Silencing the conservative press

We surmised a few days ago that the opponents of the FCC’s new ownership rules weren’t as interested in promoting media diversity as in silencing conservative voices. As if on cue, Moveon.org has launched a “media monopoly” fundraiser aimed at Rupert Murdoch: Ironically, the campaign’s name betrays its purpose: Media Monopoly seeks to recreate the … Continue reading “Silencing the conservative press”

We surmised a few days ago that the opponents of the FCC’s new ownership rules weren’t as interested in promoting media diversity as in silencing conservative voices. As if on cue, Moveon.org has launched a “media monopoly” fundraiser aimed at Rupert Murdoch:

murdoch.jpg

Ironically, the campaign’s name betrays its purpose: Media Monopoly seeks to recreate the three network liberal monopoly of the 80s, before Murdoch shook up the system with an alternate view.

These folks do my work for me.

10 thoughts on “Silencing the conservative press”

  1. They use Murdoch because he is probably more well-known than any other media mogul. Moveon.org also wants to get publicity so they use a divisive person like Murdoch. Murdoch also appeals to the people who give money to moveon.org.

    The problem I have with Murdoch is his media outlets have a conservative agenda. Say what you want about ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN but at least the ATTEMPT to be objective, even though they do not always succeede. They do not WANT to be biased although sometimes they are. The bias of Murdoch’s papers are obvious to everyone, and if Fox News is really supposed to be “Fair and Balanced” a former Republican operative wouldn’t be running the network.

  2. Uh, two former Democratic operatives used to run CNN, bubba.

    The bias you speak of is not so much obvious to “everyone” as it is to people who aren’t used to hearing alternative voices, in my experience.

    But whatever–let’s grant the notion that everything Murdoch does is really “conservative agenda” driven, which is far from demonstrated. Even if it’s so, so what? The fear expressed seems to be that people can’t possibly be trusted to think for themselves, and that there are no other voices to be heard.

    Yet since Murdoch, there is more diversity in the news, not less.

    Does this mean I think he’s a saviour? No. I think he’s representative of the greater intellectual diversity our media has these days. Which, from what I can see, is far more varied and diverse than anything I ever saw in the 1970s and 1980s while I was growing up.

  3. Murdoch’s only agenda is making money, and if he could do that with differently-abled Marxist lesbians of color, he would. The left-biased media left a news and opinion vacuum on the right, and he filled it.

  4. If there are ABC, CBS, NBC, and CNN and they at least the ATTEMPT to be objective although they fail miserably and aren’t objective. They try and that’s enough. When watching Fox’s regular news they seem pretty on the ball to me. Most of they’re commentators are conservative but that’s fine because there is no other place you can get that on network television. I think the ultra-liberals get uncomfortable when there obvious mind drivel is exposed. I know to a liberal the truth is a dangerous thing. People may actually believe that they can think for themselves, have personal responsibility for themselves, and there lives. You don’t need a government program to provide that through entitlement programs, now that’s dangerous. Socialist don’t like those kinds of ideas either very similar to liberals in our country. Because that’s the new line for them and it’s a gradual transition for them. Listen to liberal or progressive radio like ieamerica radio listen to them. They don’t care about facts they just try to sell the line that the American dream can;t be had by everyone so we should raise taxes and let the government provide everything for everyone.

  5. Listen, I watch about 12 hours of news channels a day (part of surviving a lonely job).

    CNN is currently the WMD channel: every hour there is another story on how WMD haven’t been found. The bits cut across both regular news and “shows” such as Crossfire. They even find their way into promotions for future shows. It is simply unimaginable that there wasn’t some sort of directive from on high. It’s practically comical: in fact, in the very middle of writing this paragraph, CNN did another 30 seconds on it. They had to choose from 60 minutes of Colin Powell on Late Edition, and guess what sentence they decided to highlight?

    So recently, I’ve taken to switching from CNN to Fox with I hear something utterly mind-bogglingly left-biased, and switching back from Fox to CNN when I hear something utterly mind-bogglingly right-biased. And don’t you know, I switch equally often.

    On Fox the other day, they reported that popularity polls showed that Pennsylvanian’s job satisfaction levels with Santorum “didn’t change” after his anti-gay remarks: polls said 55% satisfactory before, 55% satisfactory after his remarks. The problem was that, an hour before on CNN, they reported the same poll. Before, 55% satisfactory, 22% unsatisfactory; after, 55% satisfactory, 33% unsatisfactory.

  6. ABC, NBC, and CBS and CNN don’t attempt to be unbiased, they just say they are when they really are not. They have no problem introducing Phil Gramm as the “former right-wing Senator from Texas,” which he is, but they can’t seem to EVER get the “liberal” word in front of Teddy Kennedy’s name, and he most assuredly is.

  7. Right AND left wingers will always complain about bias, and because of that, they will find it…in the actual dialogue of interviews, scripted copy, and even in time dedicated to commercials.

    Expecting perfectly unbiased and impartial views from any TV station or network is about as foolish as expecting to win the lottery.

    The excellent solution to this situation is very simple: you *can* change the channel to another station, whose bias might not be controlled by the same people as the channel you just changed from.

  8. One major problem with Faux News, as I’m sure everyone knows by now, is the uhhh…mistaken impressions, shall we say?…..(being polite, ya know) that they leave with their viewers. Who hasn’t see the study that found that viewers who receive most of their news content from FN would have been better off statistically by GUESSING at the issues surrounding the Iraq invasion than by relying on what they’d learned from Fairly Unbalanced?

  9. There is one way to fix this “problem”. If you are a left-wing liberal, watch CNN. If you are a conservative, watch FOX news. Its simple. If you dont like what CNN or FOX says, then DONT WATCH IT. It is near impossible to be unbiased in news today, so deal with it and stop complaining.

Comments are closed.