Rahm Emanuel criticize Rush Limbaugh.
No. 100 is telling a Democratic congressman who voted against the stimulus bill, "Don't think we're not keeping score, brother."
Murdoch apparently is, too, and journalism buffs are breathlessly awaiting the lists of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
Wag-the-Dog Tea Parties
As Fox News, the Wall Street Journal et al are heavy-breathing about Tea Party protests on Tax Day, Gallup discloses that Americans' "Views of Income Taxes Among Most Positive Since 1956."
But reality is no more a deterrent for Rupert Murdoch than it was for William Randolph Hearst when he was stirring up the Spanish-American War in 1898 with a drumbeat of scare headlines. To a message from artist Frederick Remington reporting "There is no war," Hearst famously replied, "You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war." And he did.
In a 24/7 news world, however, Murdoch's efforts seem less like Hearst's than those of the mental case who thinks he's Teddy Roosevelt in "Arsenic and Old Lace," blowing a bugle and rushing up the stairs with a sword, yelling "Charge!"
One reason the Tea Parties won't work as a Wag-the-Dog move lies in Gallup's report that Americans who say taxes are too high has fallen from 68 percent in 2001 to 46 today:
"Since 1956, there has been only one other time when a higher percentage of Americans said their taxes were about right--in 2003, when 50% did so after two rounds of tax cuts under the Bush administration.
"The slightly more positive view this year may reflect a public response to President Barack Obama's economic stimulus and budget plans. He has promised not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $250,000, while cutting taxes for lower- and middle-income Americans. The latter has already begun, as the government has reduced the withholding amount for federal income taxes from middle- and lower-income American workers' paychecks."
Add this to the undoubtedly large numbers of taxpayers who, in meeting today's deadline, will find that, as a result of falling income last year, they can expect a refund, and the tax protests look like they will turn out to be as limp as an overused tea bag.
But reality is no more a deterrent for Rupert Murdoch than it was for William Randolph Hearst when he was stirring up the Spanish-American War in 1898 with a drumbeat of scare headlines. To a message from artist Frederick Remington reporting "There is no war," Hearst famously replied, "You furnish the pictures, I'll furnish the war." And he did.
In a 24/7 news world, however, Murdoch's efforts seem less like Hearst's than those of the mental case who thinks he's Teddy Roosevelt in "Arsenic and Old Lace," blowing a bugle and rushing up the stairs with a sword, yelling "Charge!"
One reason the Tea Parties won't work as a Wag-the-Dog move lies in Gallup's report that Americans who say taxes are too high has fallen from 68 percent in 2001 to 46 today:
"Since 1956, there has been only one other time when a higher percentage of Americans said their taxes were about right--in 2003, when 50% did so after two rounds of tax cuts under the Bush administration.
"The slightly more positive view this year may reflect a public response to President Barack Obama's economic stimulus and budget plans. He has promised not to raise taxes on Americans making less than $250,000, while cutting taxes for lower- and middle-income Americans. The latter has already begun, as the government has reduced the withholding amount for federal income taxes from middle- and lower-income American workers' paychecks."
Add this to the undoubtedly large numbers of taxpayers who, in meeting today's deadline, will find that, as a result of falling income last year, they can expect a refund, and the tax protests look like they will turn out to be as limp as an overused tea bag.
Friday, October 17, 2008
The Wall Street Journal Is Worried
As the McCain campaign concentrates on holding the red states, Rupert Murdoch's house organ for the super-rich sounds the alarm on what could happen if Barack Obama's coattails are long enough to give Democrats filibuster-proof majorities in Congress.
"Though we doubt most Americans realize it," a WSJ editorial warns, "this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s."
A sidebar lists Republican nightmares that passed the House this year but were blocked in the Senate--prescription-drug price controls, renegotiating mortgage contracts in bankruptcy, withdrawal timetables for funding the Iraq war and, horror of horrors, a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
Looking to the future, the Journal is doing a Paul Revere on the possibility of laws to expand health care coverage that could lead to a single-taxpayer system and a "tax-and-regulation scheme in the name of climate change."
To a liberal who was alive when FDR created such support systems as Social Security and FDIC insurance for bank accounts, going back to the 1930s and 1960s, when LBJ finally gave the vote to African-Americans, is nowhere near as scary as continuing the Bush debacle that is decimating our economy today.
