DOWNLOADS: (165)

PLAYS: (1352)

Embed

CNN host Howard Kurtz on Sunday blasted News Corp chief executive Rupert Murdoch for an "atrocious" suggestion that stereotyped the "Jewish owned press" as having a hidden agenda.

In a tweet on Saturday, Murdoch had lashed out at what he called the "Jewish owned press" for its coverage of a recent conflict between Hamas and Israel.

"Why is Jewish owned press so consistently anti-Israel in every crisis?" he wrote.

The Daily Beast's Peter Beinart quickly noted that Murdoch's tweet managed to offend both journalists and Jews.

"It’s offensive to journalists because it implies that institutions of the 'press' should reflect the ideological biases of their owners," Beinart wrote. "Reading Murdoch’s tweet, it would be logical to conclude that he believes that any newspaper he owns should reflect his right-wing views, even in its news coverage."

"Murdoch’s tweet is offensive to Jews because he’s suggesting that when it comes to Israel, Jewish media-owners should let their Jewishness guide their journalism. ... Murdoch seems upset that Jewish media owners are not Israel-firsters. He wants their tribal loyalty to a Jewish state to trump their professional obligation to oversee fair-minded, unbiased journalism."

In his Sunday media analysis on CNN, Kurtz also tore into Murdoch.

"Last night, he went beyond outrageous to offensive," the media critic said of Murdoch, observing that most media organizations -- with the exception The New York Times -- were owned by public companies like Viacom, Comcast, Disney and Time Warner.

"And beyond that, this media mogul who isn't shy about interfering in his own newsrooms is suggesting that Jewish Americans have a hidden agenda in which their religion trumps their commitment to journalism," he added. "That is atrocious and it is beneath Rupert Murdoch."

It turns out that Fox News' Glenn Beck isn't the only one that can follow the money.

Comedy Central's Jon Stewart pulled out his chalkboard Wednesday and discovered that Fox News' parent company had been supplying one Republican group with loads of cash.

News broke Tuesday that News Corp. had donated $1 million to the Republican Governors Association (RGA) without a similar donation to Democratic Governors Association (DGA).

It isn't like this is a complete surprise, but still, there is something incestuous about News Corp. donating $1 million to the Republican Governors' Association in order for the Republican Governors' Association to mount high-profile attack campaigns on Democratic candidates. I think it's safe for everyone to eliminate the terms "fair" and "balanced" from any discussion of Fox News.

"We all know deep down inside in our hearts, in our stomachs, in our mind that money is corrupting our political process, a festering sore on the body politic," began Stewart. "But it's complicated. Luckily there's one organization that is tenacious at exposing the gangrenous rot."

What followed was a flurry of clips showing how Fox News hosts like Bill O'Reilly, Sean Hannity and Glenn Beck had attempted to expose partisan donations to Democratic causes.

In March, Stewart first performed an epic impersonation of Beck. The comedy central host used Beck's mannerisms and grand gestures in the 15-minute parody.

Stewart reprised that role Wednesday to cover News Corporation's big donation.

"News Corp. owns Fox News. This is going to get a little tricky but follow me," Stewart said to the audience as he put on Beck-style glasses, headed to the chalkboard and got out his pointer.

Only hand motions and gestures were needed as Stewart discovered the truth written in chalk. News Corp. had funneled $1 million straight to Republicans.

"Follow me people. You're not going to believe... the money starts here and goes directly there," announced Stewart. "It's a straight line. It's just a straight line. It comes from Fox News and goes straight to Republicans."

"This is a travesty. I think if anything Republicans should be paying Fox News millions and millions of dollars. Not the other way around," he concluded.

DOWNLOADS: (1514)

PLAYS: (5086)

Embed

As Karoli already noted "News Corp. donated $1 million to the Republican Governors' Association in order for the Republican Governors' Association to mount high-profile attack campaigns on Democratic candidates." Cenk Uygur took a whack at them while filling in for Ed Schultz this week.

Uygur: Fox News came out of the closet today. Everyone with two bits of sense always knew they were a Republican propaganda machine, but today they made it official. Bloomberg News reported that News Corp, the parent company of Fox News Channel, The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post donated $1 million to the Republicans Governors Association.

