If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   "Bob (Woodward) had a great scoop, a buzzy media story that made it perfect for Style. It didn't have the broader import that would justify A1," - WP Editor on Murdoch trying to buy US Presidency. Travel section cleared for when man walks on Mars   (guardian.co.uk) divider line 95
    More: Scary  
•       •       •

9712 clicks; posted to Main » on 21 Dec 2012 at 12:56 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



95 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-12-21 11:08:49 AM
Historically, effort at political objectivity of the free press has been more the exception than the rule. The main odd thing seems to be trying to be secretive about it. Might be worth asking a historian about what factors were correlated with the decline of such blatant partisanship previously.
 
2012-12-21 11:11:28 AM
Um, well perhaps it didn't get much media attention because it was a non-story. Petraeus didn't take them up on it. Done deal. Nothing else to say, right?

I guess it is sorta interesting that this went down, but the result is pretty eye-rolling at the end of the day, and not really surprising given what we know about FoxNews in general.
 
2012-12-21 11:24:29 AM
I don't disagree with the editor.  Murdoch runs a bunch of media outlets with fake journalists that shill for the GOP and control the conservative narrative in this country.  He had great influence over the election and could have had more if he bankrolled and cultivated Petraeus.  But that would not be "hijacking the presidency".  He wouldn't be buying votes, committing fraud or doing anything like the phone-hacking scandal in the UK.  In the US, he runs some crooked TV channels and newspapers.  That's it (for all we know).  It's just public influence.
 
2012-12-21 11:58:27 AM
The Fourth Estate has become The Fifth Column.
 
2012-12-21 01:03:19 PM

make me some tea: Um, well perhaps it didn't get much media attention because it was a non-story. Petraeus didn't take them up on it. Done deal. Nothing else to say, right?

I guess it is sorta interesting that this went down, but the result is pretty eye-rolling at the end of the day, and not really surprising given what we know about FoxNews in general.


Yeah, he only OFFERED to use his "fair and balanced" media empire to be completely in the tank to promote him. I mean, that's like if I only offered to fark your mom. As long as I don't actually fark your mom or you don't take me up on the offer, it's a non-issue.
 
2012-12-21 01:03:56 PM
A single rich dude wanted to use his money and power to heavily influence an election? Yeah that was okayed in Citizens United, subby.
 
2012-12-21 01:03:58 PM
What would have happened, had Murdoch tried this stunt, when all the "banging the biographer" stories came out? I guarantee that those stories would have popped up even sooner had Petraeus been a Presidential candidate. Murdoch dodged the bullet of a lifetime, IMHO.
 
2012-12-21 01:04:09 PM
Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":

www.washingtonian.com

It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.
 
2012-12-21 01:05:22 PM

Satanic_Hamster: make me some tea: Um, well perhaps it didn't get much media attention because it was a non-story. Petraeus didn't take them up on it. Done deal. Nothing else to say, right?

I guess it is sorta interesting that this went down, but the result is pretty eye-rolling at the end of the day, and not really surprising given what we know about FoxNews in general.

Yeah, he only OFFERED to use his "fair and balanced" media empire to be completely in the tank to promote him. I mean, that's like if I only offered to fark your mom. As long as I don't actually fark your mom or you don't take me up on the offer, it's a non-issue.


But everyone already expects Fox to be in the tank for the right. They wouldn't have "bought" the presidency for Petraeus anymore than they did for Romney.
 
2012-12-21 01:06:38 PM
And I am certain that Liz Spayd's decision to run a part of this huge story in the Style section had absolutely nothing to do with her wanting to see a certain US embassy moved to a certain city and Romney promising to do so.
 
2012-12-21 01:07:07 PM

Insatiable Jesus: Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":



It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.


AustinPowersThatsamanbaby.jpg
 
2012-12-21 01:07:40 PM
Drew should stick this on the Entertainment tab for lulz.

At one point in my life I would have been outraged... But I'm just too jaded now. Fark it. Our world is a shiathole of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption. And it's all of our own making. I can't reasonably expect to make a difference so instead I'll just try and secure a good life for me and mine and fark the rest of you filth flinging monkeys.
 
2012-12-21 01:07:40 PM

Insatiable Jesus: Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":

[www.washingtonian.com image 300x313]

It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.


That's a dude.
 
2012-12-21 01:08:22 PM
Damn you Rindred!
 
2012-12-21 01:09:03 PM
The last two paragraphs are somewhat interesting:

Petraeus was not hungering for the presidency at the moment of the messenger's arrival: the general was contented at the idea of being CIA director, which Ailes was urging him to forgo.