But then again, the editors of the Wall Street Journal are so much more sophisticated about such matters, particularly with the Australian-billionaire sensibility they recently acquired.
"Though we doubt most Americans realize it," a WSJ editorial warns, "this would be one of the most profound political and ideological shifts in U.S. history. Liberals would dominate the entire government in a way they haven't since 1965, or 1933. In other words, the election would mark the restoration of the activist government that fell out of public favor in the 1970s."
A sidebar lists Republican nightmares that passed the House this year but were blocked in the Senate--prescription-drug price controls, renegotiating mortgage contracts in bankruptcy, withdrawal timetables for funding the Iraq war and, horror of horrors, a windfall profits tax on oil companies.
Looking to the future, the Journal is doing a Paul Revere on the possibility of laws to expand health care coverage that could lead to a single-taxpayer system and a "tax-and-regulation scheme in the name of climate change."
To a liberal who was alive when FDR created such support systems as Social Security and FDIC insurance for bank accounts, going back to the 1930s and 1960s, when LBJ finally gave the vote to African-Americans, is nowhere near as scary as continuing the Bush debacle that is decimating our economy today.
But then again, the editors of the Wall Street Journal are so much more sophisticated about such matters, particularly with the Australian-billionaire sensibility they recently acquired.
Wednesday, February 27, 2008
Barbarians at the Gray Lady's Gates
The year has not started well for the New York Times. While taking fire for the John McCain story, its family ownership is under siege from hedge funds that have now accumulated over 15 percent of the company's Class A shares.
Symbolically, the attackers are led by Scott Galloway, most often seen in a charity-ball photograph dressed as a blue-faced, sword-wielding Scottish rebel from the movie "Braveheart." But Galloway and his group are digital warriors who insist they don't want to overthrow the old order, just bring it into the 21st century.
In asking for four seats on Times Company board, they wrote that "we are not pursuing a change in the dual class shareholder structure. The New York Times is a great institution controlled by the Sulzberger family and we have no illusion about, or desire to change, that fact...
"We believe a renewed focus on the core assets and the redeployment of capital to expedite the acquisition of digital assets affords the greatest shareholder appreciation and creates the appropriate platform to compete in today’s media landscape."
For their $400 million investment so far, Galloway's invaders have received little encouragement. Their four nominees for the board have been rejected in favor of new Sulzberger choices including, significantly, a close associate of Warren Buffet's.
Nothing like a Rupert Murdoch takeover of the Wall Street Journal is on the horizon, but with 97 percent of its revenue coming from paper-based properties and stock prices falling, the Company is vulnerable to such criticism, as reported by the Washington Post, that "with a market capitalization of $2.8 billion, the single most valuable asset the Times Co. owns, some analysts say, is its new midtown Manhattan headquarters, which may be worth as much as $1 billion. Some have caustically remarked that the Times Co. is now a REIT--a real estate investment trust-- with a newspaper attached."
Amid denunciations of its McCain takeout from the Right and much of the Left, all this is a reminder that the New York Times is one of the few remaining media institutions still family-controlled and being nominally run as a public trust in a time when corporate ownership and "shareholder appreciation" are the rules of the game.
For those who have spent a lifetime in journalism, all this pressure on "the newspaper of record" is a sobering reminder that the old rules in most places are long gone.
Symbolically, the attackers are led by Scott Galloway, most often seen in a charity-ball photograph dressed as a blue-faced, sword-wielding Scottish rebel from the movie "Braveheart." But Galloway and his group are digital warriors who insist they don't want to overthrow the old order, just bring it into the 21st century.
In asking for four seats on Times Company board, they wrote that "we are not pursuing a change in the dual class shareholder structure. The New York Times is a great institution controlled by the Sulzberger family and we have no illusion about, or desire to change, that fact...
"We believe a renewed focus on the core assets and the redeployment of capital to expedite the acquisition of digital assets affords the greatest shareholder appreciation and creates the appropriate platform to compete in today’s media landscape."
For their $400 million investment so far, Galloway's invaders have received little encouragement. Their four nominees for the board have been rejected in favor of new Sulzberger choices including, significantly, a close associate of Warren Buffet's.
Nothing like a Rupert Murdoch takeover of the Wall Street Journal is on the horizon, but with 97 percent of its revenue coming from paper-based properties and stock prices falling, the Company is vulnerable to such criticism, as reported by the Washington Post, that "with a market capitalization of $2.8 billion, the single most valuable asset the Times Co. owns, some analysts say, is its new midtown Manhattan headquarters, which may be worth as much as $1 billion. Some have caustically remarked that the Times Co. is now a REIT--a real estate investment trust-- with a newspaper attached."
