Glenn Beck’s Soros-palooza Day 3: The Reckoning

Posted by on November 12, 2010 at 1:40 am. 3 Comments :

In the concluding episode of Glenn Beck’s hallucinatory documentary on George Soros, Beck apparently had completely run out of fresh smears so he spent most of his time telling his viewers not to listen to him…

“Go and find the truth yourself. Do not take my word for any of it.”

…and not to kill him…

“In the end, you go against that kind of power you will be destroyed. I get it.”

And in an uncharacteristically honest declaration, not to believe him…

“In these last three episodes I’m not making claims, I’m not asking questions, I’m not telling you statements of fact.”

That’s painfully obvious, but it’s still nice of him to admit it. As an example of a statement that doesn’t contain facts, Beck played a video wherein Soros was asked about whether there should be “more foreign influence into the United States.” Beck’s analysis of the answer was that Soros was advocating a vote for foreigners in Congress. Where Beck strayed from the facts was when he played the answer but cut off the video before Soros had finished it. Here is the part of the answer that Beck played:

“I think you put your finger on a very important flaw in the current world order, and that is that only Americans have a vote in Congress. And yet, it is the United States that basically determines policy for the world. That is a flaw in the current setup.”

And here is the part he cut out:

“I don’t think you can correct it by giving the Chinese government a vote in Congress. But it is a flaw, and I think this is where American leadership is needed, to take into account and respect the interests of others as well, in order to retain the dominant position we currently enjoy.”

Notice that the part that was excised actually reveals that Soros was saying precisely the opposite of what Beck insinuated that he was saying. And yet, Beck can still claim that he was just playing back Soros’ own words. Just like I’m only playing back Beck’s own words in this video that shows him declaring his admiration for Hitler:

Beck’s final thoughts contained a lot of frightening advice to prepare for something horrible that’s coming. This, of course, is something he’s been doing for months. He warned that you should have a year’s supply of food stored up. He made a vague but ominous prediction that “next year we’re not gonna just change our self, we’re gonna change the world.” And he topped it all off with another errant slice of honesty:

“More and more propaganda is coming in the days and weeks ahead.”

Thanks for the warning, Glenn. But it’s pretty much what we were expecting from you anyway.

In response to a barrage of criticism from Jewish groups appalled at Beck’s latest excursions into anti-Semitism, Joel Cheatwood, a senior vice president at Fox News, took the time to issue a statement of support for Beck’s hate speech:

“[I]information regarding Mr. Soros’s experiences growing up were taken directly from his writings and from interviews given by him to the media, and no negative opinion was offered as to his actions as a child.”

Indeed, the information was taken from Soros’ own writing in much the same way as demonstrated above – edited, out-of-context, and deliberately misrepresented. And if Cheatwood thinks the opinions offered were not negative, I’d hate to see what he does think is negative. Personally, I would not regard a blatantly false assertion that a 14 year old boy participated in throwing his fellow Jews into gas chambers to be a particularly positive opinion. But that’s just me.

Now, stay tuned for Beck’s next shocking expose. The follow up to “The Puppet Master”, coming soon, will be “The Muppet Pastor.”


It will feature Beck using funny voices he heard on Sesame Street to preach his antediluvian gospel. You’ll delight to watching Beck play with dolls, eat cookies, and draw on chalkboards. All these and more of the classic antics that prove Beck’s contention that he will always treat his viewers like adults.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

The ADL Must Revoke Rupert Murdoch’s Award

Posted by on November 11, 2010 at 10:38 am. 5 Comments :

Rupert Murdoch Puppet MasterIn light of the brazen anti-Semitism displayed throughout Glenn Beck’s special programs attacking George Soros this week, the Anti-Defamation League must now answer for their tribute to Beck’s employer, Rupert Murdoch.

Last month the ADL gave Murdoch their International Leadership Award citing “his commitment to promoting respect and speaking out against anti-Semitism.” The press release announcing the award noted the presence of ADL’s National Director Abraham H. Foxman and Fox News President Roger Ailes at the award ceremony. However, it didn’t manage to offer a single example of Murdoch speaking out against anti-Semitism. The only representation of Murdoch’s opinion on the matter that appeared in the press release was this:

“When Americans think of Anti-Semitism, we tend to think of the vulgar caricatures and attacks of the first part of the 20th century,” Mr. Murdoch said. “Now it seems that the most virulent strains come from the left. Often this new anti-Semitism dresses itself up as legitimate disagreement with Israel.”

So the only justification for the tribute to Murdoch cited in the press release is one that attacks liberals who have been the most committed opponents of Anti-Semitism. That’s a pretty thin (and biased) resume for tribute.

The awarding of this honor to Murdoch was suspect from the start as Murdoch’s television and newspaper properties have a long history of conveying overtly negative impressions of Jews and other Semitic peoples. But now that Beck has embarked on his crusade of hate directed at a Jewish philanthropist and a true hero of international tolerance, the ADL has to take a stand.