"We're all set," said the emissary, referring to Ailes, Murdoch and Fox. "It's never going to happen," Petraeus said. "You know it's never going to happen. It really isn't. ... My wife would divorce me."


I wonder, now that Petraeus is idle and his wife is already aggrieved, how interested he would be in taking Murdoch up on his offer. Obviously, his brand is damaged somewhat, but surely that could be rehabilitated over the next few years. If he starts showing up on Fox News Sunday as one of those expert talking heads, or is featured in some Fox News Special Reports, I'll bet he'll throw his hat in the ring for 2016 - if not at the top of the ticket, perhaps paired with someone like Rubio or Ryan to enhance the ticket's foreign policy credibility.
 
2012-12-21 01:10:01 PM

Wolf_Blitzer: Satanic_Hamster: make me some tea: Um, well perhaps it didn't get much media attention because it was a non-story. Petraeus didn't take them up on it. Done deal. Nothing else to say, right?

I guess it is sorta interesting that this went down, but the result is pretty eye-rolling at the end of the day, and not really surprising given what we know about FoxNews in general.

Yeah, he only OFFERED to use his "fair and balanced" media empire to be completely in the tank to promote him. I mean, that's like if I only offered to fark your mom. As long as I don't actually fark your mom or you don't take me up on the offer, it's a non-issue.

But everyone already expects Fox to be in the tank for the right. They wouldn't have "bought" the presidency for Petraeus anymore than they did for Romney.


The difference, and I suppose it's a subtle one, is that Fox'd be SPONSORING the Petraeus Presidential Bid (brought to you by Carl's Jr), rather than simply endorsing it beyond reasonable journalistic measure.

It's one thing if they publish an endorsement - news outlets do that all the time (usually in the Opinion section, though...) - quite another if they find, fund and promote their own candidate.
 
2012-12-21 01:10:58 PM

Lumpmoose: I don't disagree with the editor.  Murdoch runs a bunch of media outlets with fake journalists that shill for the GOP and control the conservative narrative in this country.  He had great influence over the election and could have had more if he bankrolled and cultivated Petraeus.  But that would not be "hijacking the presidency".  He wouldn't be buying votes, committing fraud or doing anything like the phone-hacking scandal in the UK.  In the US, he runs some crooked TV channels and newspapers.  That's it (for all we know).  It's just public influence.



Murdoch is not a hands-off owner. Newsroom ethics come from the top down, and is self-reinforcing through new hires and selective culling.

I'd be very, very surprised if "something like phone hacking" didn't occur in his non-UK titles as well. There just wasn't a trail (that's been found yet).
 
2012-12-21 01:12:25 PM
Boy, I just don't know what I'd do if some rich cocksucker who didn't give a crap about me was put in charge of the country.
 
2012-12-21 01:14:00 PM

Dr Dreidel: The difference, and I suppose it's a subtle one, is that Fox'd be SPONSORING the Petraeus Presidential Bid


I don't see the difference. You don't actually think Fox News would be the official sponsor, do you? This would be more like the Koch Brothers sorta sponsorship we saw in the GOP primary where one rich dude bankrolls a candidate via SuperPACs. Hell, Fox could anonymously bankroll it without anyone ever knowing. It's only a matter of time before some really rich dude in India or something realizes he can purchase US politicians and get things like trade deals go his way (assuming it hasn't happened already).

Dr Dreidel: It's one thing if they publish an endorsement - news outlets do that all the time (usually in the Opinion section, though...) - quite another if they find, fund and promote their own candidate.


If they did, I imagine it would look something like this:

mediamatters.org
 
2012-12-21 01:16:00 PM

neversubmit: Damn you Rindred!


One Minute Rule declares it a simulpost; don't sweat it.
 
2012-12-21 01:19:44 PM
Why the US media ignored Murdoch's brazen bid to hijack the presidency

Because that has been the US main stream medias' job and talking about his failed effort would bring too much attention to their successful effort to keep a political machine's empty suit "community organizer" in the White House.
 
2012-12-21 01:21:23 PM

Insatiable Jesus: Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":



It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.


I can't imagine living an entire lifetime being uterably unfarkable.
 
2012-12-21 01:23:21 PM

lennavan: Dr Dreidel: The difference, and I suppose it's a subtle one, is that Fox'd be SPONSORING the Petraeus Presidential Bid

I don't see the difference. You don't actually think Fox News would be the official sponsor, do you? This would be more like the Koch Brothers sorta sponsorship we saw in the GOP primary where one rich dude bankrolls a candidate via SuperPACs. Hell, Fox could anonymously bankroll it without anyone ever knowing. It's only a matter of time before some really rich dude in India or something realizes he can purchase US politicians and get things like trade deals go his way (assuming it hasn't happened already).