Now that they're open about their orientation they are free to get in bed with any Republican they like and they've already taken full advantage.

In the recent Iowa caucus poll of Republicans, Mike Huckabee came in number one, Newt Gingrich was number three and Sarah Palin was number four, all of them Fox News employees.

In case you were wondering Mitt Romney came in second and Fox's Facebook game as we speak. According to Bloomberg, News Corps gift is the largest from any corporation to the Republican Governors Association. How's that for fair and balanced?

Is this any surprise given that the President of Fox News is Roger Ailes, who was a media consultant for Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush and Richard Nixon? Nixon would have been so proud.

Fox News does on a daily basis what Nixon could only dream of doing to his enemies in the press.

Cenk continued with showing examples of Fox promoting their potential presidential candidates working for the network and their help in creating and promoting the Tea Party movement. He also said he didn't have any problem with what they're doing as long as we had a little "truth in labeling".

That's never going to happen since Fox will never "out" themselves to their propagandized viewers. He also slammed the rest of the media for "taking their stories at face value" and running with them. I say amen to that brother. Fox like Drudge and Politico are nothing but an RNC talking points propagators and sadly it's not just Fox that is regurgitating this crap into what we call our mainstream media which would be better labeled our corporate media.

I hope Cenk gets his own show on MSNBC. I guess we'll find out if this much truth telling is too much for the network to give him a slot.

DOWNLOADS: (613)

PLAYS: (1034)

Embed

Fox News has found yet another way to claim that unemployment benefits make people too lazy to find jobs.

Bill Auchmoody, CEO of Partnership Staffing Inc., told Fox News' Brian Kilmeade Thursday that he has a hard time finding workers because so many are receiving unemployment benefits.

"We'll hire 200 to 300 people every month and about five percent of those folks may tell us that because of their unemployment benefits, it's not worth them taking a job," said Auchmoody.

Raw Story's Ron Brynaert noted:

Auchmoody apparently can't keep his talking points straight, because he was quoted in the Wall Street Journal -- which is also owned by Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. -- last week tossing off a different figure.

Auchmoody told WSJ's Sara Moody last week, "We only get about 2% or 3% who use the excuse to us, blatantly, face-to-face, 'You know, that's not enough money, I make more money on unemployment."

"You have to explain to them a $9 or $10 an hour job is really better for them to take it because when they get their unemployment benefits their taxes aren't being taken out of that and so when they see their net check, they think they're better off but the opportunity in taking a job and potentially moving up or going full time with one of my clients is far more upside to that than sitting at home on the dole," he said.

"Some people say that's callous to think that if you don't extend unemployment benefits, one of the reasons you don't extend unemployment benefits is because people lose the incentive to get a job," said Kilmeade "It's easier to stay home. You're saying that's reality."

"That is reality. And we have people now in the last couple of weeks where their unemployment benefits are running out that I've spoken to personally who say I have to have a job next week. Why can't you send me to work? My question is why didn't you register a month ago and try to find work a month ago rather than you are running out of benefits and you need to get to work tomorrow," replied Auchmoody.

It's not the first time that opinion has been heard on the conservative network. Earlier this month, Nina Easton expressed a similar view. "In the past, what has happened is it actually extends unemployment because people wait till the last minute before their benefits run out to find a job, to relocate to take jobs that they really didn't want to take," she told Fox News' Major Garrett.

Unemployment benefits expired in June so if Auchmoody is right he may soon have all the workers he needs. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid told reporters Wednesday that he would hold a vote next Tuesday on resuming those benefits. Republicans and Sen. Ben Nelson (D-NE) have been preventing a final vote on the bill.

The Huffington Post's Arthur Delaney reported:

There are currently five people looking for work for every job opening, according to the Department of Labor, and only 67 percent of the nearly 15 million unemployed receive benefits in the first place. For all the anecdotes about business owners having hiring trouble, there are job ads flatly stating that the unemployed need not apply. But suspicion of the unemployed, coupled with wariness of the deficit, has led to an epic holdup in Congress over reauthorizing benefits for people who've been jobless for six months or longer. The benefits lapsed at the end of May, causing some 2.1 million so far to miss checks.