Amid denunciations of its McCain takeout from the Right and much of the Left, all this is a reminder that the New York Times is one of the few remaining media institutions still family-controlled and being nominally run as a public trust in a time when corporate ownership and "shareholder appreciation" are the rules of the game.
For those who have spent a lifetime in journalism, all this pressure on "the newspaper of record" is a sobering reminder that the old rules in most places are long gone.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
All the Money You Could Want
Most of us go through life wishing for more money but are never faced with deciding what to do with endless amounts. A news story today suggests how much imagination it takes to deal with no limits.
After a tax scam that yielded millions, the FBI raided a modest home and garage in Washington to find a Mercedes, tons of designer shoes and luggage, silver-plated iguana figurines, 13 watches including a Rolex, 90 purses (47 from Chanel), flutes and goblets by Steuben, a Faberge egg and a silver bar cart as well as courtesy cards used by regular gamblers in half a dozen Las Vegas and Atlantic City casinos, phone bills of $1500 a month and travel receipts from all over. They filled 25 boxes with clothes and listed 414 unidentified pieces in the inventory.
But all this is only a testament to the banality of greed, a kind of Home Shopping Network vision of huge wealth. Without imagination, the woman who apparently embezzled more than $20 million from the D.C. government used it to become a glorified bag lady.
How much more complicated is it for the Warren Buffets, Bill Gateses, and Oprahs of the world, trying to do good, a Mike Bloomberg, pondering whether to buy the White House, or a Rupert Murdoch, too busy trying to acquire more power and influence to spend much actual money in his own life?
For some, it can produce deprivation by surfeit, psychological chaos (pace Paris Hilton and her ilk). For box-office actors and superstar athletes, there are booby traps of hubris and self-importance.
For politicians controlling huge amounts of other people's money, see the President and Congress squabbling over which is acting more like the teenager with an unlimited credit card.
For the rest of us, there is the iffy consolation of believing it's too much money that may actually be the root of all evil.
After a tax scam that yielded millions, the FBI raided a modest home and garage in Washington to find a Mercedes, tons of designer shoes and luggage, silver-plated iguana figurines, 13 watches including a Rolex, 90 purses (47 from Chanel), flutes and goblets by Steuben, a Faberge egg and a silver bar cart as well as courtesy cards used by regular gamblers in half a dozen Las Vegas and Atlantic City casinos, phone bills of $1500 a month and travel receipts from all over. They filled 25 boxes with clothes and listed 414 unidentified pieces in the inventory.
But all this is only a testament to the banality of greed, a kind of Home Shopping Network vision of huge wealth. Without imagination, the woman who apparently embezzled more than $20 million from the D.C. government used it to become a glorified bag lady.
How much more complicated is it for the Warren Buffets, Bill Gateses, and Oprahs of the world, trying to do good, a Mike Bloomberg, pondering whether to buy the White House, or a Rupert Murdoch, too busy trying to acquire more power and influence to spend much actual money in his own life?
For some, it can produce deprivation by surfeit, psychological chaos (pace Paris Hilton and her ilk). For box-office actors and superstar athletes, there are booby traps of hubris and self-importance.
For politicians controlling huge amounts of other people's money, see the President and Congress squabbling over which is acting more like the teenager with an unlimited credit card.
For the rest of us, there is the iffy consolation of believing it's too much money that may actually be the root of all evil.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Giuliani, Murdoch and Judith Regan
She is making news again, this time claiming Rupert Murdoch's people asked her to cover up an affair with Bernard Kerik to protect Rudy Giuliani's presidential ambitions. It's vintage Judith Regan to tie her own interests, this time in a lawsuit against Murdoch, to the headlines.
The charge comes at the start of a 70-page filing for $100 million in damages for what she says was a campaign to smear and discredit her by her bosses at Harper Collins and its parent company, News Corporation.
Before she was famous, Regan sounded me out about writing a book about fatherhood. When I started talking about the complexity of the subject, she cut me off.
"No, no," she said, alluding to her own experience. "It has to be about bastards abandoning their children. The title is 'DaddyWho?'"
After that brief encounter, Regan parlayed her colorful certainty into a notorious career as a book publisher and TV host, most of it under the aegis of Murdoch, a kindred spirit when it comes to eschewing ambivalence.