The ADL cannot dismiss this as the ravings of a TV pundit whose views are distinct from Murdoch. Beck has said on several occasions that he would not be able to make the statements he does if Murdoch disagreed:

Beck: Who owns this network? Rupert Murdoch. Do you know how much money Rupert Murdoch is … you know he’s got all these things going on. Do you think he’s going to let a guy at five o’clock say a bunch of stuff, put this together, it’s completely wrong, and stay on the network? Do you think he became a billionaire because he’s stupid? No, so that’s not it. Because Fox couldn’t allow me to say things that were wrong.

Beck is declaring unambiguously that Murdoch permits his hateful, hostile rhetoric specifically because he agrees with it. And Murdoch has never disassociated himself with Beck’s views or the assertion that Beck’s presence on the network is affirmation of their agreement. Therefore, Murdoch is vouching for Beck and his repugnant commentary.

The question now is whether the ADL still thinks that Murdoch is deserving of the award they presented to him. In an article in The Jewish Week published today, Jewish leaders and Holocaust survivors castigated Beck for his “monstrous” allegations. Amongst them was the ADL’s Abe Foxman who said:

“For a political commentator or entertainer to have the audacity to say, there’s a Jewish boy sending Jews to death camps, that’s horrific. It’s totally off limits and over the top.”

Beck’s comments ‘were either out of total ignorance or total insensitivity,’ he said.”

I think it’s fair to say that Beck’s comments encompassed both ignorance and insensitivity. And in Beck’s own words, Murdoch would fire him if he thought Beck had lied or said something wrong. Since Beck still has a job we can conclude that Murdoch is comfortable with Beck’s “over the top” remarks.

So what will Foxman do about it? Will his comment to The Jewish Week be the whole of his protest? Will he hold Beck or Fox News accountable in any way? The one thing that he can do immediately is to announce that he is revoking the award he gave to Murdoch, an award that wasn’t deserved in the first place. By revoking the award Foxman would be making a statement that the sort of hate speech that Beck peddles will not be rewarded or tolerated. It would make a statement that media barons who promote this garbage are equally culpable.

There is simply no reasonable argument that absolves Murdoch from the responsibility he has for his network and its personnel. Foxman must not stand with Murdoch. He must have the courage to do the right thing. He must demonstrate that he is man of integrity and principle. And if he doesn’t he should just drop the “man” from his last name and be properly branded as another flunky for Murdoch and Fox News.

Feel free to let the ADL know how you feel about Murdoch being the recipient of an award for opposing anti-Semitism while his network promotes anti-Semitism.

ADL Contact Form
ADL Press Email


Glenn Beck Gone Wild: Day Two Of Soros-Fest

Posted by on November 11, 2010 at 1:01 am. 4 Comments :

Glenn BeckOn the second installment of Glenn Beck’s Soros-palooza, Beck had so little to say that he pretty much repeated the same delusional ravings as the day before. This is nothing new for Beck who is known for regurgitating the same old conspiracy nonsense day after day. Anyone who watches regularly has seen the same video of Van Jones hundreds of times.

The principle problem with Beck not producing any new content for today’s show is that…well…now I don’t have anything to write about. Obviously this was Beck’s intention. He deliberately aired an hour of leftovers to deprive me of material for my blog. Well, I’ve got news for him. I can be just as redundant as he is any day of the week.

So let’s start with the fact that Beck worked over the same checklist of steps to control any country. Here’s what I wrote yesterday about that:

  • Form a shadow government: Beck begins by pointing fingers at the Center for American Progress, but that’s a dodge because the real target could just as likely be the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute.
  • Control the airwaves: In a bit of misdirection, Beck cites NPR and Free Press, however they are hardly major players in the media. The top rated cable news channel is Fox News. Most of the rest of the media is owned by giant, multinational corporations run by conservatives. And radio is dominated by names like Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh.
  • Destabilize the state: Here Beck suggests that the Puppet Master would cause a political or economic crisis. Perhaps like the one that sent the country into a tailspin in late 2008?
  • Provoke an election crisis: Anyone who watched Fox News in the days leading up to the election couldn’t help but notice the incessant accusations of alleged election fraud. And no one focused more intently on the imagined scandals involving ACORN and the New Black Panthers than did Fox.
  • Take Power: Stage massive demonstrations and accuse opponents of voter fraud through radio and TV stations that you control. Does that sound like any Tea Party/Fox News coalition you might have heard about?

Actually, there is a bit of news since yesterday. With regard to “controlling the airwaves,” Beck was a bit more specific. He re-addressed what he portrayed as a vast network of television and radio outlets that Soros controlled and identified them as Media Matters, Tea Party Tracker, and ThinkProgress. Of course, those are all Internet sites. Beck didn’t name a single radio or TV station that answered to Soros. Apparently Beck doesn’t know the difference between airwaves and information superhighways.

Another notable regurgitation by Beck was his assertion that everything he says must be true or Rupert Murdoch would throw him off the air. He made this claim last April saying…

“Who owns this network? Rupert Murdoch. Do you know how much money Rupert Murdoch is … you know he’s got all these things going on. Do you think he’s going to let a guy at five o’clock say a bunch of stuff, put this together, it’s completely wrong, and stay on the network? Do you think he became a billionaire because he’s stupid? No, so that’s not it. Because Fox couldn’t allow me to say things that were wrong.”