Dr Dreidel: It's one thing if they publish an endorsement - news outlets do that all the time (usually in the Opinion section, though...) - quite another if they find, fund and promote their own candidate.

If they did, I imagine it would look something like this:

[mediamatters.org image 400x300]


Well, I'm pretty sure that everyone already realizes that FoxNews is the media arm of the Republican Party, most especially their loyal viewers. They love the fact that they have their very own loudmouthed douchebag TV channel to jam their views down everyone else's throats. The "Fair and Balanced" thing is said with a wink and a nod. This is not a big secret anymore, and hasn't been for quite a while now.
 
2012-12-21 01:23:32 PM
This must be that liberal media I hear so much about.
 
2012-12-21 01:23:50 PM

Angry Buddha: Insatiable Jesus: Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":



It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.

I can't imagine living an entire lifetime being uterably unfarkable.


Uterably? Why would my phone insist upon this?
 
2012-12-21 01:23:57 PM
You know what's funny now? When I first saw Tomorrow Never Dies, I thought the idea of a media mogul manipulating the news for political and monetary gain was silly and impossible.
 
2012-12-21 01:24:17 PM

OscarTamerz: Why the US media ignored Murdoch's brazen bid to hijack the presidency

Because that has been the US main stream medias' job and talking about his failed effort would bring too much attention to their successful effort to keep a political machine's empty suit "community organizer" in the White House.



As opposed to his predecessor, a raging dry drunk who had the IQ of a turnip and a "staff" that had to tell him what to do every waking minute.
 
2012-12-21 01:26:10 PM
The editor is right. Bernstein is refuting his own argument by saying "Fox News is a joke! They're a sham, a shill for the Republican Party! They aren't legitimate!" And then on the other hand, he's holding them up as a bastion of media propriety with the likes of NBC News and the New York Times.

If they're a joke, Carl, this is exactly the kind of thing they're expected to do.

The editor, like many here, was saying "They're not a real news organization. What the hell did you expect?"
 
2012-12-21 01:26:29 PM
Hey, there's nothing wrong with a man not born in this country buying the highest office in the land; it's as American as apple pie. Why, George Washington wasn't born in the United States, and he was the richest man in the country in his day, and look at him. Why do you hate the founding fathers?
 
2012-12-21 01:28:52 PM
But but but "Fair and Balanced" and "We Report, You Decide"!
 
2012-12-21 01:30:18 PM

make me some tea: lennavan: Dr Dreidel: The difference, and I suppose it's a subtle one, is that Fox'd be SPONSORING the Petraeus Presidential Bid

I don't see the difference. You don't actually think Fox News would be the official sponsor, do you? This would be more like the Koch Brothers sorta sponsorship we saw in the GOP primary where one rich dude bankrolls a candidate via SuperPACs. Hell, Fox could anonymously bankroll it without anyone ever knowing. It's only a matter of time before some really rich dude in India or something realizes he can purchase US politicians and get things like trade deals go his way (assuming it hasn't happened already).

Dr Dreidel: It's one thing if they publish an endorsement - news outlets do that all the time (usually in the Opinion section, though...) - quite another if they find, fund and promote their own candidate.

If they did, I imagine it would look something like this:

[mediamatters.org image 400x300]

Well, I'm pretty sure that everyone already realizes that FoxNews is the media arm of the Republican Party, most especially their loyal viewers. They love the fact that they have their very own loudmouthed douchebag TV channel to jam their views down everyone else's throats. The "Fair and Balanced" thing is said with a wink and a nod. This is not a big secret anymore, and hasn't been for quite a while now.


Yeah. The only difference (and again, it's a subtle one) is that it'd be an official (as official as a recorded backroom conversation can be, I suppose) endorsement before the fact, rather than after-the-fact.

Sort of like the difference between Murder 1 and either Murder 2 or Manslaughter.

// Murder 2 is FN is just pissed at all the Democratic candidates
// Manslaughter if they're just picking the GOPper they like the most
 
2012-12-21 01:31:06 PM

Honest Bender: Drew should stick this on the Entertainment tab for lulz.

At one point in my life I would have been outraged... But I'm just too jaded now. Fark it. Our world is a shiathole of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption. And it's all of our own making. I can't reasonably expect to make a difference so instead I'll just try and secure a good life for me and mine and fark the rest of you filth flinging monkeys.


