PDA

View Full Version : Murdoch Admits Fox Tried To Shape War Agenda



Gayle in MD
02-05-2007, 07:50 AM
Murdoch Confesses To Propaganda On Iraq
Filed under: General Propaganda— Mark @ 5:46 pm
Last Friday, at the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, Rupert Murdoch sat on a panel where he lamented what he described as a “loss of power” due to the ascension of the Internet and other new media. The notion that this captain of one of the most dominant media conglomerates in the world is trembling in the shadow of bloggers is simply absurd. Especially when you consider the fact that his company is also a dominant player on the Internet with an aggressive acquisitiveness that includes MySpace, the world’s largest online social networking site.

But there was a more shocking exchange that took place that ought to have caused more of a stir amongst professional journalists and all freedom loving people. It was an exchange that revealed something that most conscious beings knew, but which I have never seen explicitly articulated.

Murdoch was asked if News Corp. had managed to shape the agenda on the war in Iraq. His answer?

“No, I don’t think so. We tried.” Asked by Rose for further comment, he said: “We basically supported the Bush policy in the Middle East…but we have been very critical of his execution.”

Let me repeat this: “We Tried!”

Setting aside the nonsense that they had ever been critical of Bush’s adventures in Baghdad, having confessed to being deliberatly deceitful raises some questions. For instance, how can anyone ever again take seriously Fox News or any of Murdoch’s other instruments of bias? How can News Corp. continue to pretend that they are “fair and balanced?” How can any other media company exhibit the slightest expression of respect or patronization?

And speaking of other media companies, where are they now? The Chairman and CEO of a media empire that includes the number one rated cable news network, and numerous newspapers around the world, has just admitted that he tried to use that empire to “shape the agenda” in support of a partisan political goal with consequences of life, death, and global destabilization. Why has the media, who you might think would have some interest in this subject, virtually ignored these remarks? We know they were there because, on the very same day, there was a media tempest over remarks by John Kerry on whether Bush had turned the U. S. into an international pariah. That trumped up commotion was led, of course, by Fox News. Even the Hollywood Reporter downplayed the most startling portion of Murdoch’s presentation by headlining their story: “Big media has less sway on Internet.” They apparently felt that that was a more weighty revelation than the attempted thought-control exposed by Murdoch.

Where is the outrage? Where are the calls to disband this mammoth and unlawful propaganda machine? Murdoch, who was made an American citizen by an act of Congress because, otherwise, he could not own an American television network, should have his citizenship revoked and be deported back to Australia. Think of the precedent this sets for any other wealthy and ambitious ideologue that seeks to manipulate public opinion. There are plenty of wealthy and ambitious ideologues in the Middle East and elsewhere who may view Murdoch as a role model.

At the very least, it needs to be broadcast far and wide that News Corp. and Fox News are nothing but a tool of the neo-con operatives in government. You might say we already knew that, but this is different. We are not merely accusing them of this stance, they have now admitted it. And it can not be tolerated! Not by any standard of journalistic ethics. Not by a nation that values a free press so much that it incorporated that freedom into its Constitution.

/ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif


Fair and Balamced??? No wonder Cheney loves Fox! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

pooltchr
02-05-2007, 11:14 AM
Where was all this outrage when CBS/Dan Rather reported a story based entirely on forged documents???????????
Steve

wolfdancer
02-05-2007, 11:48 AM
Steve, there's that old saying "two rights, always make a wrong" or something like that....
Are you implying that one can't be outraged at Fox manipulating the news....because one didn't express outrage over Dan Rather first?
Without resources, we have to trust in the veracity and intregrity, of what is being reported as news....until we subsequently learn more facts.....Fox has performed a great public service, in refuting that blind trust, and getting us to do a little more research, before accepting the news as "news".

pooltchr
02-05-2007, 03:00 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote wolfdancer:</font><hr> Steve, there's that old saying "two rights, always make a wrong" or something like that....
Are you implying that one can't be outraged at Fox manipulating the news....because one didn't express outrage over Dan Rather first?
Without resources, we have to trust in the veracity and intregrity, of what is being reported as news....until we subsequently learn more facts.....Fox has performed a great public service, in refuting that blind trust, and getting us to do a little more research, before accepting the news as "news". <hr /></blockquote>

I'm just wondering why some are so quick to jump on this story, but were willing to accept the hack job that CBS tried to pull without getting upset. Seems like a double standard to be upset about one but not the other. Personally, I think they are both wrong in what they are/were doing. It's kinda like I believe a lie is a lie. At least Murdock admits they tried to slant the news. To my knowledge, Rather never admitted to any wrong doing.
Steve

Gayle in MD
02-05-2007, 04:10 PM
Where do you find outrage in my post? This story is nothing new to me anyway. I find it interesting that Murdoch doesn't even try to deny what he did.

Where was all your outrage over learning that we went to war on lies from this administration? Where was your outrage when there was no connection to alQaeda, no WMD's, and no reason to invade Iraq?

