• Menu
  • Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Before Header

  • About Us
  • Lexicon
  • Contact Us
  • Our Store
  • ↑
  • ↓
  • ←
  • →

Balloon Juice

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

The GOP couldn’t organize an orgy in a whorehouse with a fist full of 50s.

Impressively dumb. Congratulations.

You don’t get to peddle hatred on saturday and offer condolences on sunday.

Something needs to be done about our bogus SCOTUS.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Putin must be throwing ketchup at the walls.

Perhaps you mistook them for somebody who gives a damn.

Republicans don’t trust women.

Bad news for Ron DeSantis is great news for America.

Prediction: the GOP will rethink its strategy of boycotting future committees.

Republicans are radicals, not conservatives.

Nancy smash is sick of your bullshit.

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

Shallow, uninformed, and lacking identity

I did not have this on my fuck 2022 bingo card.

I’ve spoken to my cat about this, but it doesn’t seem to do any good.

When I decide to be condescending, you won’t have to dream up a fantasy about it.

It’s time for the GOP to dust off that post-2012 autopsy, completely ignore it, and light the party on fire again.

Republicans seem to think life begins at the candlelight dinner the night before.

I wonder if trump will be tried as an adult.

Wow, you are pre-disappointed. How surprising.

Never entrust democracy to any process that requires republicans to act in good faith.

A last alliance of elves and men. also pet photos.

Following reporting rules is only for the little people, apparently.

Mobile Menu

  • Winnable House Races
  • Donate with Venmo, Zelle & PayPal
  • Site Feedback
  • War in Ukraine
  • Submit Photos to On the Road
  • Politics
  • On The Road
  • Open Threads
  • Topics
  • Balloon Juice 2023 Pet Calendar (coming soon)
  • COVID-19 Coronavirus
  • Authors
  • About Us
  • Contact Us
  • Lexicon
  • Our Store
  • Politics
  • Open Threads
  • War in Ukraine
  • Garden Chats
  • On The Road
  • 2021-22 Fundraising!
You are here: Home / Economics / C.R.E.A.M. / Murdoch’s millions

Murdoch’s millions

by DougJ|  October 3, 20102:09 pm| 43 Comments

This post is in: C.R.E.A.M., Our Failed Media Experiment

FacebookTweetEmail

This is something I have been wondering about too:

Ben Smith reports that Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, after having donated $1 million to the Republican Governors Association, has also donated to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, a pro-Republican business lobby.

This makes zero sense to me. The value of News Corp to the Republican party is massive. It’s worth hundreds of millions of dollars. Why also give money to Republicans? By openly donating to the party, you help tear away the mask of objectivity, thereby reducing your own value as a propaganda outlet. It seems like a bad move both for Fox and the GOP. (If I’m the Republicans, I’d rather have Fox retain a more plausible claim of objectivity.) And if you’re Fox, you’re obviously making a joke out of your “Fair and Balanced” mantra.

Turns out there is a simple answer as to why Murdoch did this (warning Politico link, but this is good reporting, regardless):

A person close to News Corp. told me this week the company didn’t realize its $1 million to the RGA would become public. And the $1 million to Chamber of Commerce was supposed to be secret as well.

Stories like make me wonder how much of what businesses do to control the political process remains secret. It’s telling that Tom Friedman is thrilled that millionaires on both coasts are plotting to form a new party.

FacebookTweetEmail
Previous Post: « Progress
Next Post: A modest proposal »

Reader Interactions

43Comments

  1. 1.

    PS

    October 3, 2010 at 2:14 pm

    So, Rupert is getting nervous enough to throw some coin into the game (secretly, natch, till he got caught). And on the front page of the New York Times today, Republicans are moving away from their “inevitable victory” gambit and into a “gotta work for it” mode. Happy days? Well, maybe …

  2. 2.

