The New Yorker's Ken Auletta claimed Murdoch "often" uses "his publications
and his media to advance his business or his political interests." Imagine
that! The views of New York Times publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., can be
read in his newspaper, which consistently promotes policies and people he
favors. When you're a liberal, this is regarded by the elites as "good
journalism." When you have a different point of view, you are engaging in
propaganda and serving only yourself and your interests.
The elite media have been beating up on Rupert Murdoch for years, when they
ought to have been addressing the cause of their own decline. Instead, they
preferred to indulge in paranoia and denial.
The attacks on Murdoch began in earnest just four months after the debut of
the Fox News Channel. In a transcript provided by the Media Research Center
of a Jan. 19, 1997 "60 Minutes" broadcast on CBS, Mike Wallace warned
ominously that "on Murdoch's new cable channel the news comes with a
conservative spin." Who did Wallace cite as his expert authority? None other
than CNN founder Ted Turner, who regularly promoted his left-wing views
about the Soviet Union, Fidel Castro and other dictators, high taxes, big
government, Democrats and environmental activism when he owned and ran that
network.
Before Fox News Channel was born, I met with several network news
presidents, telling them that someone was going to go after a demographic
that felt shutout by the mainstream media. These people, I said, go to
church, fly the flag, respect the nation's traditions and institutions and
hate the liberal media. They feel censored, or stereotyped, by the media
elites. I told them the person who recognizes that demographic and gives
them a voice would reap a huge reward.
That person is Rupert Murdoch. He is not the media Satan, as the left likes
to portray him. Some of the offensive (to me) tabloid stuff notwithstanding,
he just may be the media's savior. The elites hate him, but growing numbers
of people are buying his products.