>>I mean, I'm >>not sure, but I think an anti-alt-fuel story based on falsehood can >>come from someone who doesn't necessarily do it for any clear payoff >>or anything. They may simply think it just generally goes with what >>they see as their organization's establishment anti-progressive >>agenda, and they think they can get away with it, and somehow be >>rewarded without asking for payment-in-advance, because the interests >>they serve are just so powerful and wealthy and obvious. >> >>Just a theory. > >Spot on.
PS: a little looking around shows that it is hard to nail down if the smh is a Murdoch paper, but it looks like the answer might be more or less "no". The publication I ran into last summer was a Murdoch tabloid. http://www.ifex.org/alerts/view.html?id=10303 At first glance the smh is a "Fairfax" paper, not a news corporation paper. A history of fairfax is here: http://www.ketupa.net/fairfax2.htm Here is the list of newscorporation papers, which does not include the SMH. http://www.newscorp.com/operations/newspapers.html Lachlan Murdoch, the son, works for Newscorp, interviewed in smh, not a newscorp paper: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2002/03/22/murdochfeat.htm This story is one I couldn't figure out. It tried to lend some perspective last year. Fairfax and the possible carving up of it is mentioned: http://media.guardian.co.uk/rupertmurdoch/story/0,11136,604953,00.html Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