    KG

    October 3, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    They thought the donations, to registered PACs would remain secret? Don’t these organizations have to report all donations to the FEC? And don’t publicly traded corporations have to disclose political contributions to the SEC? If so, on either point, I’m guessing this is just another “the rules only apply to little people, not us” scenario

  3. 3.

    The next to last samurai

    October 3, 2010 at 2:15 pm

    My guess is most fox viewers will never know about this. Who is going to tell them? Rush? Hannity? Beck?

  4. 4.

    Linda Featheringill

    October 3, 2010 at 2:16 pm

    Karl was right.

  5. 5.

    KG

    October 3, 2010 at 2:18 pm

    @The next to last samurai: even if they were told, they wouldn’t care. Free speech, bitches!

  6. 6.

    Roger Moore

    October 3, 2010 at 2:20 pm

    @The next to last samurai:

    My guess is most fox viewers will never know about this.

    I suspect that it’s not their own viewers they’re most worried about. Viewers who genuinely believe the “Fair and Balanced” line are such suckers that they’re not going to see anything wrong with this. It’s their competitors who are really going to run with it, and there’s a chance that this will be sufficiently embarrassing that it might get something like the DISCLOSE Act passed.

  7. 7.

    Lolis

    October 3, 2010 at 2:26 pm

    @The next to last samurai:

    Fox viewers don’t care. They watch it because it is biased.

  8. 8.

    Moses2317

    October 3, 2010 at 2:26 pm

    For people who haven’t already figured out that Fox “News” is simply a propaganda arm of the Republican party, I doubt that these donations will make any difference. Plainly such people have only a tenuous grasp on reality.

    For the rest of us, the donations simply confirm what is already obvious.


    Winning Progressive

  9. 9.

    El Cid

    October 3, 2010 at 2:26 pm

    Well

    By openly donating to the party, you help tear away the mask of objectivity, thereby reducing your own value as a propaganda outlet.

    Will any of the other major networks (ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN) care about this? I’m sure that the late afternoon / evening programming on MSNBC.

  10. 10.

    j

    October 3, 2010 at 2:36 pm

    The upshot is that the GOP and the CofC now have extra cash to spend on smear commercials. I wonder which TV stations will be getting the bulk of that money? FOX stations in red states?

    Uncle Rupie was just laundering money to his own outfits through the GOP & the CofC.

  11. 11.

    J

    October 3, 2010 at 2:37 pm

    I’d like to go Friedman one better. Not only do we need a third party, but how about a third branch of congress? Tricameralism if you will. This body, which would be appointed–for life–by, and possibly include, Tom Friedman and David Broder, would consist mainly of wise, public-spirited billionaires, ‘above party’, the class to whom, if we were only capable of realizing it, we owe everything. Its powers, well I’m not sure what they should be, but perhaps the decision should be left in the hands of its members, who know so much more and are so much better intentioned than the rest of us. (I can already picture the movie, alas Edward Arnold can no longer be cast in the part of the wisest and most benevolent of the kindly far-seeing billionaires.)

    Surely our problems would soon be a thing of the past.

  12. 12.

    Xboxershorts

    October 3, 2010 at 2:46 pm

    FOX News is an important link in that chain that would bind America to a permanent republican majority.

    FOX does care about the bad publicity, but it’s too late to really care, FOX is totally bought and paid for already.

  13. 13.

    DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice.

    October 3, 2010 at 2:47 pm

    @J:

    I like this idea.

  14. 14.

    Martin

    October 3, 2010 at 2:48 pm

    Donald Duck discovers Glenn Beck h/t Ebert.

  15. 15.

    NonyNony

    October 3, 2010 at 2:51 pm

    Okay, I know that this is supposed to be a big deal, but I’m not seeing it.

    NBC is owned by GE (mostly now, Vivendi also has a partial share). GE is a member of the US Chamber of Commerce. GE is also a major defense contractor. Arguably, that makes the GE/NBC combo a worse offender than what News Corp is doing, since GE is both giving money to political candidates and making money off of direct government procurement of military hardware.

