You are browsing the archive for Fox News.

by spocko

Why Does Fox News Side With Abusers Like Ray Rice?

2:35 pm in Uncategorized by spocko

Today’s Ray Rice story is still developing, but one thing it illustrates is the role outsiders can play in demanding justice and then expecting change from an institution that failed to act–or failed to act with sufficient seriousness about a problem.

Digby and Perlstein wrote today about what happened when we failed to hold individuals accountable for malfeasance. When institutions protect individuals, by explaining away their actions, it prevents change from happening.

The other thing it is illustrating is how great it is to have a group of people like Fox News or the RW media on your side, even if only temporarily.

Last week I wrote this piece, CEO Abuses Puppy. Why RW Media Supports Abusers Instead of Victims. I wondered how the RW media would act when they were told to be on the abusers’ side.

Well today we saw just a peek of what that might look like on Fox and Friends. Now they aren’t totally on the side of Rice, but they are able to get in some victim blaming and pass on some protective advice to their abusing buddies.

 

‘We should also point out, after that video — and now you know what happened in there — she still married him,’ host Steve Doocy explained. ‘They are currently married.’

‘Rihanna went back to Chris Brown right after [he assaulted her],’ co-host Brian Kilmeade noted. ‘A lot of people thought that was a terrible message.’

‘I think the message is take the stairs,’ he added, as co-host Anna Kooiman giggled.

‘The message is, when you’re in an elevator, there’s a camera,’ Doocy concluded.

Kilmeade says to avoid the situation whereas Doocy, the real brains of the outfit, says to avoid the cameras. The person who might be the most righteously upset, Anna Kooiman, first defends football in general (avoiding addressing NFL’s policies) and then giggles at a lame joke.

The message isn’t “don’t do something nasty,” but “don’t get caught doing nasty things on video.”

I’ve read that Rice has now been fired and supposedly some changes will happen at the NFL. Enough people were outraged, and let them know it, that their weak measures were deemed not enough. The firing is important, but it is the promised changes that we hope will have a lasting impact, we need to keep an eye on.

Will there be any changes at Fox and Friends for their victim blaming? Nope, of course not. Because their institution is doing exactly what it was designed to do, protect the abusers in their club, instead of the victims.

Fox and Friends aired before Rice had been drummed out of their club, so they didn’t have to defend him full throatily. If they had, they might have started talking about how, “He’s the real victim here,” because of concussion damage from football. But they got the word from on high, the real client is the NFL.

They will be defending the NFL in the future, and whatever actions they were forced to take to get the rabble to simmer down.

Fox knows that the real clients are the members of the club who pay their bills. The $9 billion dollars a year in revenue, non-profit club calling themselves the NFL.

UPDATE from Raven’s Press conference.

I just watched the Raven’s Press conference. I don’t want to bag on the reporters, they are probably used to asking the coach really hard questions of athletes and getting answers like, “We came to play.” but when talking to the coach, they could have pressed harder, this is some hard news.

One asked, “Why didn’t you have access to the tape before today.

I have no answer to that. (Educational video link for  the purpose of media criticism)

And that was it. Okay then.

No follow up, “Well can we talk to someone who DOES have the answer?”

So to follow up on my theme, from the CEO kicks dog post, the control of this video is a HUGE deal,  ’who saw the video when’ and who has access to it is a huge power play. That the reporters just let it slide might be expected if they are being deferential to the coach, but will we see any follow up? I’m guess that will be coming with the “wrongful termination” suit.

ADDED:

Keith Olbermann

by spocko

BREAKING: UPDATE Malaysia Airlines Plane Reported Shot Down on Ukraine-Russia border

8:43 am in Uncategorized by spocko

 

A Malaysian Airlines craft in flight

Spocko anticipates the media spin as another Malaysian Airlines flight crashes.

In the minutes, hours and days to come you will be reading a lot about this story. This is a tragedy with the loss of multiple lives that will effect thousand of people’s families and friends. There will be a lot of speculation, incomplete information and conflicting reports. My friend Dave Johnson often reminds me that people who closely follow the news with a critical eye notice how it is shaped, spun and redirected.

We will be told not to speculate without enough information, while all the experts and both ‘fair and balanced’ broadcasters and journalists WILL speculate. Even people we respect will offer opinions based on certain biases. This is a chance to watch for them. Maybe even to point them out.

