Did you read any of the news back then? Did you read the article I linked? (The relevant part is just above the middle of the story.)
Murdoch sponsored a big fund raiser in NYC for Gore. He donated several thousand personally. He spent several million to help support the DNC convention that year.
No, technically the Post did not endorse Gore. And they retained their mostly conservative writers. But somebody put a leash on them, so on balance the newspaper wrote more favorably of gore that summer and fall than they did about Bush. You couldn't miss it back then if you were watching.
It was also around that time that Murdoch sent his son on a mission to China, to negotiate a deal. As a result, when the US spyplane incident broke, the Post was largely silent. They won't criticize China for business reasons.
No, technically the Post did not endorse Gore. And they retained their mostly conservative writers. But somebody put a leash on them, so on balance the newspaper wrote more favorably of gore that summer and fall than they did about Bush. You couldn't miss it back then if you were watching.
Oh, if you only knew....! You are correct about Murdoch playing both sides of the aisle as it pertains to business and political influence. You avoid any mention of his considerable support for Bush and the GOP, far, far outstripping any of his contributions to the Democrats.
Your contention that the Post was favorable to Gore over Bush is simply absurd. Again, I know what I speak of.
No offense, we're on the same side here. You are mistaken about the Post however.