"Now it looks like they're not going to get extended," said Kilmeade. "Maybe the [expiring] unemployment benefits will get people to sober up and take some of your offers," he told Auchmoody.

DOWNLOADS: (643)

PLAYS: (1944)

Embed

January 16, 2010 News Corp. (h/t CSPANjunkie)

Rep. Peter King must be on a quart of scotch and some blow because only a drunk who's hopped up on cocaine with the shades drawn and is afraid to answer his phone would worry about radical extremists in our frakking milaitary. Yes, the military missed this one and Ft. Hood was a tragedy, but there are disturbed people living and working all over the place. Is King worried about radical Islamic extremists at VA Tech? Maybe we better keep an eye on the post office.

If I was in the military and heard this jackass try to smear the entire military as possible traitors I'd be pretty upset. This is the same crap that conservative4s used during the cold war. Everybody is a soviet spy and communist sympathiser. Oh, and don't drink the water because the Ruskies spiked it with fluoride. Remember, it's all about bodily fluids.

Dr. Strange Love:

God willing, we will prevail in peace and freedom from fear and in true health through the purity and essence of our natural fluids. God bless you all."

--

Ripper:

And as human beings, you and I need fresh, pure water to replenish our precious bodily fluids.

Mandrake:

Yes. chuckles nervously

Ripper:

You beginning to understand?

Mandrake:

Yes. chuckles. begins laughing/crying quietly

Ripper:

Mandrake. Mandrake, have you never wondered why I drink only distilled water, or rain water, and only pure grain alcohol?

Mandrake:

Well it did occur to me, Jack, yes.

Ripper:

Have you ever heard of a thing called fluoridation? Fluoridation of water?

Mandrake:

Ah, yes, I have heard of that, Jack. Yes.

Ripper:

Well do you now what it is?

Mandrake:

No. No, I don't know what it is. No.

Ripper:

Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face? Window in the office is shot through by automatic weapons fire

Ripper:

Nineteen hundred and forty six. Nineteen fortysix, Mandrake. How does that coincide with your postwar commie conspiracy, huh? It's incredibly obvious, isn't it? A foreign substance is introduced into our precious bodily fluids without the knowledge of the individual, and certainly without any choice. That's the way your hard core commie works.

Mandrake:

Jack... Jack, listen, tell me, ah... when did you first become, well, develop this theory.

Ripper:

Well, I ah, I I first became aware of it, Mandrake, during the physical act of love.

Mandrake:

sighs fearfully

Ripper:

Yes a profound sense of fatigue, a feeling of emptiness followed. Luckily I was able to interpret these feelings correctly: loss of essence.

Mandrake:

Yes...

RiRipper:

I can assure you it has not recurred, Mandrake. Women... women sense my power, and they seek the life essence. I do not avoid women, Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence.

DOWNLOADS: (132)

PLAYS: (487)

Embed

January 09, 2010 News Corp

From Democracy Now--A Look at the Future of TV: Media Consolidation Opponent Byron Dorgan to Retire, Comcast Takeover of NBC Under Review:

Sen. Byron Dorgan’s decision to retire from the Senate stunned many in Washington. Dorgan has been a leading opponent of media consolidation and US trade policy. We speak with the Center for Digital Democracy’s Jeff Chester about Dorgan’s retirement, as well as what the future holds for the digital media landscape with Comcast’s deal to acquire a controlling interest in NBC Universal under review, and the dispute resolved between Time Warner Cable and News Corp.

AMY GOODMAN: We turn now to another guest in Washington, particularly on Byron Dorgan. Juan?

JUAN GONZALEZ: We’re joined by Washington—by Jeff Chester, executive director of the Center for Digital Democracy.

Jeff, talk about Byron Dorgan’s role as an opponent of media consolidation and a supporter of net neutrality.

