Times Undertakes Multi-Bureau Rupert Murdoch Investigation
MORE Off the Record
The New York Times is currently undertaking a major news investigation, led by managing editor Jill Abramson, into News Corp.’s business dealings throughout the world, according to a source with knowledge of the project.
Currently, Ms. Abramson is working outside of the newsroom, recovering from injuries sustained during a traffic accident last month.
But, as she told The Observer in an e-mail on May 26, executive editor Bill Keller has kept her quite busy.
“Bill has asked me to lead an investigative project for the next month, which I’ll mainly do from home,” Ms. Abramson wrote at the time. “It involves a group of domestic and foreign reporters, but I obviously can’t tell you what it is.”
Well, the group includes one obvious choice: media reporter Richard Siklos, who authored Shades of Black, the 1995 biography of disgraced press baron Conrad Black.
Although Mr. Siklos is currently covering the Black trial in Chicago, he’s also been busy reporting on Mr. Black’s fellow media mogul, Rupert Murdoch: He has had nine bylined pieces, including a 3,300-word cover story in the Sunday Business section, since News Corp.’s bid for Dow Jones was announced on May 1.
The investigative project also includes, according to a source at The Times, investigative editor Matt Purdy and reporters Jo Becker (in New York), Jane Perlez (in London) and Joseph Kahn (in Beijing).
Mr. Purdy did not confirm there was an investigative project underway, and referred this reporter’s questions to Ms. Abramson—who declined to comment. Mr. Siklos also declined to comment. Ms. Becker did not return calls seeking comment. Ms. Perlez and Mr. Kahn could not be reached at press time.
A News Corp. spokesperson confirmed that they knew of The Times’ investigative project, but declined to comment.
I was beginning to wonder if Murdoch would ever be brought under the magnifying glass. While his business dealings are out of my range, his cultural impact isn't.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/murdochs_enslaved_red_states.html
http://www.light-to-dark.com/ruperts_brains.html
The damage accomplished through tabloidization and polarization is qualitatively obvious. His screamers, including O'Reilly, Hannity, Savage, and others help divide our country not by encouraging rational discourse but by crowding it out with angry filler and propaganda.
Murdoch's market share tends to be those with short fuses.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/coulter_limbaugh_oreilly.html
Therefore, he and his underlings are perfect conveyors of White House propaganda.
http://www.light-to-dark.com/unanticipated_2.html
The Times may resurrect itself yet.
Interesting, isn't it? The media is all over Murdoch, while ignoring George Soro's, who profited off of the Nazi atrocities starting at the age of 14, and who now funds Democrat leftist organizations like MoveOn.org and Fairness in media. Here is the world these folks would like vis-avis free speech in America; Silence the American people with "hate speech" laws. Silence the soldier's, because they dare to speak out against them, and just want to win. Silence the radio waves with the "Fairness Doctrine." Silence the pulpits with threatening the churches with removal of their tax-exempt status for conducting "political speech" from the pulpit. (I.E.- talking about them.) Silence people who accuse them of wrongdoing by having them audited by the IRS. Silence your political opposition by obtaining their F.B.I. records, where any accusation can be unfairly made, and pass it off to a willing media as an “innocent mistake.” B.J. Clinton was a master of the last three. Silence dissent in the classrooms. Silence speakers and alternative viewpoints by heckling on college campuses. Silence authors by not displaying or reordering their books in the bookstores, even when they are on the best seller list. Attack the right of free speech by denying that there is a God, so no such thing as a "God given right." Disseminate false and misleading information when it serves your interests to advance your cause. Silence the right of being asked serious questions by your opposition, by refusing to appear on any network that doesn’t support you, even if that networks opinions are supported by half of the nation Any of you sunshine patriots who support these people should think twice. When you stop marching out of lockstep, and have a different view then the one the media is filling you with, it will be your turn to discover just what an oppressive government can do. You know, "when they came for me, there was nobody left." When the right of free speech is gone, the only thing separating us from a revolution will be the size of our middle class. Should China, or another nation, put us into economic chaos, all that will remain is anarchy. Woe to you on that day, as I for one will be part of a group of millions that will be ferreting out you lunatics who support the silencing of your fellow Americans, or believe all this nonsensical conspiracy garbage . Then, all the gun laws, faith in global warming, and smarmy intellectual superiority you think you possess in the world won't be enough to protect you from we, the people, who still love this country. We will be sanctioned in what we do, as the documents that created this great nation demand us to revolution, should we be threatened with the government usurping of our “God given rights.” This is what our founder’s said, in case you’ve forgotten- “Whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their saftey and happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light or transient causes: and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.” Ya’all just might want to keep that in mind
So, were better off in a world where the government uses peoples FBI files to muffle dissent?