Here is the Google News headlines and links as off 9:29 PST:

Malaysia Airlines Loses Contact With Passenger Plane Over Ukraine ABC News

More:

Realtime Coverage

  • Ukraine Accuses Russia of Shooting Down Fighter Jet Wall Street Journal
  • Malaysia Airlines Passenger Jet Crashes in Ukraine, Reports Say NBCNews.com 
  • Ukraine accuses Russia of downing plane; Moscow attacks new sanctions Los Angeles Times
  • Ukraine says Malaysian airliner shot down, 295 dead -agency Cyprus Mail
  • Ukraine’s president say his nation did not shoot at any airborne targets; Minneapolis Star Tribune
  • MALAYSIAN PASSENGER CARRYING 295 SHOT DOWN IN UKRAINE Daily Sabah 
  • Malaysian airliner crashes in east Ukraine DigitalJournal.com 
  • Malaysia Airlines Loses Contact With Plane Over Ukraine KUOW
  • Malaysia Airlines Passenger Jet Crashes in Ukraine, Reports Say NBCNews.com 

Here are a few questions that will come up in maybe 24 or 48 hours. I don’t want to minimize the tragic loss of life, but that will not stop Fox News from working hard to pin this on liberals, Obama, Hillary Clinton or John Kerry.

  1. How does this help John McCain? In his comments about Foreign policy? (UPDATE. John McCain just appeared on CNN at 10:30 PM)
  2. What did Obama know about this? Did his failure to act in the Ukraine crisis help this happen?
  3. Isn’t this just a distraction from Benghazi? (Three to five days for this one, I’m starting the clock.)
  4. Has John Kerry responded? Hillary? Why are they always so slow to respond when it involves Obama’s failures in foreign policy?

Seriously:

If you were Roger Allies what spin would you suggest your anchors use on this news piece to attack liberals, the White House and Hillary Clinton?

If you compare headlines then substance and analysis as the story develops you will see how Fox New, Limbaugh and the RW media move the needle away from the issues there and move them to the issues here. They will be asking, How does this effect the November election of Obama? That is how it is done by the grandmaster of deception to further his agenda.

Read the rest of this entry →

by spocko

Murdoch’s Favorite Editor, Rebekah Brooks, Cleared of Phone Hacking Charges

4:12 pm in Uncategorized by spocko

News International in front of the Select Committee

Former News of The World editor Rebekah Brooks cleared of all charges. Fellow former editor Andy Coulson found guilty of conspiracy to hack phones.

The former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks has been cleared of all charges in the phone hacking trial at the Old Bailey.<

Brooks, the one-time editor of the News of the World, was overcome with emotion as she was found not guilty of involvement in a conspiracy to hack phones between 2000 and 2006, as well as misconduct in a public office and perverting the course of justice.

But while Brooks walked free from court to a waiting black cab today, her fellow former editor and ex-Downing Street spin doctor Andy Coulson was found guilty on one count of phone hacking.

The jury returned this morning after continuing its deliberations for an eighth day, following the high profile trial that began in October last year.

Brooks and Coulson, along with retired managing editor Stuart Kuttner, had been accused of being part of a conspiracy to hack phones over the course of a six-year period.  – The Independent, Adam Withnall

In July of 2012 I hosted a Book Salon on Tom Watson’s and Martin Hickman’s book: Dial M for Murdoch: News Corporation and the Corruption of Britain. At the time I remember thinking what a great story it was and I wanted to learn how we could have a similar impact on Fox News and News Corp here in the US.

Now we see what political power can get you. I’m sure there is a lesson for us here in the US. I remember thinking, “With a combo of good journalists, lawyers and politicians we could uncover dirt at Fox News.” We could even use the Corrupt Foreign Practices Act. But the trick was to find others who felt as strongly as I did.

I’m an idealist and a fighter. I’m not a prosecutor or politician. One of my big take aways from this trial is that your target and goals don’t have to be the same. The King will protect his favorites but he will also sell out almost anyone else to do it. Aim for the top knowing the King will even burn the Prince if necessary, which gets you the Prince! The Prince’s crimes are just as bad, and that can lead to reforms.

Always Look on the Bright Side of Life?

This last week I’ve been rather depressed about the ability of powerful people to skirt and use the law, the political system and a cooperating media to avoid accountability. 

But I don’t want to discount all the good work that was done by the journalists, lawyers and politicians like MP Tom Watson who brought this hacking case to light. It was used to reign in some of Murdoch’s power.

I sometimes wonder, “What can we do to reign in Roger Ailes power?” Is there a strategic campaign to make it happen? We can see that it’s not just money in politics that has an impact, it is also the media in politics. Murdoch loses 100′s of millions of dollars on some newspaper properties because he knows that is a different kind of power. (Which reminds me of the old joke, “Sure we lose money on every paper we sell but we make it up in VOLUME!”) Murdoch wants and has VOLUME!

LOL Comedy Media, But We Need the Real Media Too

The people that really cover the media today are the comedy media. The comedy media is great, but their work doesn’t lead to prosecutions, firings, civil damages and prison time. I’m sure Colbert and Stewart will have a hilarious story about this case but they are just reacting to and mocking the media. The non-comedy media shouldn’t be afraid of taking on Fox News, but they are since they think they might get a job there some day.

Maybe Fox News Shouldn’t get the Press Exemption 

I don’t think Fox News is a “Press entity” but the house PR and advertising firm for the Republican party and the conservative agenda. (FEC might even agree with me see press exemption part some day.) A story about illegal actions going on behind the scenes at Fox would help make this clear. The story about Alies and his PR guy could have been a criminal case if we had some of that zeal for prosecution here in the US instead of pay offs.

Read the rest of this entry →

by spocko

How Will Fox React to a Post-Snowden Terrorist Attack? Hint: Think Benghazi Not 9/11

9:49 pm in Uncategorized by spocko

After 9/11 I remember predicting another attack. Yet in the US it didn’t happen. (Of course we don’t count the anthrax attack because reasons. That also happened on the Bush/Cheney/Rice watch, but never mind.)

Suppose a third attack had happened under Bush/Cheney. How would Fox News have responded? They would rally around the President. It would be clear it wasn’t Bush/Cheney’s fault, even if it was. They would have a million excuses. Then they would shift the blame to anyone who got in the way of a “gloves off” torture program or the “we’ll surveil everyone” mindset. Anyone who wasn’t in favor of their new martial law was palling around with terrorists and responsible for the last attack.

Fox would target us, people who believe torture is wrong and ineffective, war is not the answer and who think maintaining our civil liberties make us stronger, not weaker. We would be blamed. Even if we could show that all the things that Bush/Cheney did that sacrificed our civil liberties still didn’t keep us safe. So let’s prepare now for this.

Imagine an attack under Obama. An attack where supposedly the NSA is now forced to ‘blind’ themselves and the CIA have had to “put the gloves back on” and not torture people. How will Fox News respond? Will they rally around the President? Will they point out that the NSA surveillance is still on but it still didn’t stop and the attack? Will they remind people that torture doesn’t work, is morally wrong and ‘enhanced interrogation’ still went on under Obama, and it still didn’t catch the terrorists? Don’t make me laugh, I have chapped lips.

Fox News will lose their minds! And they will try to take the country with them against us. Not the terrorists. Against the people who might have thought there was another way to deal with the threats, especially the threats that were created by the rights’ over reactions. I can hear Fox anchors screaming now:

Because of the Snowden revelations the NSA couldn’t do their job! The terrorists knew how to evade capture! The CIA couldn’t get good intelligence out of suspects because they wouldn’t use enhanced interrogation! Dick Cheney and George Bush kept us safe! Obama is soft on terrorism! 

All sorts of worthless and horrific programs and structures that “kept us safe” under Bush/Cheney/Obama/Biden will be given a bigger budget. Even if those programs could never have caught the perpetrators.

I though of all this while watching Person of Interest. It is one of the finest TV shows on network television. Don’t go slumming into 24 for your fighting terrorism fix, check out PoI.

At 18:16 into the show the person who is responsible for the AI program “Northern Lights” explains how it has kept us safe from terrorism in the PoI world. This is the speech that I’ll bet the NSA is still giving today if anyone dares to question how effective they are. As Kevin Gosztola and others have pointed out, their success are mostly an illusion. As a secret agency with no oversight, they can always play the,”We really DID save you, but it’s classified” card. 

In the video clip shown, I really like speech by Control talking about the terrorist plot they busted. I also wonder if, during all this back and forth about Northern Lights (the NSA-like surveillance AI program) a terrorist attack happens. The Fox News in their world would be all over it! “Obama shuts off machine protecting us! Anti-surveillance group has innocent blood on their hands!” The head of the NSA will be seen as a hero, and people whining about their “civil liberties’ are making America unsafe. “That attack could have been stopped.” Is what the head of the Northern Lights program will say, “But we were told to shut it down. If the American public wants to be safe again, they need to let us turn it back on. ”

So when the next attack happens, how will we respond? We already know how Fox News will. We are the real enemy to them. Obama is not their President. In a time of crisis I would like to think they would stand with the President of the United States like many of us did with Bush. But look at what they are doing with Benghazi, and ask. “What would Roger Ailes do?”

UPDATED.

We are seeing votes to ‘rein in the NSA‘ will future votes split on partisan lines?  Then when the next attack happens they can say, “I didn’t want to rein them in!”

by spocko

The Cost to Destroy a Left-Wing Institution? For ACORN It’s Under $300,000, so far

3:57 pm in Uncategorized by spocko

James O'Keefe - Caricature

Fired ACORN Worker Wins $100,000 Settlement From Republican Con-Artist James O’Keefe

Former San Diego ACORN worker, Juan Carlos Vera will receive $100,000 in a settlement from federal criminal and professional liar James O’Keefe, after being secretly video-taped in violation of California law by the Rightwing propagandist. The tape was just one in a series of similar videos, all deceptively edited as part of his 2009 ACORN “pimp” hoax series.

The story of the settlement was originally broken by Wonkette, which published the 3-page settlement document [PDF], yesterday.

    -Brad Friedman, Brad Blog

I was listening to the Emmy award winning comedian David Feldman’s show yesterday talking about the great new film “Janeane From Des Moines” and Feldman kept asking questions about the Presidential candidates that the film maker met and filmed during the Iowa caucus.  He wanted to know, “How can they sleep at night?” specifically he wanted to know how they reconcile in their minds their actions and policies they promoted and their proclaimed Christian beliefs. Jane Wilson, the film maker, had a very insightful response.

People who are quote unquote evil never see themselves as [evil]

- Jane Edith Wilson, Film Maker Janeane From Des Moines

For years people asked me about right wing radio hosts,  ”Do they really believe what they say or is it just an act for the money?” My response is, “Does it matter? I can’t see into their soul, all I know is what they publicly say, and what they do. And what they say is nasty. I will act to lessen their impact, because I think it is the right thing to do.” Then I proceeded to develop a program to separate them from their sponsors and their money. That was my way to go after an institution and individuals that I believe are bad for our democracy and our country.

If you are someone in power, who believes that a left-wing institution, group or person is bad for your goals there are a number of ways you can go about destroying them.  If you need to act quickly one shortcut is to manufacture “evidence” of wrong doings at that institution or from that person. This is useful when you can’t find any real wrong doings. For a price someone will do this for you. It’s good to get someone who believes in your same cause, so they can think they are doing good. But if you can’t find that person, get an actor who will pretend they are doing good. Another trick is to play the journalism “free speech” card so that you can get support from people who love journalism and free speech.

Last year I attended what I called “James O’Keefe University” to learn his techniques and methods. He talked about his real desire to be an actor and how his editing of videos was just like the editing of videos TV news shows do all the time. He encouraged people to do what he did. He then showed clips from the Daily Show from before they were revealed to be deceptively EDITED.  It was all presented as great fun. Stickin’ it to those hypocritical liberals!  I found the entire seminar profoundly depressing for a number of reasons.

First, the people funding O’Keefe, the Koch’s via Americans For Prosperity, understood just how powerful O’Keefe’s deceptive practices were, especially when teamed with the RW media and the more little O’Keefes they can unleash the better.

Second, AFP easily filled rooms with hard core right wingers whose internal beliefs convinced them they were doing heroic work taking down “bad guys” like ACORN. One of their biggest targets? Unions!

Third, and this was the one that hit me the hardest, there was nobody on the left who would fund me to go after Right-Wing institutions like O’Keefe did ACORN, but in an ethically and legal fashion. I have a track record, I have skills, but unlike O’Keefe, I didn’t have a Koch sugar daddy to support me taking on right wing institutions and media.

The AFP  seminar a.k.a “O’Keefe University” pushed the idea of “Citizen Journalist” while using the O’Keefe’s deceptively edited videos as a model for winning. And why not? As far as the Kochs and AFP is concerned O’Keefe was wildly successful.  As Brad Friedman put it:

Thousands of ACORN workers were left unemployed by the O’Keefe/Giles/Breitbart stunt after the U.S. Congress also fell for it. In 2009, shortly after the deceptively edited tapes were released, they passed legislation, signed by President Obama, that federally defunded the four-decade old community organization which had advocated to end predatory lending practices and helped millions of low- and middle-income Americans obtain housing loans and legally register to vote. The group was forced to shut its doors in the wake of the manufactured scandal.

