Zyphlin said:
I'm sure a thread about the actual on air statements and acts by both, and thier political leaning, could go on for ages. I am wanting to look at a different part of it.
I have heard numerous people give reasoning that "Of course Fox is conservatively slanted, its owned by Rupert Murdoch". It seems that because its owned by a person who is republically slanted, some feel that it is obvious that it would be slanted in that same way.
If you hold to this view, how can you not say the same about CNN, owned by a man (Ted Turner) equally as supportive to the opposite party?
If Fox is obviously slanted because Rupert Murdoch owns it, then how can you also...if that is your rationale...that CNN isn't obviously slanted because Ted Turner is the owner?
That's a good point. I think that it is illogical to assume whether a person has bias or not. For example as a libertarian, I'll tend to make anti-communist, and anti-social conservative opinions on this forum. But the more important part is whether or not you actively try to influence someone else's opinion. In this case it would be either Murdoch or Truner influencing their station editors/managers and TV pundits to have certain views, or at the very least actively tell your station or newspaper mangers to employ certain journalists or editors based on their political views.
So I think that the question should be whether or not these men actually try to influence the opinions of their staff either actively or passively? Not whether or not these men have bias.
For the record it appears that CNN international seems to be a big supporter of the UN, and multilateralism. This may reflect Ted's support of the UN. To say that CNN is liberal would be a bit incorrect though, as CNN still has many shows the are business and commerce orientated. For example they are not advocating communism.
In regards to FOX news, well the network does have a certain style. And most of the pundits seem to have some conservative leaning one way or another. I don't have a problem with that, because I figure most people are smart enough to realise that. What I do have a problem with is the their motto fair and balance.... But that is another story.
Now closing in on Murdoch. When he started up the Australian Newspaper many years ago, Rupert got a bit of a reputation for pressuring editors to compose editorial pieces, that reflected his view point, to the extent that he would fire and sack editors unless they did as they were told.
In Britain Murdoch is an extremely powerfull man, probably second after Tony Blair. During the last election, analysts actually waited to see what Rupert's papers would type about Blair. Infact it is generally percieved that whoever Murdoch's papers back for the election, will most likely win. Such is his media influence......
Interestingly Murdoch's doesn't seem to care about candidates so much on social issues, but rather business. Murdoch backed Margaret Thatcher's Torries, and conservative inspired New Labour of Tony Blair. Suggesting that Murdoch may be more Libertarian, and pro-business, and less socially conservative than people give hime credit for.
Basically Murdoch influences the opinions of his editors and station managers, he makes no effort to hide that. I'd assume that Turner tries to influence his staff, but Ted is probably more discreet about it..... :twocents:
