Crazy Like a Fox?
A number of people have expressed bewilderment at the news that Rupert Murdoch, the owner of the Fox News Channel, has agreed to host a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton. Some have suggested that Murdoch is engaging in a bit of political opportunism, that with the GOP on the verge of imploding, he is trying to hedge his bets, so to speak. Murdoch has publicly complimented Clinton recently, calling her an "effective and good senator," and Murdoch's paper, the New York Post, has been almost kind to Clinton lately (and brutal to her prospective opponents).
So what does all this mean? Has Murdoch really changed teams? Possibly. But isn't there a more obvious explanation? Murdoch is, after all, a businessman.
So I ask you this: could anything possibly be better for Fox News than a Hillary Clinton presidency? Think about it. It was the consevative hysteria induced by the first Clinton presidency that fueled the initial success of Fox News. All of Fox's big stars (O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.) cut their teeth by railing against the Clinton administration and chasing one trumped up pseudo-scandal after another. For the Fox News Channel, a Hillary Clinton presidency (with Bill as First Man) would be the gift that keeps on giving. Its ratings would soar. Hannity and O'Reilly would be happier than pigs in slop.
My sense is that the folks at Fox News don't really like being the official state news outlet. They do their job, like the loyal soldiers that they are, but it's just not any fun. It's intellectually stifling. They're constantly playing defense, spinning one failure after another, when they really long to be on the offense. With the Republicans in control of the government, the Fox News crew is generally reduced to repeating official spin and, all too often, defending the indefensible. No one likes playing defense all the time. No, I'm sure they long for the good old days, back when the Clintons occupied the White House. That was the creative heyday of Fox News, when anything went as long as it was anti-Clinton.
On some level Murdoch must know what a financial boon a Clinton presidency would be for him and his empire. But I'm sure Murdoch would never let his bottomline cloud his judgment. Nah.
So what does all this mean? Has Murdoch really changed teams? Possibly. But isn't there a more obvious explanation? Murdoch is, after all, a businessman.
So I ask you this: could anything possibly be better for Fox News than a Hillary Clinton presidency? Think about it. It was the consevative hysteria induced by the first Clinton presidency that fueled the initial success of Fox News. All of Fox's big stars (O'Reilly, Hannity, etc.) cut their teeth by railing against the Clinton administration and chasing one trumped up pseudo-scandal after another. For the Fox News Channel, a Hillary Clinton presidency (with Bill as First Man) would be the gift that keeps on giving. Its ratings would soar. Hannity and O'Reilly would be happier than pigs in slop.
My sense is that the folks at Fox News don't really like being the official state news outlet. They do their job, like the loyal soldiers that they are, but it's just not any fun. It's intellectually stifling. They're constantly playing defense, spinning one failure after another, when they really long to be on the offense. With the Republicans in control of the government, the Fox News crew is generally reduced to repeating official spin and, all too often, defending the indefensible. No one likes playing defense all the time. No, I'm sure they long for the good old days, back when the Clintons occupied the White House. That was the creative heyday of Fox News, when anything went as long as it was anti-Clinton.
On some level Murdoch must know what a financial boon a Clinton presidency would be for him and his empire. But I'm sure Murdoch would never let his bottomline cloud his judgment. Nah.
posted by A.L. at 10:30 PM
8 Comments:
That is so incredibly devious I never would have thought of it myself. I bet you're right.
It may be time to re-negotiate the back-scrathing arrangement with the Administration. This feel more like a shot across the GOP's bow to me.
(Nerd parallel: Large Government departments often go the the press saying they're about to switch away from Microsoft. This continues until the local MS rep quotes the right price ...)
There's another possibility. He may back her in the primaries counting on the the Republican base crushing her in the general.
A.L., your thoughts intrigue me. However, my pessimism about all things Republican (including those who support them) screams that this is more of the same self-serving, cash-in opportunism that is the hallmark of most Administration supporters.
If Hillary wins (I happen to like Feingold), Murdoch will be riding shotgun as a 'solid supporter'; if Hillary loses, Murdoch will be able, as you stated, to wind up the smear machine just like in the good 'ole days. Win/win.
Good point, Terraformer. Definitely a win/win for Murdoch.
Murdoch hasn't changed teams for Christ sakes! Hillary has. Or rather she was never on the "other" team to being with!
This is not directed at anyone in particular but fuck people are stupid sometimes.
Listen - Bill Clinton was the best Republican President the Republicans have ever had. Hillary is no different. All one need do is look at their fundamental belief in and strong support of free market "populism", deregulation across the board and globalization. Which as it happens is all someone like Murdoch would give a shit about. Corporations don't care about "the people". They couldn't care less about national loyalty. They have no fucking conscience! They care about money and Hillary can give that to them just as well as McCain. Probably better or Murdoch wouldn't be backing her.
A vote for Hillary is a fucking vote for more of the same. Democrats are the new Republicans. Republicans are the neo-fascists. There is no longer a "left" in this country with the exception of perhaps the Green Party. Get a clue people.
Murdoch may just feel that she's the most congenial of the electable candidates. He wouldn't want McCain (not reliable enough on business and taxes), Giuliani couldn't get through a Rep. primary, and most of the other Republican candidates are flat-out unelectable. Given that, Murdoch may want to hope that the Dem candidate is DINO Hillary rather than someone like Gore or even Warner.
My theory behind this is more in the line of ender's (above). Hillary has cozied up to Republicans in the Senate and voted for the war. She is no longer the liberal, health care for all First Lady.
A Bush-Clinton revolving door presidency would just continue handing power over to multinationals and would mean little change in terms of foreign policy. Murdoch knows that, and I don't think he cares about the issues that the talking heads on his network discuss to falsely divide people like gay marriage and abortion.
It's a money and power grab, and if they can pretend to give the American people a choice by dividing them on social issues, the grab will continue.
I wrote about this in a couple of posts on my blog, especially in response to Kos' op-ed piece at http://liberaljournal.blogspot.com/2006/05/hillary-too-much-of-clinton-democrat.html
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home