That's sad. While I agree that there is an overabundance of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption, I find your willingness to join in the ego-centric, grab it while you can, mentality. The cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption benefit a very, very small number of people. When those of us on the outside buy in to the message of self-interest, we only perpetuate it and reinforce our own exclusion. You need to find common cause with the rest of us, not withdraw and allow the powerful to remain powerful. Don't buy in to the elite's bullshiat. Challenge it.
 
2012-12-21 01:32:22 PM

lennavan: It's only a matter of time before some really rich dude in India or something realizes he can purchase US politicians and get things like trade deals go his way (assuming it hasn't happened already).


See also, globalization.
 
2012-12-21 01:35:02 PM

Rindred: Insatiable Jesus: Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":

It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.

AustinPowersThatsamanbaby.jpg


FTFY
 
2012-12-21 01:37:02 PM

Insatiable Jesus: And I am certain that Liz Spayd's decision to run a part of this huge story in the Style section had absolutely nothing to do with her wanting to see a certain US embassy moved to a certain city and Romney promising to do so.


anongallery.org
 
2012-12-21 01:37:07 PM

Angry Buddha: Insatiable Jesus: Here's the editor who called this "buzzy" with no "broader import":



It's nice to know that even ugly broads can find work as whores.

I can't imagine living an entire lifetime being uterably unfarkable.


It may not have been the case for so long.

The more I look at "her" photo, the more I wonder if Joe Paterno faked his own death so he could undergo transgender surgery and re-emerge in this identity.
 
2012-12-21 01:38:01 PM
So he was going to shill for Petraeus instead of Romney. Earth-shattering.
 
2012-12-21 01:39:40 PM

misanthropologist: Honest Bender: Drew should stick this on the Entertainment tab for lulz.

At one point in my life I would have been outraged... But I'm just too jaded now. Fark it. Our world is a shiathole of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption. And it's all of our own making. I can't reasonably expect to make a difference so instead I'll just try and secure a good life for me and mine and fark the rest of you filth flinging monkeys.

That's sad. While I agree that there is an overabundance of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption, I find your willingness to join in the ego-centric, grab it while you can, mentality. The cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption benefit a very, very small number of people. When those of us on the outside buy in to the message of self-interest, we only perpetuate it and reinforce our own exclusion. You need to find common cause with the rest of us, not withdraw and allow the powerful to remain powerful. Don't buy in to the elite's bullshiat. Challenge it.


What choice do I have? The police are little more than tax collecting thugs that protect and serve the will of the government which is itself DEEP in the pockets of the mega rich. The war is over. They won. I might be able to make a difference if I dedicate the rest of my life to fighting their oppression, but that's not really how I want to spend my life.

So instead I'll keep my head down, resent the hell out of the bastards, and do my damnedest to elevate and anchor my family solidly in the ever shrinking middle class. Hopefully I can give my children a chance to end up as something other than a wage slave.
 
2012-12-21 01:39:45 PM
Wake me when Murdoch's wife/bodyguard is sent on a mission to kill Woodward.
 
2012-12-21 01:40:24 PM
The liberal media strikes again
 
2012-12-21 01:40:28 PM

misanthropologist: Honest Bender: Drew should stick this on the Entertainment tab for lulz.

At one point in my life I would have been outraged... But I'm just too jaded now. Fark it. Our world is a shiathole of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption. And it's all of our own making. I can't reasonably expect to make a difference so instead I'll just try and secure a good life for me and mine and fark the rest of you filth flinging monkeys.

That's sad. While I agree that there is an overabundance of cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption, I find your willingness to join in the ego-centric, grab it while you can, mentality. The cronyism, payoffs, greed, and corruption benefit a very, very small number of people. When those of us on the outside buy in to the message of self-interest, we only perpetuate it and reinforce our own exclusion. You need to find common cause with the rest of us, not withdraw and allow the powerful to remain powerful. Don't buy in to the elite's bullshiat. Challenge it.


This doesn't sound like something a misanthrope would say. What are you trying to pull?
 
2012-12-21 01:45:50 PM
Yawn.

/breathe

Yawwwwwnn

//although I do despise Murdoch as much as anyone else, this is a non story. This kind of shiat has been going on for years. Move along
 
2012-12-21 01:47:45 PM

Dr Dreidel: Wolf_Blitzer: Satanic_Hamster: make me some tea: Um, well perhaps it didn't get much media attention because it was a non-story. Petraeus didn't take them up on it. Done deal. Nothing else to say, right?

