Posted on 07/01/2007 5:44:42 AM PDT by lowbridge
Posted by Noel Sheppard on June 30, 2007 - 12:06.
I’m not sure what derangement syndrome Bill Moyers is currently suffering from, but on Friday’s “Bill Moyers Journal” broadcast on PBS, the outspoken host went into an invective-filled tirade about media tycoon Rupert Murdoch that frankly was one of the most disgraceful exhibitions of liberal bias so far this year.
In his closing monologue, Moyers compared Murdoch to the Marquis de Sade, Imelda Marcos, and Satan himself.
I kid you not.
For those that can stomach it, what follows is a full transcript of this piece of…detritus. Those with a healthier GI tract can watch the video available here. And, more information concerning the press' biased coverage of Murdoch is available at the MRC’s Business and Media Institute.
Without further ado (h/t Dan Gainor, emphasis added, better fasten your seatbelts!):
If Rupert Murdoch were the Angel Gabriel, you still wouldn't want him owning the sun, the moon, and the stars. That's too much prime real estate for even the pure in heart.
But Rupert Murdoch is no saint; he is to propriety what the Marquis de Sade was to chastity. When it comes to money and power he's carnivorous: all appetite and no taste. He'll eat anything in his path. Politicians become little clay pigeons to be picked off with flattering headlines, generous air time, a book contract or the old-fashioned black jack that never misses: campaign cash. He hires lobbyists the way Imelda Marcos bought shoes, and stacks them in his cavernous closet, along with his conscience; this is the man, remember, who famously kowtowed to the Communist overlords of China, oppressors of their own people, to protect his investments there.
The ambitious can't resist his blandishments, Nor his power to get or keep them in office where they can return his favors. Mae West would be green with envy at his little black book of conquests. Tory Margaret Thatcher. Labor's Tony Blair. George Bush. Even Jimmy Carter couldn't say no.. now Bill and Hillary Clinton, who know which side of their bread is buttered, like having it slathered by their new buddy Rupert. Our media and political system has turned into a mutual protection racket.
You will not be surprised to learn that Murdoch's company paid little or no federal income tax over the past four years. His powerful portfolio positions him to claim a big stake in Yahoo and his takeover of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL, now owned by the Bancroft family, which, like Adam and Eve, the parents of us all, are tempted to sell their birthright for a wormy apple.
Murdoch and THE JOURNAL's editorial page are made for each other. They've both pursued the right's corporate and political agenda of the past quarter century. Both venerate what THE JOURNAL editorials call the "animal spirits" of business. But THE JOURNAL's newsroom is another matter - there facts are sacred and independence revered. Rupert Murdoch has told the Bancrofts he'll not meddle with the reporting. But he's accustomed to using journalism as a personal spittoon. In the months leading up to the invasion of Iraq, he turned the dogs of war loose in the newsrooms of his empire and they howled for blood. Murdoch himself said the greatest thing to come out of the war would be "$20 a barrel for oil."
Of course he wasn't the only media mogul to clamor for war. And he's not the first to use journalism to promote his own interests. His worst offense with Fox news is not even its baldly partisan agenda. Far worse is the travesty he's made of its journalism. Fox news huffs and puffs, pontificates and proclaims, but does little serious original reporting. His tabloids sell babes and breasts, gossip and celebrities. Now he's about to bring under the same thumb one of the few national newsrooms remaining in the country.
But the problem isn't just Rupert Murdoch. His pursuit of THE WALL STREET JOURNAL is the latest in a cascading series of mergers, buy-outs, and other financial legerdemain that are making a shipwreck of journalism. Public minded newspapers are being dumped by their owners for wads of cash or crippled by cost cutting while their broadcasting cousins race to the bottom. Murdoch is just the predator of the hour. The modern maestro of a financial marketplace ruled by money and moguls. Instead of checking the excesses of private and public power, these 21st century barons of the first amendment revel in them; the public be damned.
How utterly disgraceful.
BS about the Bancroft family owning it. They control about 60% of the voting shares but only own 20% of Dow Jones. Any company in which ownership and control are separated are at extreme risk of being the personal playthings of the controlling party at the expense of the owners. Just look at the NY Times for the prime example.
Is all of life about money?
I knew Moyers in the past and he has always produced his shows. No news reporting, ever. I saw him recently on c-span with his son who bottomed out on drugs and went to Hazelton. After talking for an hour about his isolated private treatment program experience he presumed to comment on what public policy should be. I lost it and sent him an email about how AA is a free, volunteer sucess story that he turned his nose up at, and he should keep his policy goons to himself.
I don't think so. I made no mention of money. I did mention envy and ratings but not money. Not all covetousness involves money.
Like covet thy neighbors wife.
For those of us who dont have any? Pretty much, yes. :-)
Moyer's heading straight for the cliff of government control of the media (leftist government control, of course) but pulls back on the reins at the last minute.
The public isn't sufficiently brainwashed, yet, to embrace his utopian vision. Just another decade or so of leftist indoctrination and enough people will see the wisdom of letting people like Bill Moyers control the flow of information to the ignorant masses.
Free market types like Murdoch (who is no ideologue and is only a conservative when there's a buck to made in it, and I mean that as a compliment) push back the timeline every time they get to voice a fact or opinion unvetted by the likes of Moyers and his ilk.
No, children are pure at heart. Liberals, on the other hand are quite taken with evil.
Teenagers are adolescents, not children.
Like covet thy neighbors ratings, power and popularity while yours is going down the drain. Mr. Moyers irrelevancy is eating him up.
Let’s see....Moyers was Lyndon Johnson’s press secretary during the Vietnam War when one lie after another came out of that White House through his lips and he wants us to believe anything he has to say? Sorry, Bill. You have zero credibility with anyone who knows you and your history of lies and deception. This is just more of the same.
The only reason ratings exist is so they know how much to charge advertisers. It's about money.
Normally I would say you were right but not in this case. PBS is a taxpayer funded monopoly and Mr. Moyers gets the same salary regardless of ratings or ad fees. Mr. Moyers is about appearance and power. He is envious that his little watched show is languishing in the shadows.
I thought this loony old drunk retired once already. Why is he back on my payroll (PBS) drooling his demented, senile, leftism?
You're right. Moyers is afraid. He's seeing that his point of view is becoming less and less well received. He also must realize that his supporters are becoming more and more unhinged and that is who he was truly speaking to.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.