http://www.cnn.com/US/9606/23/fbi.files/
Or how about using the IRS to silence your opponents through auditing them? All with the help of a willing media.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=14702
Of course, the fact that the previous administration incinerated 70 of your fellow citizens in Waco, twelve of whom WERE UNDER THE AGE OF FIVE, is fine too, I suppose. Or maybe we'll just shoot the women who we oppose, while they hold BABIES in their arms, remember? Well, it's o.k., as long as we can say BUSH is a threat to peoples freedoms. The last administration appears to have more in common with the Nazi's then free speaking Americans, but we wouldn't want to bring that up, now, would we.
The Times, not unlike San ran Nan (Pelosi) and Scary Reid, would screw up a two-car funeral. Assuredly, there will be no resurrection.
"The damage accomplished through tabloidization and polarization is qualitatively obvious. His screamers, including O'Reilly, Hannity, Savage, and others help divide our country not by encouraging rational discourse but by crowding it out with angry filler and propaganda."
'Screamers' is not a polarizing word? Oh right, it's only polarizing when someone with a viewpoint differing from your's uses it. And, you are so eager to have rational discourse that you have to dismiss opposing viewpoints as "angry filler" and "propaganda." I'd laugh if this wasn't so pathetic.
The liberal media establishment have been trying to smear Murdoch for a long time. What else is new. He refuses to march in lockstep with the leftist agenda so he must be 'investigated' by the pure and holy New York Times for his crime of dissent.
re DIFFUSE: Interesting isn't it? Yours is an accurate and well articulated description of the America unfolding before us. Two interesting points: 1) The politically correct tyrants, like the jihadists, are moral relativists who honestly believe in their hearts and souls that its OK to lie, cheat, steal, flunk students and fire employees who won't adopt their political view, because when they have complete control of all thought, speech and deed the world will be a perfect place. 2)Despite the fact that they have enormous power now, and that it will be they who are slaughtered in the end, they just can't stop. They are motivated by greed with "total domination" as their creed. The world will be a better place without them.
Concerned, read the last couple of lines to my first post. We have a remedy. God forbid it should come to that, but coming from a long line of people who were willing to fight and die so that we could enjoy freedom here, I've got no problem with doing the same. I knew when the media started putting out false exit poles, announcing states two hours before the polls closed, and making up false documents, that we needed a new source for unbiased news. Let them attack those sources if they want to be good Nazi's, freedom is a funny thing. As many communists nations have come to see, once you let THAT genie out of the bottle, it ain't so easy to put him back in.
I hate Drudge commenters. Idiots.
Yeah, if only his market had the steady temperament of a Howard Dean, Rosie O'Donnell, Charles Rangel, Al Sharpton, Charles Barron, Al Gore...
Or the level-headed, clear-thinking followers of these upstanding leaders, such as the salt-of-the-earth types who protested the NY Republican convention.
Whats So- Just what I'd expect from your type, a well reasoned, logical argument for your position. Sorry we aren't all tuned into the control unit over at the Democrat Misinformation Media Machine today. Must be easy being told what to think.
Mr./Ms. What's So: Perhaps the most interesting quality of all these comments is that they clearly aren't submitted by idiots. Though a bit too judgemental and overly succinct, I suspect you're no idiot either.
Breath deep, think long and hard my liberal friend.
Concerned: While some of the conservative comments I see here are not idiotic, others certainly are. One draws a line between lack of belief in god and crushing of free speech. Another says liberals are trying to silence soldiers, but doesn't mention the recent pentagon stifling of soldiers' speech. One talks about the admitedly abusive use of background checks and IRS audit threats under "BJ Clinton" without recognizing the recent justice department litmus test and IRS audit abuses under the current administration. Finally, one of them shockingly either predicts or advocates the slaughter of liberals. I would say these qualify as idiotic statements. And to say the left marches is lockstep, as someone commented below, is ludicrous. A significant chunk of the left believes that the NY Times is a right wing stooge, which is also idiotic.
diffuse, concerned, et. al:
You all trying to sound so cool and bad-ass is quite funny. What's even funnier, though, are your comments in general.
