On the Campaign Trail & 'Feeling the Bern'

Sanders Introduces Democratic Socialism to the American People

Updated April 19, 2016 from 4/15/16 / NYC Neighborhoods / News Analysis & Opinion / Gotham Buzz NYC.

If nothing else, this has been an interesting presidential election cycle. It's not 'reality TV', its televised reality.

Making America Great ... again?

The Republicans attracted most of the attention early on, thanks mostly to Donald J. Trump's shock jock presidential candidacy. A candidacy that turned presidential debates about public policy into name calling, discussions of poll numbers & penis size, and relentless barrages of vituperative insults.

The Donald has, in his campaign, essentially told us to forgeddabout the ballooning government deficit, a dated and at times crumbling infrastructure, fixing our public education system, helping the shrinking middle class and addressing global climate change.

The Donald has distracted us from an intelligent discussion about these 'loser' subjects, and told us that he's going to rip 12 million people [the equivalent of about 5% of the nation's population] away from their families by deporting them, punishing women for getting abortions, and erecting a wall along the border with Mexico which he tells us the Mexicans are going to pay for.

Does Trump really think this is how to 'make America great ... again'?

Trump Candidacy Increases Ratings Which Translates to Profits

Trump may not make America great again, but he's been good for corporate-owned, network television ratings. The Hollywood Reporter quotes CBS Chairman, Leslie Moonves telling a Morgan Stanley conference in San Francisco on February 29th, 2016 that,

"The money’s rolling in and this is fun ... this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It’s a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going.”

While Sanders Delivers Substance & Expands Public Debate

So while Donald Trump has been filling the pockets of corporate-owned mass media, Bernie Sanders - the man with the real story - has largely been ignored. Ignored by the mass media, but embraced by the social media and a signficant and growing segment of the American populace. In fact Sanders, during the past week of campaigning in New York, attracted crowds of tens of thousands, while the other candidates on both sides of the ticket did not.

Click here to see photos of the Bernie Sanders campaign 2016 in NYC & LIC Queens, as well as a story about the contest between Sanders and Clinton.

On the Campaign Trail & 'Feeling the Bern'

Sanders Castigates Super Wealthy & Wins Crowd at Huge Rally

Updated April 19, 2016 from 4/15/16 / NYC Neighborhoods / News Analysis & Opinion / Gotham Buzz NYC. Continued.

Mass Media Heralds Hillary's Victory, Long Before Assured

The corporate-owned, mass media seems increasingly out of touch with the people they say they serve. For months they have been announcing that Hillary Clinton has won the Democratic nomination.

They keep telling us,

"Hillary has won, Hillary has won, Hillary has won ... "

except that if vote tallies still matter ... well then she hasn't won ... at least not yet. The New York primary could propel the Sanders campaign all the way to the nomination - or virtually end it.

There have been large polling errors during this election which either reflect some measure of incompetence, or possible bias, by the mass media funded pollsters.

Take the Michigan Democratic primary for example, where the WSJ / NBC / Marist poll completed March 3, 2016 showed Hillary Clinton leading Sanders 57% to 40%. Just five days later, on March 8, 2016, the voters spoke and Sanders beat Clinton 49.8% to 48.3%. The polling group's databases may have undercounted the Millenials and / or other key groups who, in some large measure, have been fueling the Sanders campaign.

A WSJ / NBC / Marist poll for the New York Primary Predicts Hillary will win again. A WSJ / NBC / Marist poll completed April 10, 2016 showed Clinton leading Sanders 55% to 41%. Could they be as wrong in New York as they were in Michigan?

Billionaires & Mega Millionaires Now Own U.S. Mass Media

Unlike years past, today most of the major U.S. media companies are now owned by billionaires and / or run by mega millionaires. And these are the very people that Bernie Sanders wants to have 1) pay into social security at the same percent of income as the rest of us, 2) pay more to their employees via a higher minimum wage [aka WalMart], and 3) pay more in taxes, because billionaires don't need all that money to cover their monthly living expenses - like somewhere in the neighborhood of half the people in this nation do. The following will give you an idea of who owns or runs the organizations conducting the polls, publishing the opinions, and framing the news in New York City as well as the nation.