Dan Rather's story was true. Why should he apologize? Even if the story was wrong, which it wasn't, your comparison of Fox, intentionally skewing information in an effort to push this country into war by helping this administration to lie to Americans, to a news story about something that happend in the past, is utterly ridiculous. There is no comparison, IMO. Just shows me how little regard you have for the truth, and particularly when it involves the death of over three thousand American troops, and over a half million Iraqis. I have nev er read a single post from you which is critical of the many lies that Bush, Cheney Rice, and Rumsfeld told to psuh this country into an un-necessary war, now the many lies they told about it after wards in order to cover up their complete incompetence in prosecuting it.

Gayle in Md.

Gayle in MD
02-05-2007, 05:29 PM
I wonder, will our troops be tuning into Fox to learn how great things are going in Iraq?http://www.zogby.com/NEWS/ReadNews.dbm?ID=1075

An overwhelming majority of 72% of American troops serving in Iraq think the U.S. should exit the country within the next year, and more than one in four say the troops should leave immediately, a new Le Moyne College/Zogby International survey shows.

I have yet to talk with a single guy or gal that thinks this war isn't pointless, unwinnable, and beyond any military solution.

Bush will go down as the worst of all presidents. An Oil man, who never struck Oil, couldn't get his wife pregnant, can't string together three gramatically correct sentences, refused to answer questions about his cocaine abuse, and drank his way all the way to the White House on his Daddy's connections. Cowboy Diplomacy...all hat, no cattle.

He just needs to get his meshesh out...

"The hardest part of my job is convincing the American people that there is a connection between the war in Iraq, and terrorism."

The memories of this administration will be the horrors of
George Bush, spreading terrorism into Iraq, the greater Middle East, and around the globe, as he piled debt on top of debt.

Gayle in Md.

Qtec
02-05-2007, 07:30 PM
Dan was set up, everyone knows that
Is it OK for political parties to have their own TV stations and call them NEWS channels?

Q

pooltchr
02-06-2007, 06:39 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr>
Dan Rather's story was true.
Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Which planet did they move Maryland to? You can't really believe this statement. The documents were proved to be false, and when they got caught, they let Rather take an "early retirement" to ease the situation.
As for my "outrage", if you read my post completely, rather than selectively, you would see that I stated I believe both CBS and Fox to be wrong. You, on the other hand, still want to give CBS a pass.
When you return to this planet, please let us know.
Steve

Gayle in MD
02-06-2007, 07:53 AM
The story about George Bush is true, period, regardless of what you think, and I, for one, think there is no comparison between the two incidents.

Please tell us who is dying partly because of whatever you "Think" CBS tried to do. Since WAR, is the worst of all results, lying that leads to WAR, is the worst of all lies.

Mary Mapes tells the whole story in her book, not that I think it is at all likely that you have read it.

Gayle in Md.

pooltchr
02-06-2007, 12:22 PM
If what you say is true, why would someone at CBS have to manufacture evidence to substantiate the story?
Steve

Gayle in MD
02-06-2007, 06:06 PM
Read the documents for yourself. And, this isn't all of the proof, the issue was the subject of a documentary in which those quoted in these memos, were interviewed on tape. The story is true.

http://www.truthandduty.com/documents.htm

cushioncrawler
02-06-2007, 06:32 PM
Back in Oz we have black n white footage of young Rupert, who had just taken over hiz dad's little newspaper in Adelaide, in the early 60's ??, saying to a journalist ..." a newspaper owner shoodnt tell the editor to lean one way or another"... or words to that effect.

Gayle in MD
02-06-2007, 06:39 PM
That's a good one. He should be deported, as far as I'm concerned.

Gayle in Md.

Stretch
02-06-2007, 08:53 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Gayle in MD:</font><hr> That's a good one. He should be deported, as far as I'm concerned.

Gayle in Md. <hr /></blockquote>

Unfortunately "propaganda" is what passes for news now, that and ratings. I think the problem lies in the fact that most people are still under the misguided impression that "news" is impartial, unbiased and based on fact. When in actuality it is anything but. In todays information age one really needs to be educated in a number of different sources to even get close to what's really happening.Unfortunately most people are not, so they get fed whatever is easiest and most accessible, that's TV. The government knows this and plays it well. St.

Gayle in MD
02-07-2007, 11:37 AM
Very true, unfortunately. IMO, watching C-Span, reading books, and attending lectures are the only way one can decipher the best available version of the truth. Too bad, IMO, when our country is being manipulated by such a dishonest administration, that people don't realize how important it is to make the effort to learn what is really going on. Murdoch is among the worst of all offenders. It's so obvious, you'd think people would see through it, but we still have that idiotic, nutty 28% who thrive on what they want to believe, rather than uncovering what is really so.

jGayle in Md.

Deeman3
02-07-2007, 12:29 PM
Gayle,

They all have a slant, left or right. Most of us know this and take it into consideration when we watch different news sources. I really enjoy NPR news but have to balance that against other information as I do with some Fox news programming. One thing that does strike me as odd is the continual citing, by you, of the percentage of Americans that feel the war is worng, that GWB is not doing a good job and such. Most of us know why the poll numbers fall in all wars over time and we understand the unpopularity of thigs that can't be resolved by government programs and negoiations. If 69% of the American people polled say they fell abortions are wrong and should be curtailed, would you be quoting those numbers? You never say that over 90% believe in God and 60% attend church. Why are the numbers you now quote so vital to the argument. Has something now put more faith in you at the judgement of the American people? Hillary it thee one that will go entirely by polls. While we diagree on a lot of things, I think you are more thoughtful than that and your other arguments stand up better than popularity arguments.