    It seems like it’s worse with News Corp because there’s no illusion that there’s a barrier between the corporate activities of News Corp and the editorial actions of Fox News. But I think that barrier between GE/NBC is equally illusory – less so now than in the past perhaps (because GE/NBC now have a shareholder relationship instead of a direct boss relationship), but still an illusion.

    Is this just a question of News Corp actively doing something that violates the narrative of “unbiased media” in a way that is somehow worse than their actual propaganda network, or am I missing something bigger here? Because I’m not quite getting what is worse about what News Corp is doing here than what GE has done they founded NBC as far as the political donations and lobbying stuff goes.

    I feel like I’m missing about half this story and I was wondering if the story was just being pushed because it’s anti-Fox News. But then that stupid update from Ben Smith where his source said that News Corp thought it would be kept secret makes me think that even News Corp knows there’s a difference here between how the usual suspects play the game and I’m just not seeing it.

  16. 16.

    DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice.

    October 3, 2010 at 2:53 pm

    @NonyNony:

    I see what you’re saying, but I also think that if GE gave a million dollars to the RGA and none to any corresponding Democratic groups, that would get some attention too.

  17. 17.

    Nellcote

    October 3, 2010 at 2:58 pm

    Well, if it will get those damned millionaires off unemployment …

  18. 18.

    Nellcote

    October 3, 2010 at 3:05 pm

    @NonyNony:

    1. magnitude of donations
    2. NBC isn’t the propoganda arm of either party.

  19. 19.

    NonyNony

    October 3, 2010 at 3:11 pm

    @Nellcote and @DougJ is the business and economics editor for Balloon Juice.:

    Yeah, I guess I see what you’re saying. It is more “in your face” than the typical donations you might expect. And Fox is already facing off against a reputation for being an extension of the GOP, so this plays into that narrative perfectly. Whereas GE buys candidates to support it on both sides of the aisle, making it tougher to criticize – they may be working for GE, but GE isn’t also demanding that they swear fealty to the Tea Party.

    Still, it almost feels like the problem is one of degree rather than action. If News Corp had donated 100K instead of a million, would it have been an issue? I think it should be, but then I think any corporation (as opposed to an individual) who donates even a $1 to a campaign is a problem. But that puts me outside the mainstream and makes me a dirty hippie from what I can tell, so I’m not sure where this story is going to go. It seems like it will still be hard for the rest of the media to criticize when their own parent companies are doing something similar and the distinctions need to be explained.

  20. 20.

    Citizen Alan

    October 3, 2010 at 3:12 pm

    @Nellcote:

    2. NBC isn’t the propoganda arm of either party.

    Bullshit. The fact that one of NBC’s subsidiary news organizations (MSNBC) graciously permits semi-liberals to host shows for two hours a day — so long as they (a) have good ratings and are profitable and (b) do not undermine the perpetual war that feeds GE’s coffers — does not cancel out NBC’s transparent and systemic bias in favor of the Right. Need I remind you that MSNBC also once canceled its highest rated show because Phil Donahue wasn’t sufficiently pro-war? Or that MSNBC (the liberal network) currently runs a former Republican congressman for three hours a day?

    When MSNBC hires an ex-Democratic congressman to rail against the Republicans as much as “Morning Joe” has against Dems, you be sure and let me know.

  21. 21.

    Mark S.

    October 3, 2010 at 3:15 pm

    Why did they think they wouldn’t have to disclose this? I thought the disclosure requirements were about the only thing Citizens United didn’t gut.

  22. 22.

    Nick

    October 3, 2010 at 3:17 pm

    @NonyNony:

    NBC is owned by GE (mostly now, Vivendi also has a partial share). GE is a member of the US Chamber of Commerce. GE is also a major defense contractor. Arguably, that makes the GE/NBC combo a worse offender than what News Corp is doing, since GE is both giving money to political candidates and making money off of direct government procurement of military hardware.