O’Keefe achieved Koch’s and AFPs goals, and it was cheap.  Based on what O’Keefe has said I estimate it cost 70K for the cross country, illegal-taping tour of ACORN offices, 100K for this current settlement and let’s say 130K for those high-priced Republican lawyers. $300,000 to destroy ACORN. What a bargain!  Of course hopefully this settlement will lead to more.

If you knew you could take down Fox News or the Heritage Foundation for $300,000 would you? What if you didn’t have to manufacture evidence to do it? Would you do it then?

Many of you might remember the Book Salon that I hosted with Martin Hickman who wrote the book, “Dial M for Murdoch” In the book he described how a small team consisting mostly of a politician, some journalists and a lawyer exposed the phone hacking scandal at News of the World which led to it being shut down. They did the work legally using real journalism, the legal system and political pressure on a merger deal. I’m pretty confident that something similar could be used on New Corps properties here in the US.  But will anyone? Since Obama won the election does that mean that we stop focusing on right wing media institutions and get back to helping people? It would be nice, and that is the attitude of a number of funders, they really don’t want to fight the right. I think that’s a mistake, because the RW media and institutions are more vulnerable now than they have been in awhile.  Shall we let them regroup? Did they back off attacking us when they had the White House and the senate?

The right has to fund liars and deceivers like O’Keefe because they know they need to cheat to win. We don’t have to, but we do need the will to fight. One thing that I’ve learned over the years is that the mainsteam media will not go after the right wing media. They hate to cover them, they would rather ignore them. As Cenk Uygur said on The Young Turks the other day, one reason nobody on cable goes after Fox is because they either have friends who work there or they expect to work there some day. 

Here’s the deal, the ideas and attitudes of the right wing media and their belief tanks are killing our country. They are the ones who push the failed austerity ideas. They push cuts to earned benefits as a “shared sacrifice” instead of demanding raising revenue. They push ideas that the economy is a deity who must be sated with the lives of your friends and neighbors to support the profits of the one percent. They attack our values and ideals. They support the destruction of our democratic institutions.  And some of them get rich doing it. It doesn’t have to be that way.

I don’t want O’Keefe’s fine to scare off people who want to do real journalism and activism against corrupt institutions and people. If we have the goods we don’t have to deceptively edit. We also have to be smart about the law. I would hate for someone to have good video that could not be used because they didn’t know the law. Here is a link to “Can We Tape?” put out by Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press.

My friend, Angelo Carusone, at Media Matters wrote an article about the impact of the campaign to separate advertiser’s money from Rush Limbaugh one year after his attack on Sandra Fluke. Nobody is going to jail for alerting advertisers about the vile things Limbaugh has said and continues to say.  Dial Global, a radio syndication company, reported roughly $100 million in losses for 2012 and publicly cited Limbaugh as a significant contributing factor.  I celebrate this success. It was done legally and ethically.  Let’s keep pushing our success and learn from their success and failures.  The country is counting on us.

Creative Commons Attribution image by DonkeyHotey 

by spocko

Dear Irena Briganti: Anyone Ever Fired for On-Screen Errors at Fox?

5:02 pm in Uncategorized by spocko

The information coming out of Fox News is often misleading or clearly incorrect. People ask me, “Spocko, is there anything we can do about this? Can’t the FCC do anything? What about the FTC and truth in advertising laws?”

How can Fox employees get away with calling themselves journalists when they are acting more like lobbyists or employees of a PR firm?

Are there every any negative consequences for people who intentionally lie while calling themselves journalists?  Can’t some groups who give credentials for being “the press” take them away? Why should Fox get a higher level of protection from libel than other corporations? Is having a tagline, “Fair and Balanced” and the word “News” in your logo all it takes? (If so I’m launching Spocko’s Brain News Network with the tagline, “Vulcans Never Bluff.”)

Why do they get all the benefits of being the press without any of the responsibilities?

I had some of these questions myself so when Fox News recently broadcast a chart that was clearly wrong (but wrong in a way that made Obama look bad) I decided to ask them of the SVP of media relations at Fox News.

Here is my letter.

Irena Briganti, Senior Vice President
Media Relations Fox News

Dear Ms. Briganti:

On Monday December 12, 2011, Fox News Network, L.L.C., broadcast a chart entitled Unemployment Rate Under President Obama. The source was listed as the 2011 Bureau of Labor Statistics. Numerous writers have pointed out the visual errors in this chart (link) and called into question whether they were genuine mistakes or intentional efforts to mislead.