What percentage of the Chinese felt Moa was a great leader and what did it matter? /ccboard/images/graemlins/frown.gif

DeeMan

wolfdancer
02-07-2007, 02:15 PM
???????????

I think all Gayle is trying to say by citing the polls, is that a majority of Americans do not approve of anything with Bush's imprint on it.....and questions the intellect of anyone that disagrees with that disagreement.
The difference between Chairman Mao, and Chairman Bush, is that we not only can show Bush the swinging door, but we can boot his a$$ through it.
I'm already taking names, and when my people take over....

pooltchr
02-07-2007, 04:18 PM
All polls can be manipulated simply by the way the questions are worded. If I were to ask 1000 Americans the following question, how many would answer yes? Do you think the government has done a good job preventing terrorist attacks in the United States since 9/11?
I would bet the responses would be overwhelmingly positive.

Now if I ask "Do you feel good about the efforts of the government in the war on terror since 9/11?" you might get a completely different response.

Same question...but designed to get a different answer.

Steve

Gayle in MD
02-08-2007, 07:50 AM
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>


They all have a slant, left or right. Most of us know this and take it into consideration when we watch different news sources. I really enjoy NPR news but have to balance that against other information as I do with some Fox news programming.
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

My point is that none of us should be relying solely on news sources to provide us with factual, complete overview of the facts, hence, I sight C-Span's live coverage of our government, lectures and books written by award winning journalists, former government employees, and experts in any given field. While I do watch the news, I am much better prepared to determine those who lie, or have a partisan agenda, due to other studies.

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
One thing that does strike me as odd is the continual citing, by you, of the percentage of Americans that feel the war is worng, that GWB is not doing a good job and such. Most of us know why the poll numbers fall in all wars over time and we understand the unpopularity of thigs that can't be resolved by government programs and negoiations.
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

When all the polls are saying the same thing, one may be relatively sure that there is some truth in them. Our last election, also supports the findings of the polls.


[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
If 69% of the American people polled say they fell abortions are wrong and should be curtailed, would you be quoting those numbers?
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
I quote the number of people, roughly 26% to 30% who still support George Bush because I believe they represent the number of religious fanatics who are still in denial of his lies and failures, and who think they can dictate to all others how they must live, and what personal private choices they have a right to make, according to their own personal religious beliefs. I find that to be very unamerican, and against our constitutional rights. No one is FOR abortion, as I have tried to state here many times. One's personal private decisions should not be a matter of legal or public debate, IMO, or legal interference from any particular religious doctrine. At any rate, if you want to use percentages, the percentages fall far over on the side of personal, private choice.
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
You never say that over 90% believe in God and 60% attend church.
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
I have nothing against people wish to worship, as they choose, nor do I have any gripe with their right to do so. As I have stated many times, I have a problem with Christians, and religious doctrine when it leaads to discrimination or opression against gay people and women, and the obvious part that organized religion has played throughout the history of the world in causing war, death and human destruction. Those who use their personal beliefs as a means to dictate to others what is right and wrong, what is legal and illegal, are the problem, IMO, and it is wrong for government to use their doctrines as a means to dictate to others regarding their personal, private decisions. But, as I often say, they have every right to pray, worship, and preach, just not to dictate to others or force their opinions into the personal lives of others, which they seem determined to do since the dawn of time.


[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
Why are the numbers you now quote so vital to the argument. Has something now put more faith in you at the judgement of the American people? Hillary it thee one that will go entirely by polls. While we diagree on a lot of things, I think you are more thoughtful than that and your other arguments stand up better than popularity arguments.
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
I think it is very clear that the vast majority of Americans now know that George Bush, and his administration lied us into this war, that after rushing into it his administration, and his appointees, continued to lie, demonstrated extremely poor performance, wasted billions of dollars, and caused the loss of over three thousands Americans, during which time, the Republican majority gave them a blank check to continue to lie, and mismanage the war, at the expense of others. The fact that we have, as I say, roughly 26 to 30% still defending such gross incompetence, is proof, to me atleast, that roughly 26 to 30% of Americans are GOOFY! OR, they just hate democrats so much they would rather see our kids continue to die for nothing, OR that they are only concerned about getting a tax break on their stock investments, and don't give a damn about any of the atrocities already committed by Bush, and are willing to deny reality, as long as they get their measly extra bucks.

[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>
What percentage of the Chinese felt Moa was a great leader and what did it matter?


DeeMan
[ QUOTE ]
<hr /></blockquote>

Since I'm not Chinese, I have no dependable numbers to give you on this. I am far more concerned in keeping up with how much debt we now owe China for Bush's War, to the chinese, and other potential enemies, than I am about the past.

Gayle in Md.