What planet are you all living on? Everything you say is so hare-brained and ludicrous it defies description.
Someone already mentioned (thank god!) that the problems with the DOJ and AG, and the Pentagon silencing the soldiers. Furthermore, it's the redneck fundies on the right that are not only trying to teach Creationsism (myth) in schools, but are trying to do away with (i.e., "silence") proponents of Evolution (quantifiable scientific theory). So, again, who is silencing whom?
But the BEST is DIFFUSE talking about how he comes from a long family of fighters willing to fight for his freedoms! What a riot!
Hey, DIFFUSE, didn't The Decider say that the Iraq War is the most important battle of this generation? Well, why haven't you enlisted to fight for all our freedoms?
My guess is that you haven't enlisted because you're having a hard time figuring out how a Civil War in Iraq could affect our freedoms (although I doubt that's the reason), or it's that you're a pussy.
Just a guess, though. At any rate, DIFFUSE, you have been de-fused.
trueAmerican
Concerned, Glad to see a response, and not an insult. Do you see another reason for the rabid "Christophobic" attitude of the left? My rights are untouchable, as long as they are God given, and not government given. How can I, or the airwaves, be silenced without attacking them as God given, and who is trying to silence here? Draw your own conclusion. I know many soldiers, they all say, "how come the media never expresses how we feel?" Got an answer for them, other than the constant insults to them about how they can't win? If you can show me proof of the administration abusing the IRS, post the link. I read a lot of accusations about this administration, but if there was anything solid, do you really think the Dems wouldn't be all over it, instead of saying "we have to investigate to see IF a crime was committed. Do you think a media controlled by former Democrat party operatives like Russert, Stephanopolous, Roberts, et al. wouldn't be SCREAMING about it daily? Nobody is saying liberals should be slaughtered. What I'm saying is that it is un-American to silence people who do not agree with you, you know, by doing things like investigating people who disagree with you, while giving a pass to people who do.
trueAmerican; Re-Iraq, been there, done that How 'bout you? While we're at it, why don't you take a look at what your folks were saying about it, if you want to talk about pussy's. Yeah, there's some folks with some true courage of their convictions. Willing to have a discussion if you can manage without trying to insult. Don't think your capable, though.
http://www.whosaiditiraq.blogspot.com/
Hey DIFFUSE,
For good and all, maybe you can pass this along to your fellow patriots:
I am a historical Democrat, liberal in the flesh, and conservative of bone.
That means that my concern for others is deep, but silliness and craven back-bending just appall me.
I am liberal in many ways, but conservative in others, and I do not walk in Lock Step with anybody.
Will you please retire the sad old trope that those that oppose you have been unduly influenced by somebody? I am influenced by many, on both sides of any given issue.
What gets my attention is someone who is thoughtful about what they are saying and aware that specificity of language reaps many benefits.
One of the benefits of speaking clearly and specifically is that someone with less opportunity to pause and think can't easily misconstrue what I am intending to say.
Surely you have spoken with or heard of someone who has misconstrued even your own message and beliefs to the point of extremity.
That is an opportunity to understand that somewhere down at the end of the line, some poor soul has so misunderstood what you are getting at that it is very nearly unrecognizable.
The freedom to choose for women can be turned into babies being left on the floor of port-a-potties.
The right to bear arms can be turned into Waco.
Hmm, trueAmerican: Keyboards broken? Or does the need to use logic and reason to advance your positions preclude the ability to answer? Guess so.
Wow, such violent rage. Everyone cool down. Murdoch as a public figure and business man deserves to be investigated, just as Soros does.
Is there no compromise in America anymore? There are a lot of good intentions on every side of every issue. The art of understanding each other is being lost in heat of the argument. We used to teach debate in this country. Gone. And with it understanding and listening. No one listens to each other - JUST REACTS. Shame on you all.
Wow, such violent rage. Everyone cool down. Murdoch as a public figure and business man deserves to be investigated, just as Soros does.