    I’m not about to tell you NBC is better than FOX, except that NBC’s right wing bias is more subtle

  23. 23.

    Nick

    October 3, 2010 at 3:18 pm

    @Mark S.:

    Why did they think they wouldn’t have to disclose this? I thought the disclosure requirements were about the only thing Citizens United didn’t gut

    Of course they knew they had to disclose it, but who cares? it’s not like people are going to actually KNOW. Who’s going to tell them? Fox?

  24. 24.

    Amanda in the South Bay

    October 3, 2010 at 3:19 pm

    I don’t see how they thought they could keep this secret; that speaks volumes as to the ineptitude and incompetence of our billionaire ruling classes. I guess being rich doesn’t mean you are smart or competent?

  25. 25.

    MTiffany

    October 3, 2010 at 3:19 pm

    And the wingnuts thought the Big Government Takeover™ of healthcare by Obamacare was bad, just wait until the Big Government Takeover™ of the MSM by President Friedman. Eeek. Badly-written handjobs to the deserving wealthy as required reading every day, direct from the oval office no less… weekly fireside chats with Charlie Rose… agghhhh!

  26. 26.

    gypsy howell

    October 3, 2010 at 3:23 pm

    Hmm.. I think we can assume that NewsCorpse is fully aware of exactly what they can and can’t get away with from a disclosure standpoint. (I’m NOT saying what’s legal or not legal, I’m saying what they think they can get away with.) That they should be surprised when they got caught suggests that there are others (GE/NBC, and well let’s face it, all of the media corps) who might STILL be getting away with it.

    Perhaps someone here can fill me in because I didn’t follow the original story — how exactly DID NewsCorpse get caught?

  27. 27.

    MAJeff

    October 3, 2010 at 3:31 pm

    Related, I wonder which high-income donors NOM is trying to protect as it goes around the country challenging laws requiring disclosure of donations? (ME, WA, IA, MN, RI so far)

  28. 28.

    NonyNony

    October 3, 2010 at 3:35 pm

    @gypsy howell:

    The donation to the RGA came to light because News Corp and their donation amount was listed in the disclosure statement to the FEC. As is required by law. AFAIK, the Chamber of Commerce story was broken by Politico from a “source close to” News Corp. Which makes me wonder if there are disclosure statements that are going to be published soon and News Corp wanted to get it out there on a weekend so it would be “old news” by Monday, so they called up Ben and fed him the story.

    Thinking about it more, the only excuse I can come up with from the News Corp people thinking it would be kept “secret” is that they didn’t think anyone else in the media would report on it, so it would be an open secret. That would mean that the News Corp guys would have to believe that this was an “everybody’s doing it so no one will talk about it” situation. That’s the only way that their belief it would be “kept secret” could possibly be justified.

  29. 29.

    Joseph Nobles

    October 3, 2010 at 3:44 pm

    This money may as well be rebates for these organizations advertising on local Fox affliates, the equivalent of bulk orders driving the latest Regnery Books screed up the NY Times bestseller list. Because that’s the way I see these donations, I don’t understand how Fox can get away with these rebates that they aren’t offering the Democrats and left-leaning organizations.

    ETA: I’m beginning to consider that perhaps News Corp. is less a propaganda arm of the Republican Party than the Republican Party is the power-wielding arm of News Corp.

  30. 30.

    KEN

    October 3, 2010 at 4:53 pm

    Is it possible that the Fox contributions suggest some internal numbers that aren’t nearly as positive as the themes trumpeted by the Fox Noise machine? As Noble suggests above, Fox can figure they get back half of the money in advertising spend. Any way you look at it the amount of corporate money going into politics is at an all time high thanks to the Supremes. They gave us Bush and they keep on giving. The only viable answer is to go and vote. As my old political science professor used to say, vote early and vote often. I think he meant just vote once in each election.

  31. 31.