Now here they are, locked in combat, after Murdoch fired her over O.J. Simpson's "If I Did It" book, which he had apparently approved but backed off when it provoked widespread outrage.
Regan, the New York Times reports, "had an affair with Mr. Kerik, who is married, beginning in the spring of 2001, when her imprint, Regan Books, began work on his memoir, 'The Lost Son.' In December 2004, after the relationship had ended and shortly after Mr. Kerik’s homeland security nomination fell apart, newspapers reported that the two had carried on the affair at an apartment near ground zero that had been donated as a haven for rescue and recovery workers."
Regan has an unerring flair for getting attention and perfect pitch for bad taste. It's a wonder Murdoch ever let her go.
The charge comes at the start of a 70-page filing for $100 million in damages for what she says was a campaign to smear and discredit her by her bosses at Harper Collins and its parent company, News Corporation.
Before she was famous, Regan sounded me out about writing a book about fatherhood. When I started talking about the complexity of the subject, she cut me off.
"No, no," she said, alluding to her own experience. "It has to be about bastards abandoning their children. The title is 'DaddyWho?'"
After that brief encounter, Regan parlayed her colorful certainty into a notorious career as a book publisher and TV host, most of it under the aegis of Murdoch, a kindred spirit when it comes to eschewing ambivalence.
Now here they are, locked in combat, after Murdoch fired her over O.J. Simpson's "If I Did It" book, which he had apparently approved but backed off when it provoked widespread outrage.
Regan, the New York Times reports, "had an affair with Mr. Kerik, who is married, beginning in the spring of 2001, when her imprint, Regan Books, began work on his memoir, 'The Lost Son.' In December 2004, after the relationship had ended and shortly after Mr. Kerik’s homeland security nomination fell apart, newspapers reported that the two had carried on the affair at an apartment near ground zero that had been donated as a haven for rescue and recovery workers."
Regan has an unerring flair for getting attention and perfect pitch for bad taste. It's a wonder Murdoch ever let her go.
Monday, August 13, 2007
Murdoch Retirement Plan for Rove
If Newt Gingrich got $4.5 million and Clarence Thomas $1 million, what will Rupert Murdoch pay for Karl Rove’s memoirs?
In announcing his departure exclusively to Murdoch’s soon-to-be Wall Street Journal, Rove disclosed “no specific job plans, save to write a book on the Bush years, which ‘the boss,’ as in Mr. Bush, ‘has encouraged me to do.’"
To keep his wholly owned franchise, the other boss, Rupert Murdoch, will undoubtedly be the overbidder, even if no other publishing house is holding its nose and competing.
Should the umpteen-million advance not be enough to keep Rove living in high style retirement, there will undoubtedly be a part-time job as a commentator for Fox News.
In announcing his departure exclusively to Murdoch’s soon-to-be Wall Street Journal, Rove disclosed “no specific job plans, save to write a book on the Bush years, which ‘the boss,’ as in Mr. Bush, ‘has encouraged me to do.’"
To keep his wholly owned franchise, the other boss, Rupert Murdoch, will undoubtedly be the overbidder, even if no other publishing house is holding its nose and competing.
Should the umpteen-million advance not be enough to keep Rove living in high style retirement, there will undoubtedly be a part-time job as a commentator for Fox News.
Friday, August 03, 2007
Is John Edwards Accident-Prone?
On the heels of good news about the Iowa polling, the former Senator can’t resist shooting himself in the foot by trying to score points demanding his Democratic opponents give back contributions from Rupert Murdoch.
Today Murdoch’s New York Post notes that Edwards “himself earned at least $800,000 for a book published by one of the media mogul's companies.” Was he, the Post asked, going to give that back?
This little pickle recalls the hoo-ha about Edwards’ use of money raised to fight poverty for campaign purposes and his tortured explanation for earning almost half a million dollars for a part-time job with a hedge fund involved in sub-prime loans to low-income home owners.
Edwards might be well advised to stop talking about the rich and stick to palaver about the poor.
Today Murdoch’s New York Post notes that Edwards “himself earned at least $800,000 for a book published by one of the media mogul's companies.” Was he, the Post asked, going to give that back?
This little pickle recalls the hoo-ha about Edwards’ use of money raised to fight poverty for campaign purposes and his tortured explanation for earning almost half a million dollars for a part-time job with a hedge fund involved in sub-prime loans to low-income home owners.
