Tuesday, November 27, 2012



Infamous “fair and balanced” television news network demonstrates repeatedly just what those terms mean to that corporate news department.    What influence does corporate management have on broadcasters' approach to delivering news?   Do a Google Search for “News Bias – YouTube Videos” and you’ll find quite a selective number of examples of that network's news presentations.

Thomas E. Ricks, a Pulitzer Prize winning former reporter for the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post, who writes on defense topics provides the most recent view on news reporting at that illustrious network.  He even had the audacity to suggest that network was “operating as a wing of….” a political party he named.  What do you think?

What corporation owns that network?  News Corp which also owns Dow Jones & Company that owns the Wall Street Journal.  Oh, did I mention News Corp is owned by Rupert Murdoch?

Mr. Murdoch thrives on building his power structure for media control with the base being tabloid journalism.  That’s how he started in Australia, then went to Great Britain where he injected his philosophy, business and ethical practices or considerations into what many respected journalists believe to be a very negative force to not only quality journalism there, but allegedly may have had improper influence with that nation's government.   

I shuddered when I heard he was coming to the United States years ago, then became a U. S. citizen which made it legal for him to own broadcasting stations.   The rest, as they say, is history in terms of the influence that news network has had as a political force in our nation. There seem to be an incredible number of viewers who have a positive accepting view of what news is presented there.  I am definitely  not one of those people.

The empire Rupert Murdoch has built was somewhat short-circuited in Great Britain with accusations of alleged criminal acts by Rebecca Brooks, his News International Chief Executive, and others.  Read specifics at this Guardian website.

I’ve been following the fortunes of Rupert Murdoch since I was first impressed with his phenomenal business success in Australia which took him to Great Britain.  Then, years ago as his empire grew with the simultaneous decline of what I, and many others much more knowledgeable, could perceive as destructive to Great Britain journalism’s better values at news publications he owned, my opinion completely reversed -- long before he ever reached our U.S. shores. 

Here’s a link to a New York Times updated succinct summary about Rupert Murdoch.

Scroll down to “Murdoch in America: A Political Force,”  then “Dividing the Company in Two,”: and finally, “Murdoch Resigns From His British Papers’ Boards.”

Rupert Murdoch’s business ethics plus his empire’s corporate values will continue to influence U.S. journalism and politics and not for the better in my humble opinion.  

I believe those who desire sincere efforts to present balanced, fair news reporting will want to exercise due diligence to determine that’s what they’re receiving everywhere, but especially with this repeatedly discredited television network's news offerings..... 

the Fox is guarding the news hen house, so beware.


  1. Dear Joared, I never watch Fox, whether that be news or any of its shows. Well, I do watch one in the summer called "So You Think You Can Dance." The choreography and the dancing is so wonderful that I can't resist it.

    But I'd never so for news to Fox because the station truly is an arm of the Republican Party. The reason I know that is because so many times I've read online or in the newspaper about something that Fox newscasters have said or done or I've read the people whom they are going to interview and it's clear that they are one-sided. And hyper also! Peace.

    1. I wonder how many regular Fox viewers, and those listening to some radio bloviators bother to check elsewhere for the accuracy of what they're being told?

  2. Fox News is a disgrace to responsible journalism. Perhaps equally disgusting is the large number of Americans who continue to watch it, therefore promoting advertising sales that keep the network on the air. We must support freedom of speech, so there is no way to combat this sort of phony entry into the world of media other than for people to turn the dial to something more rational.

    1. We viewers and listeners really need to be discriminatory, but seems there may be a fairly large population who aren't.

  3. Murdoch's a piece of work, all right. But losing this election really has hit the Republicans hard, and their #1 noise machine is in trouble. More and more viewers are turning to MSNBC, where they can get substantive coverage of the news, along with commentary, across a spectrum of political opinion, from Morning Joe to Rachel Maddow.

    1. Their "#1 noise machine" can't be in enough trouble for my taste. I'd like to see some reconsideration made on some of their stations when FCC license renewals come up, or the actual network and ownership itself if it could be done.

      The Big Three major networks have not been lily white pure, and I think NBC has declined since G.E. assumed ownership, but those three are paragons of virtue compared to Fox which is disgraceful as an example of what good journalism strives to be.