In response to that I noted that Murdoch must agree with Beck on the plethora of ludicrous accusations that Beck has made over the years, like…

  • President Obama is a racist with a deep-seated hatred for white people.
  • It is the eve of destruction in America.
  • The climate cult is teaching your children that the earth is God.
  • The current administration is full of Nazis, socialists, communists, Marxists, and Maoists.
  • Katrina victims are scumbags.
  • Progressivism is the cancer in America and it is eating our Constitution.
  • The founding of the United States, and the Constitution, were divinely inspired.
  • If your church preaches social justice you must run from it as fast as you can.
  • If we don’t face the truth right now, we’ll be dead in five years; this country can’t survive.
  • The passage of the health care bill marks the end of prosperity in America forever.
  • There are traitors in this government who are deliberately trying to destroy it.
  • The only hope left for America is for Osama Bin Laden to attack again.

Since beck has dragged Murdoch into this, it is now incumbent on Murdoch to refute Beck’s assertion that Murdoch agrees with all these statements. Barring that, Murdoch is just as responsible for them as Beck. Today on his radio show Beck again recruited Murdoch as his corroboration for the insanity he spews. This time in a sort of open letter to George Soros:

“Mr. Soros, do you actually expect America to believe that I could get on the radio and television and tell wholly fabricated lies about the most powerful man on planet earth and you would not crush me overnight? You would not have your attorneys, you would not have everything at your disposal going after Rupert Murdoch and Fox News. Of course you would. You would do it a legal way. If I were making up lies about you, I couldn’t stay on the air. First of all, you wouldn’t have to pressure. Rupert Murdoch wouldn’t put me on the air. He would fire me.”

So once again, Beck asserts that Murdoch is in complete agreement with him by virtue of the fact that he still has a show. But Beck’s logic is a bit faulty (now there’s an understatement). He believes that Soros could crush him at will if he were fabricating lies. But couldn’t Soros also crush him at will if he were telling a truth that Soros wanted suppressed? In fact, wouldn’t Soros have even more incentive to crush him if the allegations were true? After all, Soros is the most powerful man in America according to Beck.

One other relatively new item is that Beck is now asserting that Soros has “threatened” him by giving him a gift. Was it a horses head in his bed? Was it a fish wrapped in newspaper? Nope. The ominous present was a DVD of the old movie “A Face in the Crowd” starring Andy Griffith. In the film Griffith played a Beck-like demagogue who rose from an alcoholic drifter to become a national broadcast star. Gee, what do you suppose the connection is? Somehow Beck regards this as a threat, but he neglects to explain what’s so threatening about it. Does he think that Soros is hinting that he’s going to sign Beck up for Netflix without permission?

I suppose I’ll leave it at that and hope that Beck provides a little more original content on tomorrow’s program. I can’t be expected to carry this debate all by myself.


Shocking Glenn Beck Expose: The Puppet Master. It’s Not Who You Think

Posted by on November 10, 2010 at 3:53 am. 16 Comments :

On today’s episode of the Glenn Beck program on Fox News, Beck made good on his promise to reveal the “Puppet Master” behind every diabolical scheme orchestrated by progressives and socialists for the past century. It was a shocking expose that is certain rattle the halls of power and stir even the embers of Hades.

This was no ordinary program. Yesterday Beck alerted his radio audience that if they didn’t watch, some dreadful fate might befall Beck (Now that’s marketing!). It was an alert that began with a warning to Beck’s nemesis, George Soros:

Beck: George, just a message for you. Something that…we’re prepared in every possible way, sir. But we are doing what we feel we have to do. I ask you…because we are going out on a limb here…We are kind of a canary in a coal mine. If people don’t watch, or whatever, it puts us, quite honestly it puts us in danger. You know it’s kind of like…I kind of look at you as our attorney. If something happens, could you just get this information out for us?

Got that? If Soros or his goons should fit Beck for cement galoshes, it’s up to you, his loyal viewers, to avenge him. It’s somewhat curious that Beck is the one fearful of being harmed when just a few weeks ago it was one of Beck’s goons that was captured after a gunfight with police while he was on his way to kill people at the Tides Foundation and the ACLU.

Today’s program was classic Beck. He led off early with that old standard of Van Jones being a “communist revolutionary,” and then sweetened it with a new twist that Jones is “a guy who pines for the days of Stalin.” Of course, none of that is true, but it makes a good soap opera plot.

Then Beck gracefully pivoted to his patented “mug and shake.” This is where he presents a usually out of context quote like this:

Beck: George Soros, in the aftermath of 9/11 talked about police actions as an alternative to war. Now did anybody pick up on that? This is what he said: “War is a false and misleading metaphor in the context of combating terrorism. Crimes require police work not military action.”