CBS is controlled by Sumner Redstone who's reported to be worth $5 billion. ABC is owned by Disney which is publicly traded and presided over by Bob Iger who had a net worth in the neighborhood of $100 million a few years ago, and at that time received a salary of about $30 million. NBC is owned by Comcast which is controlled by Brian Roberts who is reported to be worth $1.5 billion. CNN is owned by Time Warner which is publicly traded and presided over by Jeff Bewkes who a few years ago was reported to have a salary of $32 million. Fox News, the Wall Street Journal & the NY Post are owned by News Corp which is controlled by Rupert Murdoch whose net worth is reportedly near $12 billion. The NY Daily News & U.S. News & World Report are owned by Mortimer Zuckerman whose net worth is reported to be $2.5 billion. The New York Times is publicly traded and still run by a descendant of the family that has run the newspaper for about the past 120 years and whose net worth and compensation I haven't been able to ascertain but it's safe to say that it's likely far greater than yours and mine. And the Washington Post is owned by Jeff Bezos whose reported net worth is $53 billion.

Many Super Wealthy Appear to Value Money Over Most Everything Else

The public policy concerns of the billionaires and millionaires who control the large news corporations, are not likely to be the same as the readers and viewers to whom they are providing political candidate and public policy information. Likely few or none of the corporate news titans, have a clue as to what it's like to have to live from paycheck to paycheck.

For example, according to The Hollywood Reporter, CBS Chairman Leslie Moonves made the following comment as to why CBS had given Trump such extensive coverage vis a vis the other presidential candidates during this election cycle. Essentially Moonves said that Trump generated high ratings, which in turn generated ad revenue and hence,

“It may not be good for America, but it’s damn good for CBS.”

There's an old saying in the news business which is - consider the source. I think this statement is more relevant today than ever before in our lifetimes.

This statement is not just imporant because of the proliferation of unreliable and inaccurate information sources over the internet, but because all of the media mentioned above - except the New York Times & Fox News - have changed hands at least once or more often in the past few decades. And invariably with ownership changes, come changes in how the editorial content is produced, positioned and presented. So keep that running in the back of your mind, while you're listening to the branded network news announcers or reading the prose of the branded news corporations' writers.

Clinton Campaign April Fundraisers in China & U.K.

While looking for Clinton / Sanders events to cover, I found something unexpected on Hillary's site. According to her website, this month she sent surrogates overseas to Asia and Europe [London] on fundraising gigs. Hillary's campaign took down the scheduled visits to Hong Kong and Beijing, China within hours after I discovered them, because of the negative feedback she was receiving from viewers online, about going overseas for fundraisers. To your right is a snaphot of the scheduled fundraisers as shown on the Clinton website just prior to their removal.

It's worth noting that the Clintons negotiated the World Trade Organization deal that let China into the 'club' and which was an important springboard for China's rapid rise as a global power [George W. Bush signed the deal]. And it's worth mentioning that in the Thursday debate on CNN, Sanders said he wanted Europe [and the U.K.] to pay its fair share of the costs for operating Europe's NATO defense, most of which are currently paid for by you, the American taxpayer.

Sanders also points out that many of the European nations, for whom we are currently footing some disproportional sum of the NATO bill, provide their citizenry with accessible healthcare and higher education, while many Americans struggle to do the same, because America is spending so much money on other nation's defense.

If Hillary doesn't have more pledged delegates than Bernie going into the convention, she may actually lose the Democratic nomination. This is because the Democratic party would have an extremely difficult time convincing Democrats to vote for her, if their votes weren't fairly counted and their will as expressed in the Democratic primaries not respected.

Having to count the voters' votes and respect their will has also become something of an issue in the Republican presidential primary. It seems both parties' establishments are having difficulty getting voters to embrace the candidates the respective establishments want.

Sanders Introduction of Democratic Socialism to the American Public could be Biggest Underreported Story of 21st Century

Socialist Bernie Sanders' Democratic candidacy has become iconic, and may turn out to be the biggest political story to date in the 21st century. A story made even bigger by the fact that his campaign has received little serious coverage by the corporate news media. This makes sense, of course, because the corporate news media is owned by the same super wealthy, billionaire class that Bernie's been railing against.