Edwards might be well advised to stop talking about the rich and stick to palaver about the poor.
Wednesday, August 01, 2007
Murdoch to Buy Bush Administration
On the heels of the Dow Jones deal, Rupert Murdoch has made an offer to acquire the assets of the nearly bankrupt Bush Administration, reliable sources reported today.
Insiders speculate that, among other moves, the media baron plans to merge the White House Press Secretary’s Office with Fox News in a 24/7 effort to counter liberal media bias.
The synergy of the proposed merger is intriguing media analysts, who foresee joint efforts by the newly acquired Wall Street Journal and the Treasury Department to ease trade imbalances and stimulate corporate investment as well as initiatives by the State Department to improve relations with the People’s Republic of China where Mr. Murdoch has been making significant progress in advancing U.S interests.
Off the record, Mr. Murdoch has reassured stockholders of continuity of top management in the White House but has not ruled out lower-level changes such as replacing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with a legal expert of Australian extraction and moving Karl Rove to the New York Post as editor of Page Six, which has lost some of its bite of late.
If negotiations should fail, Mr. Murdoch is prepared to settle for a smaller acquisition, reported to be one or both houses of Congress.
Another possibility is the Supreme Court, where News Corp. has previous ties with a $1 million book advance to Justice Clarence Thomas.
Insiders speculate that, among other moves, the media baron plans to merge the White House Press Secretary’s Office with Fox News in a 24/7 effort to counter liberal media bias.
The synergy of the proposed merger is intriguing media analysts, who foresee joint efforts by the newly acquired Wall Street Journal and the Treasury Department to ease trade imbalances and stimulate corporate investment as well as initiatives by the State Department to improve relations with the People’s Republic of China where Mr. Murdoch has been making significant progress in advancing U.S interests.
Off the record, Mr. Murdoch has reassured stockholders of continuity of top management in the White House but has not ruled out lower-level changes such as replacing Attorney General Alberto Gonzales with a legal expert of Australian extraction and moving Karl Rove to the New York Post as editor of Page Six, which has lost some of its bite of late.
If negotiations should fail, Mr. Murdoch is prepared to settle for a smaller acquisition, reported to be one or both houses of Congress.
Another possibility is the Supreme Court, where News Corp. has previous ties with a $1 million book advance to Justice Clarence Thomas.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Getting Murdoch to Bid Against Himself
One of the iron rules of negotiation is that it takes more than one buyer to raise the price. For a week now, in the final stages of capitulating to Rupert Murdoch, the owners of Dow Jones have been trying to use their reluctance as a lever to get him to up his offer.
No sale. Conning the most relentless media acquirer of our age is a waste of time, especially when his bad reputation is your only tool. Murdoch has stood fast, and now the deal is back on track, if the soon-to-be-his Wall Street Journal has got it right.
But in an act of largesse, Murdoch will leave the Bancroft family a tip by picking up the $30 million tab of their advisers on the deal.
No sale. Conning the most relentless media acquirer of our age is a waste of time, especially when his bad reputation is your only tool. Murdoch has stood fast, and now the deal is back on track, if the soon-to-be-his Wall Street Journal has got it right.
But in an act of largesse, Murdoch will leave the Bancroft family a tip by picking up the $30 million tab of their advisers on the deal.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Dow Jones Goes Down Under
The media melodrama is over. Apparently enough of the Bancroft family will accept Rupert Murdoch’s $5 billion Faustian bargain for the Wall Street Journal.
But give them credit for a struggle to save their souls. At a family meeting Monday night, the Journal reported, one of the matriarchs, 77-year-old Jane Cox MacElree, argued against making the deal with the Devil by invoking the martyrdom of Daniel Pearl.
"He put his life on the line for the paper," Ms. MacElree said, citing the reporter who was kidnapped and killed by Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
Ms. MacElree was supported by daughter, Leslie Hill, a Dow Jones director and former airline pilot, who waved a quarter-inch-thick manila envelope filled with letters from Journal reporters and editors who protested a deal with News Corp.
“She said it was their voices that mattered.” the Journal reported. “In a halting speech, she was on the verge of tears as she talked about the reporters' dedication to their jobs, and told family members they owed it to the Journal's rank and file not to sell the paper, according to participants.”