After which Beck mugs for the camera and shakes his head disapprovingly. It’s his non-verbal way of letting his viewers know what they’re supposed to feel. In this instance they are being directed to feel appalled at whatever was just presented, even though there was nothing remotely wrong with it. The quote from Soros just happens to reflect the views of most terrorism experts, but that shouldn’t stop Beck’s disciples from being led to believe that there was something sinister in it.

We also got to see Beck build a case against 501(c)(3) charitable organizations as if there was some inherent evil in them. He gave as examples a few of his perennial foes like MoveOn.org and the Center for American Progress. But for some reason he declined to mention the conservative/Tea Party groups Americans for Prosperity, FreedomWorks, Citizens United, or the Media Research Center.

Most of this very special episode of Beck was brought to you by a four year old book that has been widely debunked: The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party. The first clue that this book, published in 2006, is less than credible is right there in the title. If this all-powerful cabal of Soros and Clinton and the sixties radicals had seized control of the Democratic Party, than how did Barack Obama beat Clinton for the presidential nomination just two years later? That doesn’t seem like a particularly menacing cabal.

But, as it turns out, the real revelation of this expose had nothing to do with any of the above. It was a all a big buildup to reveal the man that Beck regards as the “Puppet Master” pulling the strings of power for the One World Government that is hiding in the shadows. And who is that man? Well, let’s follow Beck’s clues.

The Formula:

  • Form a shadow government: Beck begins by pointing fingers at the Center for American Progress, but that’s a dodge because the real target could just as likely be the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute.
  • Control the airwaves: In a bit of misdirection, Beck cites NPR and Free Press, however they are hardly major players in the media. The top rated cable news channel is Fox News. Most of the rest of the media is owned by giant, multinational corporations run by conservatives. And radio is dominated by names like Hannity, Beck, and Limbaugh.
  • Destabilize the state: Here Beck suggests that the Puppet Master would cause a political or economic crisis. Perhaps like the one that sent the country into a tailspin in late 2008?
  • Provoke an election crisis: Anyone who watched Fox News in the days leading up to the election couldn’t help but notice the incessant accusations of alleged election fraud. And no one focused more intently on the imagined scandals involving ACORN and the New Black Panthers than did Fox.
  • Take Power: Stage massive demonstrations and accuse opponents of voter fraud through radio and TV stations that you control. Does that sound like any Tea Party/Fox News coalition you might have heard about?

The conclusion could not be more clear. The Puppet Master’s identity can only be one man. It is a man that wields enormous power around the world. It is a man with ties to media and government and big business. It is a man without a country. It is a man whom Beck has every right to fear. It is without doubt the most loathsome creature to stalk God’s green earth in decades. It is…..


That’s right. Rupert Murdoch. Who else? All the pieces fit. And no wonder Beck is afraid. He could hardly come right out and accuse his boss of these terrible crimes. That’s why he had to be so cryptic, and why he still can’t bring himself to utter the name aloud. It’s why Beck had to construct a gauntlet of phony attacks on George Soros (which have been completely debunked), who was serving as the innocent decoy in this scheme.

But now the truth is out and we must all be vigilant, for Murdoch is probably even more dangerous when threatened or wounded. So pray for Beck. His courage in going up against someone so heinous when his very livelihood is on the line is inspiring and far too rare. God bless you Patriot Beck, and good luck. You’re going to need it.

This Just In: Further evidence of the Murdoch/Puppet Master connection. Beck included in his rant against Soros the fact that Soros attended what Beck called the “Fabian Socialist” London School of Economics. What he left unsaid (likely due to fear of reprisal) is the name of another LSE Alum: Sir Keith Murdoch, father of Rupert Murdoch, and apparently another socialist.


Wall Street Journal: Sarah Palin Is An Idiot

Posted by on November 9, 2010 at 12:24 pm. 7 Comments :

Sarah PalinOK, the Wall Street Journal didn’t really say that Sarah Palin is an idiot, but they proved it in an exchange that leaves no other conclusion. The following tale of deceit is particularly interesting because both sides are members of Rupert Murdoch’s media family. The WSJ is the gem of financial newspapers, and Palin is the star of Fox News. So Palin is not being attacked by some “lamestream media” hack. This thwacking comes from the most respectable source that Murdoch commands.

The intra-News Corp cat fight began when prepared remarks Palin will make at a trade association conference were released by the National Review. Her speech will address recent actions taken by the Federal Reserve with which she takes issue. She orders Fed chief Ben Bernanke to “cease and desist” and oddly suggests that the U.S. should follow the economic lead of Germany. That’s odd because she and her rightist comrades generally portray anyone who offers European solutions to American problems as socialists and traitors. But here is where she proudly demonstrates her monumental ignorance of economic affairs:

Palin: [E]veryone who ever goes out shopping for groceries knows that prices have risen significantly over the past year or so.