Is there no compromise in America anymore? There are a lot of good intentions on every side of every issue. The art of understanding each other is being lost in heat of the argument. We used to teach debate in this country. Gone. And with it understanding and listening. No one listens to each other - JUST REACTS. Shame on you all.
IRS misuse by current administration: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/connelly/256107_joel18.html.
Flywheelgrinding, I enjoyed your post. I do, however, continue to feel there is a popular culture, and a media in this country, that is corrosive to what many others in this country feel are traditional values. I think all people should be free to speak, worship, and live as they feel fit, without negative connotations being portrayed of them. I find it interesting that in our country today, a person feels uninhibited about saying he is an agnostic, athiest, drude, wiccan, or worshiper of mother earth. It is only the Christians who feel they have to quantify their belief system with statements like "I don't want you to think I'm a Jesus freak or anything, but..." I think there is, indeed, a culture and media that has some people acting and thinking in lock-step, and strongly influencing people's belief systems. By the way, I use to be a Democrat, but there appears to be no room for Conservatives in the Democrat party anymore. I'm no fan of G.W., but as the Democrats increasingly try to marginalize us, there really isn't much one can do.
Hmm, If your link is part of a pattern as it was under BJC, and not an isolated occurrence, then it should indeed be investigated. I suspect, though, that if there were a pattern, the media in this country would be all over it. We'll see. I am interested in knowing when the New York Times will be spending it's time and money on an exhaustive investigation of George Soros, like that will ever happen in my lifetime. If you have almost total control of the popular culture and media, why would you feel the need to investigate people who offer a differing opinion first, while ignoring those who support you?
Come on TrueAm, who is silencing whom, you ask?
Tell me, whose views are frequently punished at colleges and universities? Who is it trying to silence talk radio with the Orwellian titled "Fairness Doctrine?" Whose views are not particularly welcome in Hollywood? Which views are overwhelmingly represented by the mainstream news media? John McCain aside, which party is inclined to regulate political speech?
I'm no fan of creationism or those who try to force it on others, but only the willfully blind will not acknowledge that in our current political climate, it's conservative views that are punished, belittled, or simply disregarded.
Soros? Apples and oranges. What mainstream news outlet does he own? None. Murdoch "informs" hundreds of millions of morons everyday.
As for the Times investigating his corrupt practices, I say go after him. If anyone has as much to do with the last 6 years of idiocy on the right, it's Murdoch and his right-wing propaganda.
Soros? Apples and oranges. What mainstream news outlet does he own? None. Murdoch "informs" hundreds of millions of morons everyday.
As for the Times investigating his corrupt practices, I say go after him. If anyone has as much to do with the last 6 years of idiocy on the right, it's Murdoch and his right-wing propaganda.
It's the Drudge Effect. If a Drudge post links to an article that allows comments, those comments will be dominated by an army of misinformed Drudgetards.
The premise of protecting liberalism by blocking and shouting down challenges to liberal thought and the political correctness mantra toward stifling free speech are the fundamental elements in the incubator moving toward one party Naziism.
The ad hominem tactic where liberals would commonly use such a label toward conservatives, as such a demeaning reference, allows the propogation of these psycho-seeds to shape behaviour in conservatives and to run from dealing with "affirmative action", "hate speech" being critical of "black race baiters" etc..
With their liberal hackles up in concert with howls of "racism" and "Naziism" and a left wing radical press hell bent on destroying this country, they shape opposition behaviour.
The antidote for such behaviour is to put the left wing media out of business with more conservative talk shows and a more aggressive consevative elected who would have 60% approval numbers to stand up to the real Nazi's and the enemies of the constitution.
Smokedgouda, Soros funds Media Matters, a group that is actively working to silence the rights of Consevatives to be heard.
DB- Only people who listen to the Democrat Misinformation Media Machine like yourself are truly misinformed. There posters seem to be the only one's who can't seem to post without an insult.
YEAH! And when they're done with Murdoch, let's go after talk radio with the Fairness Doctrine. And then let's egg on the campus Nazis who dump conservative newspapers and put on Stalinist show trials. Then we'll go visit conservative speakers and throw pies in their face, shout them down and start riots. Then we'll go blackball conservative documentaries in Hollywood!
I'm with ya all the way, Smoked--how DARE they express views different from ours!