What’s remarkable about this prolonged struggle is not that the various branches of the Bancroft family finally succumbed to Murdoch’s offer that doubled the market value of their holdings but that so many resisted for so long.
In the era of corporate journalism, it’s sad to witness the loss of another leading family-owned company with the principles expressed by Ms. MacElree and her daughter, but there is a kind of cold comfort in seeing that such sentiments still exist.
Their time may have passed, but Murdoch’s won’t last forever, either.
But give them credit for a struggle to save their souls. At a family meeting Monday night, the Journal reported, one of the matriarchs, 77-year-old Jane Cox MacElree, argued against making the deal with the Devil by invoking the martyrdom of Daniel Pearl.
"He put his life on the line for the paper," Ms. MacElree said, citing the reporter who was kidnapped and killed by Al Qaeda in Pakistan.
Ms. MacElree was supported by daughter, Leslie Hill, a Dow Jones director and former airline pilot, who waved a quarter-inch-thick manila envelope filled with letters from Journal reporters and editors who protested a deal with News Corp.
“She said it was their voices that mattered.” the Journal reported. “In a halting speech, she was on the verge of tears as she talked about the reporters' dedication to their jobs, and told family members they owed it to the Journal's rank and file not to sell the paper, according to participants.”
What’s remarkable about this prolonged struggle is not that the various branches of the Bancroft family finally succumbed to Murdoch’s offer that doubled the market value of their holdings but that so many resisted for so long.
In the era of corporate journalism, it’s sad to witness the loss of another leading family-owned company with the principles expressed by Ms. MacElree and her daughter, but there is a kind of cold comfort in seeing that such sentiments still exist.
Their time may have passed, but Murdoch’s won’t last forever, either.
Friday, July 06, 2007
Supreme Court Racist: Free at Last
As he goes off on vacation, perhaps to write the book for which Rupert Murdoch gave him a $1 million advance, Clarence Thomas can take satisfaction in having embarked on his real life’s work--dismantling the progress in race relations since Brown v Board of Education in 1954.
In her syndicated column today, Ellen Goodman points out a significant statement by the usually silent Supreme Court Justice in the decision striking down voluntary integration plans in Seattle and Louisville schools:
“One sentence leaps out of the footnotes: ‘Nothing but an interest in classroom aesthetics and a hypersensitivity to elite sensibilities justifies the school districts' racial balancing programs.’ He trivialized the values of diversity to a matter of aesthetics and closed with a warning: ‘beware of elites bearing racial theories.’ So much for a half-century of civil rights.”
With Bush appointees Roberts and Alito enabling a 5-4 conservative majority on the Court, Thomas is, in the words of the man who made it possible for him to pursue his life goal, “free at last” to express his inner disdain for African-Americans without the skills, desire or coldness of heart to Uncle Tom their way to the top.
Thomas didn’t invent the stereotype of a self-hating minority member--Jews have had their share--but he is practicing the art at the highest level ever.
In her syndicated column today, Ellen Goodman points out a significant statement by the usually silent Supreme Court Justice in the decision striking down voluntary integration plans in Seattle and Louisville schools:
“One sentence leaps out of the footnotes: ‘Nothing but an interest in classroom aesthetics and a hypersensitivity to elite sensibilities justifies the school districts' racial balancing programs.’ He trivialized the values of diversity to a matter of aesthetics and closed with a warning: ‘beware of elites bearing racial theories.’ So much for a half-century of civil rights.”
With Bush appointees Roberts and Alito enabling a 5-4 conservative majority on the Court, Thomas is, in the words of the man who made it possible for him to pursue his life goal, “free at last” to express his inner disdain for African-Americans without the skills, desire or coldness of heart to Uncle Tom their way to the top.
Thomas didn’t invent the stereotype of a self-hating minority member--Jews have had their share--but he is practicing the art at the highest level ever.
Our Own Tiny Axis of Evil
In today’s Wall Street Journal, Sen. Joe Lieberman achieves a rare feat in the history of puckering up to powerful backsides—-not only fronting for Bush and Cheney but blowing a kiss to the Journal’s soon-to-be-owner Rupert Murdoch with an OpEd urging Congress to “respond” to Iran’s “offensive against us throughout the Middle East.”
While the rest of our lawmakers, including endangered Republicans, are trying to disentangle from Iraq, Independent Joe, safely reelected last year after being repudiated in the Democratic primary, has a new mess for us to jump into in his favorite part of the world.