There’s only one small problem with that statement. It simply isn’t true. It’s as false as death panels; as dishonest as $200,000,000 a day trips to India by the President; as unscrupulously fraudulent as “palling around with terrorists.” In other words, it’s just another day for Sarah Palin. Sudeep Reddy of the Wall Street Journal stepped up to correct the Tea Party Queen by presenting some actual facts:

Reddy: Grocery prices haven’t risen all that significantly, in fact. The consumer price index’s measure of food and beverages for the first nine months of this year showed average annual inflation of less than 0.6%, the slowest pace on record (since the Labor Department started keeping this measure in 1968). Even if you pick a single snapshot — say, September’s year-over-year increase in prices — that was just 1.4%, far better than the 6% annual increase for food prices recorded in September 2008.

Not content to leave dumb enough alone, Palin calls Reddy’s facts and raises some more lies. She took to her Facebook page to accuse Reddy of failing to read his own paper. Then she offers this quote from a recent WSJ story to support her position that food prices have risen in the past year:

Palin: The article noted that “an inflationary tide is beginning to ripple through America’s supermarkets and restaurants…Prices of staples including milk, beef, coffee, cocoa and sugar have risen sharply in recent months.”

Notice that ellipsis Palin inserted after “supermarkets and restaurants?” Here is the complete segment with the portion she edited out in bold:

WSJ: An inflationary tide is beginning to ripple through America’s supermarkets and restaurants, threatening to end the tamest year of food pricing in nearly two decades.

Prices of staples including milk, beef, coffee, cocoa and sugar have risen sharply in recent months. And food makers and retailers including McDonald’s Corp., Kellogg Co. and Kroger Co. have begun to signal that they’ll try to make consumers shoulder more of the higher costs for ingredients.

So Palin just happened to cut out the part that affirmed that price inflation has been “tame.” And she also excised the context of the staple costs that have risen, which the Journal story makes clear was at the producer level, not the prices consumers pay. The point of the article that Palin quoted was that prices may rise in the future, but they have not risen in the past year as Palin claims.

Palin went to great lengths to ridicule Reddy and the Journal for what she regards as shoddy reporting. But upon closer examination it is Palin (who supposedly has a degree in journalism) who is mangling the truth and deliberately misrepresenting the content of the articles she cites. On her Facebook page she notes that…

Palin: Ever since 2008, people seem inordinately interested in my reading habits. Among various newspapers, magazines, and local Alaskan papers, I read the Wall Street Journal. […] Now I realize I’m just a former governor and current housewife from Alaska, but even humble folks like me can read the newspaper. I’m surprised a prestigious reporter for the Wall Street Journal doesn’t.

Now Palin may be just a former half-term governor, a quitter, a ghost-written book hustler, and a current reality TV star, but even wealthy, narcissists like her can spew falsehoods and propaganda. Judging from the evidence above, if Palin can read a newspaper her comprehension skills (or her respect for the truth) are abysmal. And her attempt to malign “a prestigious reporter for the Wall Street Journal” has not only failed, but has blown back into her face.


It’s Time For Some REAL Liberal Media

Posted by on November 8, 2010 at 7:03 pm. 1 Comments :

The American media landscape has long been dominated by giant, multinational corporations whose interests have never been aligned with those of the people they purport to serve. It doesn’t take a great mental exertion to observe the divergent aspirations of a population that is concerned with jobs, education, health care, and the welfare of their families, and a business enterprise that is concerned with profits, deregulation, protected markets, and returning value to shareholders. A corporate-managed news operation simply cannot represent the interests of their Wall Street board and their Elm Street audience at the same time.

Over the years there have been some heated debates about the absence of a media platform that represents real people’s issues, particularly from a liberal perspective. The right has had Fox News for 14 years, but nothing remotely similar exists for the left. To the extent that MSNBC comes close, it is still not equivalent. MSNBC never took the explicit role of advocating for party politics in the all-consuming way that Fox does for the GOP. Not that I would want a liberal media outfit to take up with the Democrats. I’m just noting the distinction.

The recent controversy over the suspension of Keith Olbermann for making a few donations to Democratic candidates illustrates the inadequacy of having to rely on another right-wing, corporate parent to satisfy our media appetite. And it magnifies the differences between Fox and MSNBC. Fox would never contemplate removing their most successful anchors from the air over something like that. Fox doesn’t even contemplate reprimanding their anchors when they brazenly lie, overtly incite violence, or call our president a racist. But MSNBC had no qualms about imposing a severe and embarrassing punishment on someone whose political leanings were already well known. As Sen. Bernie Sanders said about the NBC/Comcast deal:

“We do not need another media giant run by a Republican supporter of George W. Bush. That is the lesson we should learn from the Keith Olbermann suspension.”

In the past, I have not been particularly enthusiastic about the idea of building a liberal media enterprise. Not because I don’t think it’s important, but because it would be prohibitively expensive to do it right. Air America is a sad example of what happens without sufficient support and capitol. There are many additional reasons to be pessimistic about such an enterprise, i.e. it would be a risky venture that would require a long-term commitment. Rupert Murdoch deficit-financed Fox News for at least five years; radio and cable channel access is scarce and difficult to acquire; bona fide talent, both on the air and in the executive suites, is hard to recruit; and building any business from scratch is fraught with fiscal danger and obstacles.