I would like to hear your official statement about this chart and its errors; and how it came to be created and broadcast. I would also like to know if there will be any consequences for the people who created and aired this chart. Read the rest of this entry →

by spocko

Rupert and Me: I question the NewsCorp CEO about Subsidizing Glenn Beck

1:35 pm in Media by spocko

Last week I called up Rupert Murdoch, the CEO of NewsCorp (NWS)and asked him a question during his quarterly conference call.

"I know that you don’t break out revenue numbers for Fox News beyond the top line, but with 81 advertisers leaving the Glenn Beck show following the Color of Change action, the show now seems limited to in house ads and gold ads. Do you have a time frame for how long Fox will subsidize the show until it to starts to generate revenue in line with its ratings? "

Here was Rupert Murdoch’s response:

"It’s not subsidizing the show at all. And it’s giving a terrific kick off to the whole evening schedule. It has plenty of advertising, and those advertisers you talk about, I don’t think there is anything like that number, but if there were they are on other shows."

Here is the audio of my question and his answer.

I was using one of my normal sounding names instead of Spocko because I didn’t want Fox Security to be dispatched to my home like Bill O’Reilly threatened to do when my friend Mike Stark brought up an uncomfortable topic.

Murdoch’s response to the question got picked up by:

I appreciate the coverage of my question but what I find interesting is just how hard it is for the media to actually cover the big media. And, when faced with evidence to the contrary, the CEO can just say, "No, your hard evidence is wrong." and go about his business. We know that Fox has no obligation to tell the truth on their news programs, but I thought that they were supposed to acknowledge reality during the financial sessions. I seem to remember there were some regulations passed after Enron that the CEOs were supposed to know what was going on financially inside their companies.

Also, it would be nice if someone in the trade press or financial press would acknowledge when the people have an impact on big media.

The people at Color of Change put together an amazing advertiser alert program. They convinced 81 advertisers that Beck’s race baiting is something they did not want to be associated with.

Another group, stopbeck.com, had a twitter campaign that convinced more advertisers to leave.

The standard line is that public corporations are supposed to "maximize shareholder value". When they don’t, their shareholders are supposed to call them on it. The NewsCorp shareholders should want to know why Fox isn’t making MORE money on Glenn Beck’s show. That was the essence of my question.

By asking this question I wanted NewsCorp to acknowledge or deny they were subsidizing Beck in the face of the evidence. (Of course if I was sharper I would have had my follow up question out before I was cut off. "Well, the Color of Change people have proof of all the advertisers that left. Do you have proof you aren’t subsidizing him?")

Here’s the thing, huge media corporations are "too big to tell". They don’t have to tell anyone what’s going under the top line results. This can hide a multitude of financial shenanigans.

If Fox wasn’t part of a massive media entity like NewsCorp they would have had to answer questions like:

  • What steps has Fox News taken to recoup the revenue lost from 81 advertisers leaving the Glenn Beck show?
  • If the Beck show has high ratings but low revenue how long does the network plan to keep losing money on the show? Is there a path to profitability?
  • If the "high ratings" of the show is supposed to result in greater revenue for other parts of the company, is there any documented figures to make this connection? Third party audited figures? (The myth of Fox News ratings bump)
  • Which departmental budgets are subsidizing the Glenn Beck salaries and production costs?

And a few further questions I could have asked but they wouldn’t have to tell:

  • If internal Fox budgets are not subsidizing the Glenn Beck show, where is the funding coming from?
  • If Fox News is not subsidizing the Glenn Beck show and Chairman Murdoch is not personally funding it, then funding is coming out of a NewsCorp budget. What form does the company expect the return on investment to take? Better relationships with the current government? A better Federal regulatory environment?
  • The Wall Street Journal is still an advertiser on the Glenn Beck show, does this mean that the Wall Street Journal has been told to subsidize the Beck show by NewsCorp management?

We’ve been talking a lot about the ill effects of "too big to fail" in the financial industry. Huge media corporations also can have ill effects on the country when they are "too big to tell" and subsidizing people like Glenn Beck is an example of the sickness big media delivers.

—-

Thanks to Josh Stearns and the folks at Free Press, Eric Boehlert of Media Matters, Gabriel Rey-Goodlatte from Color of Change, StopBeck.com, Mike Stark of Stark Reports and Suzanne and all the folks at LLN here on FDL.
LLAP,
Spocko of Spocko’s Brain