    Warren Terra

    October 3, 2010 at 5:00 pm

    You have to listen to this week’s On The Media, which has a far more scary story of political interference by Fox: Fox is suing to prevent the Carnahan campaign from using in its advertising a clip from Fox of Chris Wallace calling out Roy Blunt, citing copyright infringement and also citing some version of slander (essentially saying that Fox will be harmed if people seeing the ad conclude Fox can air bad things about Republicans).

    I happen to think that the way Fox serves as a propaganda engine is far scarier and more effective than the few millions of cash they give to Republicans, but even so this attempt to say their ideological foes mayn’t use a clip from Fox that bolsters their case is a new and dangerous development.

    P.S. On The Media also has a good piece this week about the interesting questions raised by Fox currently employing three of the likely Republican Presidential candidates (Palin, Gingrich, and Huckabee).

  32. 32.

    TuiMel

    October 3, 2010 at 5:29 pm

    By openly donating to the party, you help tear away the mask of objectivity, thereby reducing your own value as a propaganda outlet.

    Please. Nobody with half a brain who pays attention thinks Fox has any sort of “mask of objectivity.” People who agree with them are happy to hear reinforcement of their ideas and views. But, I doubt they bother to consider any “mask of objectivity.” Those of us who do not agree with the Foxline never saw a mask of objectivity. And, even if there were this mythical mask, the news is filled with daily examples of politicians simply lying – in the face of video and audio evidence – about all manner of things. And the price of lying is not very high. The more brazen the lie (see Palin and bridge to nowhere), the more your followers seem to cheer your “audacity.” Nothing shocks me. People do not need to cover up their shenanigans; there are no consequences of significance to them for being out in the open.

  33. 33.

    The Raven

    October 3, 2010 at 5:40 pm

    Stories like make me wonder how much of what businesses do to control the political process remains secret.

    You sound so surprised. Think of GM. Think of the tobacco industry before they lost huge lawsuits. Think of big pharma. It’s an iceberg; 9/10s is below the waterline.

  34. 34.

    j

    October 3, 2010 at 6:01 pm

    @NonyNony: NBC/Universal only accounts for 9.8% of GE income, and only 12% of its profit. That includes the movie studio, the theme parks, and both the broadcast (NBC) and cable outlets, including :

    USA Networks
    Bravo
    Chiller
    mun2
    Oxygen
    Syfy
    Sleuth
    Telemundo Internacional
    Universal HD
    USA Network
    MSNBC
    CNBC

    Conflating corporate checks directly from NewsCorp to the GOP and the Chamber of Commerce is in no way similar to anything GE does through it’s employee PAC.; so there is no FOX / MSNBC false equivalency here.

  35. 35.

    Robert Waldmann

    October 3, 2010 at 6:54 pm

    Speaking of the Rich, check out Frank Rich’s latest column on O’Donnell.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/03/opinion/03rich.html?hp

    He notes that a TeaParty (TM) group received a donation of $1,000,000,000 from a donor whose name they won’t release.

    Hmm a round million. Remind you of anything ? Can you convince yourself to doubt that this donor is named Murdoch ?

  36. 36.

    drkrick

    October 3, 2010 at 9:28 pm

    @Citizen Alan:

    Need I remind you that MSNBC also once canceled its highest rated show because Phil Donahue wasn’t sufficiently pro-war?

    Canard watch – Donahue’s show was the highest-rated on the channel, but because it had an audience it was also a hell of a lot more expensive to produce. His ratings weren’t that much higher, at least not enough to cover the difference in cost, so out he went. Would they have carried him longer if we had been pro-war? Who knows, but the actual events made business sense.

    I know the conspiracy theory is more fun, and the “Morning Joe” thing is a great point.

  37. 37.

    liberal

    October 3, 2010 at 10:23 pm

    Stories like make me wonder how much of what businesses do to control the political process remains secret.

    Kinda like the proposition that it wouldn’t be surprising if the NRA was entirely a creature of the gun manufacturers?

  38. 38.

    liberal

    October 3, 2010 at 10:25 pm

    @Robert Waldmann:

    Hmm a round million.