There are almost as many flavors of Socialism as there are flavors of soda pop on the planet, but Sanders is a Democratic Socialist, which according to Wikipedia is:

"Modern social democracy emphasises a program of gradual legislative modification of capitalism in order to make it more equitable and humane, while the theoretical end goal of building a socialist society is either completely forgotten or redefined in a pro-capitalist way."

Sanders references the Scandinavian style of social democracy as an example, which includes the following characteristics.

"...support for a 'universalist' welfare state aimed specifically at enhancing individual autonomy and promoting social mobility; a corporatist system involving a tripartite arrangement where representatives of labor and employers negotiate wages and labor market policy mediated by the government; and a commitment to widespread private ownership, free markets and free trade."

Democratic Socialism in Scandinavia - Some Facts & Figures

Democratic Socialism also comes in multiple flavors, but in essence it is a modified form of Capitalism which tries to mitigate the damage of inequitable wealth distribution, as well as the attendant human and environmental abuses.

The Scandinavian countries of Norway, Sweden and Denmark are listed in the top 20 nations by per capita income alongside the U.S. [source: Wikipedia]. The following are a few additional notable comparisons which I found on Demos.org, a non-profit public policy organization based in NYC.

For instance, Denmark had a child poverty rate of 2.7% compared to the U.S. rate of 20.9% [2005 figures]. In 2014, 0.0% of Denmark's population was without health insurance, while 10% of the U.S. population was not covered. America had higher per capita debt, longer work hours, fewer people employed on a per capita basis, lower production of intellectual property [as measured by patent approvals], no guaranteed weeks for parental leave [Denmark guarantees 52 weeks per newborn], no guaranteed vacation [Denmark has about a month] - BUT America has a lower cost of government [Denmark's government costs 55% vs 33% in the U.S.] AND a lower cost of welfare [Denmark pays 30% for welfare budget vs 19% in the U.S.].

The photo above right is of Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island where Bernie Sanders made a visit while campaigning in New York City this past week.

Sanders Rails Against the Super Wealthy's Usurpation of the 'Right to Life, Liberty & the Pursuit of Happiness' for the Middle & Lower Classes

I suppose you could say Sanders wants to force the super wealthy billionaires to hoard less and share more, so that wide swaths of the rest of society can live more humane and fuller lives. Sanders told us that the top 0.1% has as much wealth as the bottom 90% of the people in the nation. He also told us that the top 20 billionaires have the combined wealth of half the nation or 150 million people. That the billionaire Walton family of WalMart are using the welfare system to offset the paltry wages and benefits that WalMart pays their employees, so that the Waltons can enrich themselves even more. And Sanders tells us that 58% of all new wealth created in this nation currently goes to the top 1%.

Sanders makes it sound like the rich are getting richer.

Sanders Calls for a more Humane America, Citing FDR & Pope Francis

Sanders wants to move America away from 19th century style unfettered capitalism, into a more humane, modified capitalism of the 21st century. A transformation that was begun by Franklin Delano Roosevelt in the 1930's and 1940's, continued by Kennedy / Johnson legislation in the 1960's, and continued again by the Obama Administration with the rollout of national health insurance about three years ago.

Sanders highlighted the sense of historical connection he feels with FDR, with a visit to the Four Freedoms Park on Roosevelt Island in the East River this past week. It's reported that Sanders also feels a connection with the Socialist Catholic Pope Francis- a connection which Sanders highlighted with a quick trip, and ever-so-brief visit with the pontiff, over the weekend.

The photo at right shows Pope Francis in the small car at right in NYC in September of 2015.

Democratic Socialist Becomes the Face of the Occupy Movement

Democratic Socialist Bernie Sanders has won 8 of the last 9 primary contests, and yet the media coverage his campaign has received by the corporate press includes only the smallest of blandly written headlines in stories which are pushed far down the front page. But Sanders supporters have kept Bernie's story and candidacy alive by sharing their videos, stories and comments on the social media, and because 7 million supporters have made small online donations averaging $27 apiece. It appears that Bernie Sanders has become the voice and the face of the Occupy Movement.

Meanwhile, over the past week I've also seen the regulars of the Queens & Manhattan Democratic machines begin swinging into action by hosting Hillary fundraisers and appearing alongside Hillary and Bill Clinton in photo ops. Sanders holds both political party establishments responsible for the declining opportunities and the shrinking of the American middle class.