JEFF CHESTER: Well, Senator Dorgan’s departure is going to be missed. He has really been consistently, over the last dozen years, the leading Senate critic of media consolidation, promoting policies for the FCC that would rein in the media giants and try to restore some accountability that the public should have over the cable and broadcasting and online giants. He has been a voice of conscience. He has been an effective legislator. He led the effort to overturn in the Senate the rules that Bush FCC chairman Michael Powell pushed through that would have deregulated almost everything in the US electronic media system. So we are going to need someone to fill his very large and important shoes, especially at this critical moment with the US media system.

JUAN GONZALEZ: Well, Jeff, specifically with the Obama administration, the issue of net neutrality is increasingly a big topic at the FCC. What’s your sense how the administration has begun dealing with the issue of net neutrality?

JEFF CHESTER: Well, this is a very critical moment for the future of US and, of course, global digital communications. I mean, the reason you’re seeing Comcast buying NBC, this fight between Time Warner and Fox, the battle over network neutrality, is that our media system is in this fundamental transition, how we consume media and how we distribute media. And the big media giants want to have as much control over the new system as they’ve been able to do over the old system of broadcasting and cable. I think the FCC under the Obama administration is on a course to enshrine rules around network neutrality, but whether or not they will truly be effective, given these new mergers that are emerging and other powerful interests shaping the future of media, remains to be seen.

I think the Comcast-NBC potential merger is a real test case for the Obama administration, Juan, and I hope you don’t mind me moving to that beyond network neutrality, because we’re going to see whether or not the Obama administration is willing to take a proactive media democracy stand on the future of media, because if you allow that merger to occur, Comcast taking over one of the largest broadcasting and cable networks, and if you don’t have some limits on their power, then even rules on network neutrality won’t be able to dent the very powerful control that a very tiny handful of big companies are able to leverage throughout broadcast, cable, and potentially online.

Continue reading...

DOWNLOADS: (119)

PLAYS: (418)

Embed

January 05, 2010 News Corp

DOWNLOADS: (972)

PLAYS: (2008)

Embed

December 28, 2009 FOX and Friends

Dave N.: Well, that certainly didn't take long. And as usual, the chief turds -- in this case, the execrable Mike Gallagher -- have come floating to the surface of the punch bowl:

Gallagher: But guys, let's look at the inevitable, the 800-pound gorilla in the room. How about we scrutinize young Middle Eastern men to stop this.

What happens when El Al Airlines, the airline run and operated by the state of Israel, if a Palestinian tries to board that plane? Do you think he goes through an extra degree of security? Well, let's do that with Muslims, let's do that with anybody named Abdul or Mohammad or Ahmed, let's take them and put them in a room and make sure they don't have explosives sewn into their underwear.

...

Brian Kilmeade: Do you think we ought to profile any Muslim?

Gallagher: Yes! I think we ought to do what El Al does. Ask anybody who knows El Al what they do with Palestinians who attempt to board El Al. We should anybody who is a known Muslim and put them in a separate line. Call it the VIP line! Treat them with respect!

Christine Fair: That is so preposterous. One-third of the world's population is Muslim. Trying to treat every single Muslim as a terrorist is simply untenable, it's fearmongering.

Gallagher: Who are you afraid of offending Christine? Al Qaeda?

Memo to Gallagher: Nigeria is not in "the Middle East," and the suspect in this case was not "Middle Eastern" -- he was African.

If you want to profile every "known Muslim," you're going to have a hell of a time in countries like Indonesia and the Philippines, considering that their populations are a mix of the world's religions, and any Muslim who wanted to pose as a member of, say, a Christian church in order to fool authorities could do so with ease.

This just underscores how foolish the whole notion of racial profiling actually is, because when you embark on such policies, they actually make you more vulnerable, not less.

That's because terrorists are not that stupid. If you begin profiling for Middle Eastern men, they will find Indonesian or African or European operatives to perform the same task. If you begin profiling for Muslims, they will find ways to conceal their religious preferences.

We know two things about profiling, especially ethnic, religious, or racial profiling: 1) These policies expose the profilers to being gamed by terrorists; and 2) They are always a tremendous waste of resources and inevitably are counter-productive.

Sounds like your classic conservative solution: Hey, let's just make matters worse!

DOWNLOADS: (121)

PLAYS: (374)

Embed

November 24, 2009 News Corp