However, we may have an opportunity today that has not been available in the past. Comcast, the nation’s largest cable operator is in the process of acquiring NBC/Universal. It is a merger that has raised red flags for many media watchdogs who are concerned about the concentration of power that has been getting progressively worse year after year. And Comcast is a conservative-run business that would further tilt the press to the right. Free Press and other reform groups are actively lobbying to oppose approval of the merger by federal agencies. And therein lies our opportunity.

Comcast wants very much to smooth the path for approval of their acquisition of NBC/U. So perhaps they could be persuaded to trade something of value for an agreement to drop opposition. What I would propose is that Comcast agree to divest itself of NBC News prior to the merger. Specifics of such a transaction would have to be worked out but would center around the divestiture of NBC’s news operations, the MSNBC cable network, CNBC, and the related Internet properties. Comcast would still get the NBC broadcast network, the lucrative USA cable network, Bravo, SyFy, and Telemundo. These networks form the basis of the syndication strategy for the NBC entertainment group. And, of course, they would also still have the NBC television station group and the Universal Studios and theme parks.

What makes this proposal viable is that the new media group splitting off is already a profitable business. It would not face the risks associated with building a business from scratch. It already has cable access to most of the country. And it is already staffed with proven talent and executives. MSNBC and CNBC are both profitable in their present form and would likely continue to be.

For this to work there would need to be an acquiring entity and financing. The money could come from a consortium that might include people like Ted Turner, Al Gore, George Soros, Steve Case, David Geffen, and/or Bill Gates. There’s no shortage of available billionaires. And ideally there would be an existing media enterprise that this could be folded into. Some examples might be Tribune, Gannett, or the Washington Post Company.

A requirement for agreeing to this would be a promise to appoint credible, progressive, experienced executives to run the news operations. It would be imperative that the management team be committed to quality, ethical journalism. It would have to be the sort of business that valued investigative projects and was unafraid of controversy. And it must be open to partnering with relevant and respectable media reform groups like Free Press, the Poynter Institute, the Schumann Center, the USC Annenberg Norman Lear Center, Media Matters, etc.

By forming a new company in this fashion we would benefit by producing honest, progressive news content; by establishing a baseline for journalistic ethics; by not having to suffer the indignities of hare-brained lackeys like Phil Griffin, the man who suspended Olbermann and is likely already sucking up to his future conservative bosses at Comcast; and by preventing another media merger that would have exacerbated the problem of concentrated power in the press. And as for Comcast, they would benefit by easing their path to the acquisition of NBC/U. There may never be a better opportunity to negotiate a deal that could produce a real liberal media outlet – for a change. And that wouldn’t be a bad name for the channel: Real Media: For a Change.

None of this will be easy. The proposed merger is already a complex arrangement that could fall apart if someone pulls the wrong thread. But it would be worth exploring. If MSNBC is presently the only allegedly liberal news channel on the dial, then it shouldn’t have to cower in the shadow of right-wing masters who can slap them down if they get too uppity. They should have the freedom to express themselves without fear of reprisal. And if that environment can be created through a spinoff of the NBC news division, then it may be worth it to let the rest of the Comcast transaction go forward.

Find us on Google+
Advertisement:

The Stupidest Man On Fox News Is Spooked By George Soros

Posted by on November 8, 2010 at 1:11 pm. 9 Comments :

Steve DoocySteve Doocy, unquestionably the stupidest man on Fox News (which is no easy achievement), expressed his astonishment that George Soros might be executing an insidious plot to Jiu-Jitsu Fox News by turning its own wealth against them. Here are excerpts of an exchange this morning between Doocy and right-wing crank/author Ron Arnold:

Doocy: Did you know that George Soros made over $2.3 million by investing in News Corp, which is our parent company? So, is he using those profits to attack Fox News? Some people are wondering that.

By “some people” Doocy means himself and his producers. Arnold took up Doocy’s question and responded precisely as he was expected to when they invited him into the studio:

Ron Arnold: That’s absolutely true. Over a period of about four years the Soros Fund Management had about $4 million at one time, ended up with about $2.3 million when they sold it off. And now they’re simply using the cash to try to get rid of News Corp’s Fox News. And that’s exactly what’s happening.

Just to be clear, Soros is being accused of parlaying a $4 million bit of a $20 billion fund (that’s 0.002%) into a windfall with which he could blow away Fox News. That’s not much more than a rounding error. The accusation also implies that the fund itself is bankrolling the Fox attacks and not Soros personally (who could write a million dollar check on his own account like most of us pick up a Venti Latte with extra foam). There is no evidence that Soros’ Quantum Fund, or any other investment, has engaged in any such partisan expenditures, and probably would not be permitted to do so. What’s more, the $2.3 million cited as the proceeds from the sale of News Corp stock appears to represent a loss of principle, not a profit as Doocy stated. But Doocy’s Fox & Friends have no use for trivialities such as facts while they are trying to fabricate a scandal. Doocy continues…

Doocy: It looked like George Soros was trying to control the media.

