On Mon, Feb 23, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Mark J. <[email protected]> wrote: > > Rupert's unstinting love of newspapers (and his purchase of the WSJ to > show his love) may've been a negative impact for the rest of his media > empire: > > http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/23/business/media/23paper.html?pagewanted=all > > And even though the NY Post is mentioned, Tim Arango and Richard Perez- > Pena do not mention That Cartoon once in the article, which biographer > Michael Wolff claims an inching-to-the-left Murdoch has raised holy > hell on (and the lefty blogosphere who wants to keep Murdoch as Evil > Incarnate refuses to believe that he is inching-to-the-left).
I believe Murdoch to be entirely apolitical, opting instead to align himself with whomever can increase his profit margin. Everything I know about the man (two biographies and seeing the decisions he has publicly made) points to a man without any ideology, driven entirely by money. FoxNews has a conservative slant because it makes him money. The Fox network is caustic and edgy because it makes him money. If Fox or FoxNews ceased being profitable, Murdoch wouldn't hesitate to change them. He'd bring Olberman to FoxNews. He'd switch Fox to family-friendly entertainment. He has no allegiances that I can detect. He has no publicly demonstrated scruples. -- Kevin M. (RPCV) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ TV or Not TV .... Smart (TV) People on Ice! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TV or Not TV" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/tvornottv?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