Sanders told us that some of our elected government officials aren't representing regular voters, because they are too busy catering to the whims of the wealthy people funding their campaigns.

NYS Polls: 7% are Undecided / Clinton Ahead by 10%

As of this writing the Huffington Post, which is generally considered a liberal media outlet, shows Hillary with 51.9% of voter interest and declining, and Bernie with 40.5% of voter interest and rising, in their poll of polls. Real Clear Politics, which is generally considered a conservative pollster, shows Hillary with 52% of the expected vote compared to Bernie's 42%, in their poll of polls. In both cases there's about 6% to 7% of the electorate that is undecided - which means that along with the polling margin for error - it is possible the state of New York could go in Bernie's favor.

But this upset scenario is still a very long shot, especially with less than a week away. The upset would be comparable to Harry Truman defeating New York Governor Thomas Dewey in 1948 for the U.S. presidency, meaning it would be totally unexpected.

Tuesday, April 19th, Republican & Democratic Primaries in New York

On Tuesday, April 19th, you the voter, get to weigh in on the matter. The following are a few of the more salient points to consider while choosing a candidate.

I. On the one hand there's the Clintons.

The Clintons signed legislation repealing large portions of the Glass-Steagall Act. The Glass-Steagull Act prevented banks from essentially lending to themselves for speculative investments.

Following the Clinton repeal of those laws in 1999, we witnessed a near collapse of the entire world financial system during the presidency of George W. Bush. Bush played a sizeable role in contributing to the banking failure because his administration was lax in its oversight of the banking industry.

This near catastrophic debacle was followed by a multi trillion dollar plus bank bailout [estimates ranged from $12 - $14 trillion government / taxpayer exposure] during the Obama years, which most economists believe Obama had to do, to avert an even greater catastrophe.

According to an NYT story [12/19/14] which was corroborated by a subsequent Washington Post story [1/5/15], the federal government actually made a small profit on the TARP [Troubled Assets Relief Program] bailout of about $15 billion. Some analysts estimated the government profit to be $350 billion. Both numbers are a paltry return on a very, very large effort to save the nation and the planet from economic ruin. These figures relate to the TARP only, and do not include the signficant amounts of fiscal stimulus that the federal government felt compelled to spend to keep the economy moving, while the financial markets were being cleaned up.

The Clintons also negotiated the deal which let China into the World Trade Organization without mandating safeguards against currency manipulation by the Chinese. Many observers believe this failure essentially gutted the American manufacturing sector. George W. Bush signed the deal, which resulted in a massive exportation of many of America's middle-income manufacturing jobs. America now finds itself importing many of its manufactured goods from China, and this, along with oil, is one of the main contributing causes to America's persistent trade deficits.

Senator Hillary Clinton also voted for the War in Iraq, which has cost the American taxpayer well in excess of a trillion dollars. Hillary says this is a vote which she now regrets.

The Clintons, like the Bushes and Kennedys before them, seek to circumvent the intent, although not the letter of the law legislated in the 22nd Amendment which term limits [individual] occupancy of the Oval Office to eight years. Regardless of the Clinton candidacy, I think the 22nd Amendment should be modified to exclude people within an extended family, including spouses, from seeking the presidency for at least 25 years after a family member has occupied it. If Hillary is elected, go ahead and grandfather her presidency, but please close the family name / family fame loophole.

One of the Clintons' greatest accomplishments was that they changed the tax code to collect more from the wealthy and turned government deficits into government surpluses which began reducing our national debt. I think that fixing our federal government deficit and reducing our national debt should be one of the top priorities of the next president, because it has the potential to destabilize the nation and throw everything this nation is about up for grabs. Oddly enough, none of the candidates, not even Hillary Clinton, are talking about the government deficit and debt.

II. On the other hand there is Bernie Sanders.

Should we elect Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders who voted against the Glass-Steagull legislation changes, voted against letting China into the World Trade Organization without safeguards, voted against the financial system bailout and voted against the War in Iraq?

Sanders' campaign and Sanders' life [he appears to have been amazingly consistent] has been about railing against billionaire funded elections, corporate greed, political manipulations, and the political party machines which he believes have sold out the American public to the wealthy private interests.