Saints preserve us! An international billionaire financier might actually be trying to wield tyrannical control over our free press. I wonder if Doocy has ever met his boss, Rupert Murdoch, an international billionaire who actually does run a media empire and sits on the board of the Associated Press. Soros, on the other hand, has no management interests in any media concern. He has made some charitable donations to NPR and Media Matters, but has no executive role or even a seat on their boards. However, even if he did, is it Doocy’s contention that NPR and Media Matters constitute a mortal threat to News Corp, AP, and the rest of the Corporate Media cabal? Apparently so.

Arnold: Well, he certainly was. And you’ve got to remember he’s got a very good friend in the Tides Foundation’s CEO whose name is Drummond Pike. They go back a long way, Soros and Pike. And I’m pretty sure that the only reason that that million dollars went to Media Matters was because Drummond Pike stepped in. Because Media Matters has been trying to get money out of Soros for years. He said no.
Doocy: It just seems incredulous [sic] that he would be making money in News Corp stock and then turning around and taking the money to try to run a division of News Corp out of business.
Arnold: Yes, it does seem incredible but you have to remember, cash trumps hypocrisy. It’s all about the money as far as he’s concerned.
Doocy: That is a crazy story.

Now follow this logic: Soros didn’t even want to fund Media Matters. He was persuaded to do it by his pal Drummond. Yet he is still portrayed as seeking to control the media despite his lack of interest. And while Doocy and Arnold find it incredible, they explain it away by asserting that “It’s all about the money,” which contradicts their whole theory as to Soros’ obsession to dominate the media. That is indeed a crazy story.

Of course I didn’t expect any of this to make sense from the beginning. Doocy’s Olympian ignorance pervades every subject he approaches. The truth is that this just a teaser for Glenn Beck’s upcoming “Puppetmaster” special on Soros. Fox News is a focused and effective marketing machine and they always go to great lengths to promote their own phony stories. Doocy is like the teaspoon of Aspertame before the full-on dose of poison that Beck will dispense tomorrow.


BROKE: Glenn Beck’s “PLAN” To Collapse The System

Posted by on November 7, 2010 at 9:50 pm. 12 Comments :

A year ago this month Glenn Beck announced that he had a “Plan” that he promised to unveil at public event to be held at the Lincoln Memorial in Washington, DC. It is a 100 year plan to restore America to what Beck imagines it was a hundred years ago, before the progressives came along and convinced everyone to eat some forbidden apples. The big event would be the launching pad for his “Plan” and a book by the same name.

In the intervening year Beck fundamentally transformed the purpose of his rally into something that resembled the old Holyroller Roadshows and Salvation Emporiums. He had completely abandoned the book launch and the mysterious “Plan” in favor of an open air revival meeting and the witnessing of a miracle flock of geese.

However, as it turns out the book wasn’t shelved. It was repackaged, retitled, and released a couple of weeks ago.

Glenn Beck - BrokeBROKE: The Plan to Restore Our Trust, Truth and Treasure, is now available with a new emphasis on the country’s fiscal woes. This isn’t exactly a new theme for Beck who has been predicting (craving) an American economic calamity for several years. The irony is that his “Plan” now places the blame for our dilemma on the American people:

“Once you see what we’re really up against, it’s much easier to develop a realistic plan. To fix ourselves financially, Glenn argues, we have to fix ourselves first. That means some serious introspection and, ultimately, a series of actions that will unite all Americans around the concept of shared sacrifice.”

See? We are the problem. And to fix it Beck has suddenly adopted the notion of shared sacrifice, a concept he previously regarded as abhorrent and a product of the socialistic ideology that he believes diminishes individual freedom and responsibility. Furthermore, his own philosophy is one that advocates allowing our economic system to crash and burn. Again, a concept he previously reviled as the Cloward/Piven strategy. He asserts that we are beyond the point of no return and must abandon all measures to stimulate growth and create jobs. Let the bottom fall out, cower in your bunker with your Survival Seeds and gold coins. Cling to your God and guns and, if your faith is strong enough, you will be redeemed by some miracle from above.

I don’t plan on reading Broke any time soon because … well because reading Beck’s books falls somewhere below bobbing for Ebola on my to-do list. And what I’ve read of his in the past has always been just a rehashing of the tired lies and disinformation that he spews on TV and radio.

However I can’t help but comment on the nauseating image he has chosen for the cover. To place himself, a man of prodigious wealth, behind a banner proclaiming destitution, with empty pockets and an expression of distress and defeat, is an insult to the millions of families who are truly suffering and struggling to maintain some semblance of comfort and security. This is a man who extorts sums exceeding $100.00 from his humble disciples for the privilege of hearing him blame them for the mess that greedy conservatives, like those Beck admires, have gotten this country into. This is a man who preaches a brand of economic isolationism that will bring misery to millions, but leave himself unscathed – hardly broke. That cover is as dishonest as everything else that Beck does and says.

The unmitigated gall of this self-centered, Randian, populist impostor, pretending to have something in common with hard-working Americans, is repulsive in the extreme. Consequently, I have come up with a couple of alternative titles and covers for his book:

Either of these is a better representation of the scoundrel Beck is and the immorality for which Beck stands.