I guess it is sorta interesting that this went down, but the result is pretty eye-rolling at the end of the day, and not really surprising given what we know about FoxNews in general.

Yeah, he only OFFERED to use his "fair and balanced" media empire to be completely in the tank to promote him. I mean, that's like if I only offered to fark your mom. As long as I don't actually fark your mom or you don't take me up on the offer, it's a non-issue.

But everyone already expects Fox to be in the tank for the right. They wouldn't have "bought" the presidency for Petraeus anymore than they did for Romney.

The difference, and I suppose it's a subtle one, is that Fox'd be SPONSORING the Petraeus Presidential Bid (brought to you by Carl's Jr), rather than simply endorsing it beyond reasonable journalistic measure.

It's one thing if they publish an endorsement - news outlets do that all the time (usually in the Opinion section, though...) - quite another if they find, fund and promote their own candidate.


You're probably right, probably I *should* be outraged, but the sad reality is that variations on "Fox News is corrupt" just don't faze me anymore.
 
2012-12-21 01:54:12 PM
I will grant that the story didn't belong in the Style section. But I don't think this is the huge story that the Guardian (which is known both for its fiercely liberal slant and its hatred of Murdoch) would like to think it is.

Wealthy liberals and wealthy conservatives woo potential candidates all the time, and financially support candidates they like.
 
2012-12-21 01:54:50 PM
Maybe it's because the US doesn't have compulsory and enforced voting like Murdoch's reputed origin. The common belief is that Republicans lose in a high turn out, therefore an engineer process of turning off voters from voting at the same time rallying a base is what to invest in.


Australia - It is compulsory for all eligible adults (18 and above) to enroll, attend a polling station and have their name marked off the electoral roll as attending, receive a ballot paper and take it to an individual voting booth, mark it, fold the ballot paper and place it in the ballot box. Because of the secrecy of the ballot, it is not possible to determine whether a person has completed their ballot paper prior to placing it in the ballot box. In some states local council elections are compulsory too.[11] Wikipedia
 
2012-12-21 01:56:56 PM

depmode98: Insatiable Jesus: And I am certain that Liz Spayd's decision to run a part of this huge story in the Style section had absolutely nothing to do with her wanting to see a certain US embassy moved to a certain city and Romney promising to do so.

[anongallery.org image 533x800]


I think the story supports the fact that a Jew did, in fact, do this. The only question left is if she did it for money or foreign politics.
 
2012-12-21 01:57:17 PM
Not sure how I like how they end the first paragraph talking about "the privileges of a free press" when that is clearly a right.
 
2012-12-21 01:58:52 PM
As far as journalism goes, there is no truth. There is no unbiased. There is no fairness. There can only be consistency, at best. Fox news would be fine if they would just admit Murdoch's intention to control American culture, by a strategy that identifies Republicans as being more easily corrupted.
 
2012-12-21 02:09:46 PM

Wolf_Blitzer: You're probably right, probably I *should* be outraged, but the sad reality is that variations on "Fox News is corrupt" just don't faze me anymore.


Exactly.
 
2012-12-21 02:17:10 PM
Oh come on people, your foil helmets are too tight. Obviously this whole "issue" is an unfounded rumor spread by nefarious enemies abroad and in our very Homeland meant to undermine in our "City on the Hill" and its Free Enterprise system. It not only should not have made A-1, it shouldn't have been printed at all. There is no excuse for publicizing any alleged data that might cause undue fear, uncertainty and doubt in those who don't already know to instantly disregard any such spurious "information."

In all his business ventures Mr. Murdoch has never done anything else but selflessly serve the public according to the fair & balanced Biblical virtues our Founding Fathers encoded in our Sacred Constitution using a Secret Key only chosen members of our Supreme Court has access to (in this sitting panel they're Justices Thomas and Scalia), which I became learned in in the process of acquiring my GED in Political Science. We should trust in God's agents on Earth, whose major prophet and vicegerent is obviously Mr. Murdoch himself, to faithfully administer the stewardship over us that Almighty God has given them.

Surely there is only one way to handle these insidious rumor-mongers who perpetrate such unfounded accusations: we must build an archipelago of Re-Education Centers in our beloved country to accommodate and provide much-needed therapy to such mentally disordered particular individuals, so the rest of us may live securely with faith in our cherished System. It's up to all right-thinking patriotic Americans to petition Prophet Murdoch to request that the Federal Government protect us in this manner.

God Bless America! Long live our free Homeland!
 
Displayed 50 of 95 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report