“The Iranian government, by its actions, has all but declared war on us and our allies in the Middle East,” he proclaims. “America now has a solemn responsibility to utilize the instruments of our national power to convince Tehran to change its behavior, including the immediate cessation of its training and equipping extremists who are killing our troops.”
This follows up on his chest-pounding last month on CBS’ Face the Nation that “we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq."
As a weakened President Ahmadinejad tries to cope with unrest in Iran, Lieberman keeps handing him rhetoric to unite his country against the threat of the Great Satan.
Way to go, Joe. You're getting to be a 97-pound gorilla. Do you have anything in mind for North Korea?
While the rest of our lawmakers, including endangered Republicans, are trying to disentangle from Iraq, Independent Joe, safely reelected last year after being repudiated in the Democratic primary, has a new mess for us to jump into in his favorite part of the world.
“The Iranian government, by its actions, has all but declared war on us and our allies in the Middle East,” he proclaims. “America now has a solemn responsibility to utilize the instruments of our national power to convince Tehran to change its behavior, including the immediate cessation of its training and equipping extremists who are killing our troops.”
This follows up on his chest-pounding last month on CBS’ Face the Nation that “we've got to be prepared to take aggressive military action against the Iranians to stop them from killing Americans in Iraq."
As a weakened President Ahmadinejad tries to cope with unrest in Iran, Lieberman keeps handing him rhetoric to unite his country against the threat of the Great Satan.
Way to go, Joe. You're getting to be a 97-pound gorilla. Do you have anything in mind for North Korea?
Tuesday, June 26, 2007
Murdoch and More
From his dazzling array of affronts to human decency, it is Rupert Murdoch’s insatiability, his pursuit of “more” as the true meaning of life that repels and fascinates above all else.
At 76, he has money and power to burn, but his greed seems to exist on some plane of quasi-religious fervor.
Clichés about loss of potency and fear of death are too pale to explain him. No Citizen Kane, Murdoch is one of a kind. He seems driven to control all the media in the world, even if it means kowtowing to the Chinese government, as the New York Times reports today.
Compare him to Bill Gates, for example, or to his contemporary, George Soros, a successful speculator, who withdrew to devote his fortune to encouraging “open societies, tolerant of new ideas and different modes of thinking and behavior."
Murdoch is not about withdrawing but charging ahead, not about tolerance but conformity, not about encouraging but controlling. He won’t have any troubling getting along with the Chinese regime.
Gates’ and Soros’ sincerity and motives may be subject to debate, but their humanity about the limits of wealth and power offer a contrast to Murdoch, who acts as if he will live forever if only he can keep swallowing companies.
But here is some news for the man who wants to control all the news. In the immortal words of Olympia Dukakis in “Moonstruck”: I just want you to know no matter what you do, you're gonna die, just like everybody else.
But when Murdoch goes, he will get a great obit in the Wall Street Journal.
At 76, he has money and power to burn, but his greed seems to exist on some plane of quasi-religious fervor.
Clichés about loss of potency and fear of death are too pale to explain him. No Citizen Kane, Murdoch is one of a kind. He seems driven to control all the media in the world, even if it means kowtowing to the Chinese government, as the New York Times reports today.
Compare him to Bill Gates, for example, or to his contemporary, George Soros, a successful speculator, who withdrew to devote his fortune to encouraging “open societies, tolerant of new ideas and different modes of thinking and behavior."
Murdoch is not about withdrawing but charging ahead, not about tolerance but conformity, not about encouraging but controlling. He won’t have any troubling getting along with the Chinese regime.
Gates’ and Soros’ sincerity and motives may be subject to debate, but their humanity about the limits of wealth and power offer a contrast to Murdoch, who acts as if he will live forever if only he can keep swallowing companies.
But here is some news for the man who wants to control all the news. In the immortal words of Olympia Dukakis in “Moonstruck”: I just want you to know no matter what you do, you're gonna die, just like everybody else.
But when Murdoch goes, he will get a great obit in the Wall Street Journal.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Book-Contract Baksheesh
On the eve of another Rupert Murdoch mongoose act, this time swallowing the Wall Street Journal, he gets a review from the New York Times that required legwork by no less than four reporters and, in the end, reflects both shock and awe at the Australian who is eating the media world.
America’s “paper of record” narrates Murdoch’s unique skills at getting politicians to act as enablers in his addictive expansion of an information empire.