    But your figure says a round billion, which I assume is a typo…

  39. 39.

    Jon H

    October 3, 2010 at 11:00 pm

    Well, obviously they would contribute the money because they want a GOP House because the nonsense batshit investigations will be a windfall for FOX.

  40. 40.

    daveX99

    October 3, 2010 at 11:26 pm

    I was surprised to see that newscorp was ‘surprised’. I thought for sure the punchline was going to be that the publicity wouldn’t matter; the right could just ‘explain’ the donation, using their usual Jedi mind tricks:

    There was no such donation. Even if there was, don’t forget that FDR was a racist anti-semite & that liberalism causes warts & divorce. This money serves only to return balance to the force.

  41. 41.

    Chris

    October 4, 2010 at 12:52 am

    Tom Friedman is thrilled that millionaires on both coasts are plotting to form a new party.

    What the fuck? Two weren’t enough?

  42. 42.

    bob h

    October 4, 2010 at 6:45 am

    Can’t Mark Zuckerberg get involved here on our side for the sake of our democracy? (When that happens, the Supreme Court will see the error of Citizens United).

  43. 43.

    brantl

    October 4, 2010 at 7:52 am

    I suspect they weighed what could be done with the money (all starry-eyed and tremble-lipped with excitement, bringing in the next robber-baron golden age) and weighed the chances of their real clientelle of suckers catching on, and said, “Fuck, let’s do it!”, don’t you?

Comments are closed.

Primary Sidebar

Recent Comments

  • Eolirin on Monday Morning Open Thread: Keep Fighting (As If We Had A Choice) (Jun 5, 2023 @ 10:33am)
  • Another Scott on A Couple Weeks Into the Diet (Jun 5, 2023 @ 10:32am)
  • Tony Jay on Monday Morning Open Thread: Keep Fighting (As If We Had A Choice) (Jun 5, 2023 @ 10:32am)
  • rikyrah on Monday Morning Open Thread: Keep Fighting (As If We Had A Choice) (Jun 5, 2023 @ 10:28am)
  • rikyrah on Monday Morning Open Thread: Keep Fighting (As If We Had A Choice) (Jun 5, 2023 @ 10:26am)

Balloon Juice Meetups!

All Meetups
Seattle Meetup on Sat 5/13 at 5pm!

🎈Keep Balloon Juice Ad Free

Become a Balloon Juice Patreon
Donate with Venmo, Zelle or PayPal

Fundraising 2023-24

Wis*Dems Supreme Court + SD-8

Balloon Juice Posts

View by Topic
View by Author
View by Month & Year
View by Past Author

Featuring

Medium Cool
Artists in Our Midst
Authors in Our Midst
We All Need A Little Kindness
Classified Documents: A Primer
State & Local Elections Discussion

Calling All Jackals

Site Feedback
Nominate a Rotating Tag
Submit Photos to On the Road
Balloon Juice Mailing List Signup
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Links)
Balloon Juice Anniversary (All Posts)

Twitter / Spoutible

Balloon Juice (Spoutible)
WaterGirl (Spoutible)
TaMara (Spoutible)
John Cole
DougJ (aka NYT Pitchbot)
Betty Cracker
Tom Levenson
TaMara
David Anderson
Major Major Major Major
ActualCitizensUnited

Join the Fight!

Join the Fight Signup Form
All Join the Fight Posts

Balloon Juice Events

5/14  The Apocalypse
5/20  Home Away from Home
5/29  We’re Back, Baby
7/21  Merging!

Balloon Juice for Ukraine

Donate

Site Footer

Come for the politics, stay for the snark.

  • Facebook
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube
  • Comment Policy
  • Our Authors
  • Blogroll
  • Our Artists
  • Privacy Policy

Copyright © 2023 Dev Balloon Juice · All Rights Reserved · Powered by BizBudding Inc

Share this ArticleLike this article? Email it to a friend!

Email sent!