Rachel Maddow On Keith Olbermann: Here’s The Larger Point…

Posted by on November 6, 2010 at 11:24 am. 23 Comments :

Keith Olbermann’s suspension from MSNBC for making a couple of political donations without getting prior approval from the network bosses has set media tongues to wagging. However, the real story here is not what Olbermann did, but what other hosts and networks (i.e. Fox News) do regularly without shame or consequence. Rachel Maddow summarizes it nicely:

Here’s the larger point, though, that’s going mysteriously missing from the right-wing cackling and old media cluck-cluck-clucking: I know everyone likes to say, “Oh, cable news, it’s all the same. Fox and MSNBC — mirror images of each other. But if you look at the long history of Fox hosts not just giving money to candidates, but actively endorsing campaigns and raising millions of dollars for politicians and political parties — whether it’s Sean Hannity or Glenn Beck or Mike Huckabee — and you’ll see that we can lay that old false equivalency to rest forever. There are multiple people being paid by Fox News to essentially run for office as Republican candidates. If you count not just their hosts but their contributors, you’re looking at a significant portion of the entire Republican lineup of potential contenders for 2012. They can do that because there’s no rule against that at Fox. Their network is run as a political operation. Ours isn’t.


The deep collusion between Fox News and the GOP is there for all to see if they just open their eyes. The sad thing is that most of the audience, even Fox fans, are aware of this cozy relationship. In fact, Fox’s audience actually approves of it, insists upon on, and takes pride in it. It’s the media that is willfully and woefully blind.

Much of the old-school press goes out of their way to defend Fox as if it were a credible source of news. They did so after former White House Communications Director Anita Dunn correctly called Fox “the communications arm of the Republican Party.” They did so after a false allegation was raised regarding Fox being denied access to a White House event. They did so when controversy erupted surrounding the seating arrangements in the White House briefing room after the departure of Helen Thomas.

When will the Conventional Media recognize that Fox is NOT a news network? When will they report the truth about the collusion between Fox and their partisan pals in the GOP? When will they wise up to the fact that while they are propping up Fox, Fox is slandering them? I previously wrote an article that asked the question: Who’s Afraid Of Fox News? (The answer: The Rest Of The Media!). Fox regularly smears their competitors in the most hostile terms yet rarely has to take a return punch. Their very slogan, “Fair and Balanced,” is an insult that implies their rivals are unfair and biased.

So when do they fight back? To date they have exhibited the courage of a flock of ostriches. The “larger point” that Maddow raises has been looming over the mediasphere for years and it is far past time for them to defend themselves, to defend ethical journalism, and to advance the interests of the public they purport to serve. If the Olbermann affair can shine a light on the brazen politicking of Fox News and incite an uprising of truth-telling with regard to it, this whole messy melodrama might actually end up being worth it.


Phil Griffin: MSNBC’s Embeded Fox News Groupie

Posted by on November 5, 2010 at 6:58 pm. 3 Comments :

I was reminded of an article I wrote last May by a Twitterer who apparently knows my work better than I do. Below are a few choice excerpts that paint a clearer picture of the man that just put Keith Olbermann on suspension.

Phil Griffin Of MSNBC ♥’s Roger Ailes Of Fox News
 

Roger AilesPhil Griffin, president of MSNBC, was interviewed by the Chicago Tribune and provided an outstanding example of the sort of clueless, illogical, journalistic myopia that is rotting away the American press. When asked about his rival Roger Ailes at Fox News, he gave an almost fawning response that makes one wonder if they are really rivals at all.

“He’s changed media. Everybody does news differently because Roger’s changed the world. Roger early on figured it out and was brilliant.”

Indeed. Roger Ailes changed media – for the worse! His “brilliant” idea was to transform the news into a rancorous, talk-radio style, shoutfest that manufactured conflict and spun every story as far to the right as their ideological wheel could turn. The inspiration behind Fox’s brand loyalty is talk-radio, soap operas, and tabloid news vendors like the National Enquirer.

[…]

If Griffin really believes that his mission is to emulate Fox from the opposite end of the political spectrum, he will only succeed in further debasing the media. In addition, he will miss the opportunity to effectively compete in the cable news marketplace. He needs to realize that, not being a news network, Fox is no more his competition than is Nickelodeon (which I’ve said before is a better source than Fox for news and plays to a smarter audience).

[…]

If Griffin were to apply basic fundamentals of entertainment to a more journalistically ethical approach he could attract a much larger and more loyal audience. He needs to give news consumers a little more credit for being discriminating, skeptical, curious, and capable of understanding the issues that bear directly on their lives. The last thing we need is more of the cheapening of journalism that Ailes has proffered. And we certainly should not be honoring him for the damage he has already done.

Why does MSNBC have a president who idolizes Roger Ailes? He should not be a role model for anyone who reveres journalism and public service. If there is any justice in this world Olbermann will be back on the air next week and Griffin will be suspended for incompetence and a debilitating lack of vision.