In addition to the time-honored methods, Murdoch has perfected new variations for buying them, not least of which is bribery by book advance.
As Congress was preparing to redraw the media ownership rules, Murdoch’s book publishing arm, HarperCollins, gave House Speaker Newt Gingrich a $4.5 million contract. In the Senate, Trent Lott got a $250,000 advance for a memoir.
Other Senators came at bargain prices. Arlen Specter, received $24,506 for “Passion for Truth,” Kay Bailey Hutchison $141,666 for “American Heroines.” Chuck Hagel has a book deal for next year.
Unless things have changed drastically since my time as a publisher, books by politicians, unless they involve scandal, are not best-sellers. Trent Lott’s quarter-of-a-million-dollar tome sold 12,000 copies.
But Murdoch got his money’s worth, as he no doubt will from the $1 million advance to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
Book publishing is an odd business that has never been just about money.
America’s “paper of record” narrates Murdoch’s unique skills at getting politicians to act as enablers in his addictive expansion of an information empire.
In addition to the time-honored methods, Murdoch has perfected new variations for buying them, not least of which is bribery by book advance.
As Congress was preparing to redraw the media ownership rules, Murdoch’s book publishing arm, HarperCollins, gave House Speaker Newt Gingrich a $4.5 million contract. In the Senate, Trent Lott got a $250,000 advance for a memoir.
Other Senators came at bargain prices. Arlen Specter, received $24,506 for “Passion for Truth,” Kay Bailey Hutchison $141,666 for “American Heroines.” Chuck Hagel has a book deal for next year.
Unless things have changed drastically since my time as a publisher, books by politicians, unless they involve scandal, are not best-sellers. Trent Lott’s quarter-of-a-million-dollar tome sold 12,000 copies.
But Murdoch got his money’s worth, as he no doubt will from the $1 million advance to Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas.
Book publishing is an odd business that has never been just about money.
Friday, June 22, 2007
Nutsy Fagin Conservative Notions
Maybe they should sell the Wall Street Journal to Rupert Murdoch after all. How much worse could its Editorial Page get?
Aside from the estimable Peggy Noonan, the space seems to have been taken over by escapees from the old Commentary booby hatch. A couple of weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz prays on its pages for Bush to bomb Iran immediately if not sooner. Now Dorothy Rabinowitz compares Patrick Fitzgerald to Duke lacrosse prosecutor Mike Nifong.
It’s a stunning parallel except for the tiny problem that the Duke players were innocent and Scooter Libby was covering up blatantly criminal activity by the Vice President of the United States and the President’s chief adviser.
But before we start carpet-bombing Terehan, let’s disbar Fitzgerald just for the hell of it. Alberto Gonzales never liked him.
Aside from the estimable Peggy Noonan, the space seems to have been taken over by escapees from the old Commentary booby hatch. A couple of weeks ago, Norman Podhoretz prays on its pages for Bush to bomb Iran immediately if not sooner. Now Dorothy Rabinowitz compares Patrick Fitzgerald to Duke lacrosse prosecutor Mike Nifong.
It’s a stunning parallel except for the tiny problem that the Duke players were innocent and Scooter Libby was covering up blatantly criminal activity by the Vice President of the United States and the President’s chief adviser.
But before we start carpet-bombing Terehan, let’s disbar Fitzgerald just for the hell of it. Alberto Gonzales never liked him.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007
Vicious Political Vaudeville
If there is still a line somewhere between journalism and vitriolic jawboning, Dennis Miller doesn’t know where it is. As a Fox News “political commentator,” he is half as funny as he thought he was on “Saturday Night Live” and twice as objectionable.
His diatribe on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, no idol of mine, which is now tickling so many conservative bloggers, makes Keith Olbermann look like Edward R. Murrow. It seems to have escaped Miller’s attention that Olbermann’s commentaries about George Bush are based on facts, not snide gags about his looks and demeanor.
As the current owners of the Wall Street Journal consider selling it to Rupert Murdoch, they may want to take a look at what he considers within the bounds of journalism.
His diatribe on Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, no idol of mine, which is now tickling so many conservative bloggers, makes Keith Olbermann look like Edward R. Murrow. It seems to have escaped Miller’s attention that Olbermann’s commentaries about George Bush are based on facts, not snide gags about his looks and demeanor.
As the current owners of the Wall Street Journal consider selling it to Rupert Murdoch, they may want to take a look at what he considers within the bounds of journalism.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)