As one of one hundred Senators, an uncompromising Sanders voted against a bailout that was necessary to prevent a financial meltdown. Were he president, this uncompromising stance would have wreaked havoc with the lives of the nation and world. But he wasn't the president, he was the dissident Senator from Vermont.

Democratic Socialist Sanders Supporters' Point of View

I queried quite a few pro-Sanders people at the Bernie Sanders rally in Washington Square Park and days later in Long Island City in Queens. I challenged them saying that it's easy for Senator Sanders to rail against the establishment, but it's far more difficult to actually change it.

I went on to ask them, if they really think Sanders can accomplish any of the things he says he wants to do? Their replies are somewhat similar, which can be summarized as follows,

"I'd rather have Bernie Sanders try to make the changes that he talks about, changes that we need to make ... and have him fail. Than to vote for someone who is going to maintain the status quo."

So there you have it.

There was a Clinton-Sanders debate on CNN Thursday night, April 14th from 9 pm to 11 pm Eastern Standard Time. It was, as expected, pretty lively.

And there's a Bernie Sanders rally in Hunters Point Park in Long Island City on Monday evening beginning at 5 pm.

Polling Place Locator for New York City & Queens

On Tuesday, April 19th, voting begins at 6 am Eastern Standard Time and ends at 9 pm. Here's a link to a NYS Board of Elections polling locator which will allow you to find your Queens polling location.

Click the Refresh Button if the Video Doesn't Appear

Queens Buzz Subscriptions & Single Copy Sales

We work very hard to help keep you informed by providing you with independent news coverage, as well as information about events in the arts, culture and business in your borough.

We do our best to tell you the whole story, not just the parts of the story that the movers and shakers want you to hear. And Queens Buzz receives no government funding.

So please help us continue to provide independent, first-person, fact-based, contextural reporting; by making a small token subscription payment for as little as $5 - the cost of a print magazine - or more, because many helpers make the work lighter.

Thank you.

Astoria Neighborhood Links

Click on these advertisements for promotions, discounts and coupons by retailers and restaurateurs in Astoria and nearby Queens.

Click this link to go to the:

Astoria Neighborhood

LIC Neighborhood - Long Island City Links

Click on these advertisements for promotions, discounts and coupons by retailers and restaurateurs in Long Island City LIC and nearby Queens.

Click this link to go to the:

Long Island City Neighborhood

Site Search Tips. 1) For best results, when typing in more than one word, use quotation marks - eg "Astoria Park". 2) Also try either singular or plural words when searching for a specific item such as "gym" or "gyms".

$element(bwcore,insert_search,N)$

$element(adman,groupad,Sectional2 Ad)$

Click the log in link below to create an ID and post an opinion.

Or send this story to a friend by filling in the appropriate box below.

---

Who's Behind NY Post's Media Hazing of Mayor?

Will Billionaire Rupert Murdoch Profit from NY POST's Attack Stories?

Updated May 13, 2016 / NYC Neighborhoods / NYC Politics / News Analysis & Opinion / Gotham Buzz.

The NY Post's incredible barrage of attack stories on NYC Mayor de Blasio this past month led us to believe that something was amiss.

 

Is the NY Post Disinforming the Public?

After a month of a barrage of negative attack (ads?) stories regarding the Mayor's campaign funding, someone reading the NY Post might come away believing that Mayor de Blasio had already been convicted of numerous counts of breaking the law. As you will see later in this story, this would not be the first time the Murdoch organization's audience was not uninformed - but rather disinformed.

That said, if they read a newspaper that generally conforms to the professional standards of American journalism, like the New York Times, they would know that,

"It is not clear how direct a role, if any, the mayor played in some of these matters." - NYT April 29, 2016

 

Infomercials Presented as News?

Given that some of what Murdoch's organization [includes NY Post, Fox News, the Wall Street Journal and hundred(s) more properties] publishes and broadcasts appears to make significant departures from the American professional standards of journalism - one has to wonder if Murdoch's organization hasn't found a way to skirt campaign finance laws - as some of their 'news reporting' looks more like long-winded political infomercials.

 

Just Because They Say it's So, Doesn't Mean it's So

The NYS Board of Elections says,

"Independent Expenditures Do Not Include Expenditures in Connection with... A written news story, commentary, or editorial or a news story, commentary, or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, cable or satellite, unless such publication or facilities are owned or controlled by any political party, political committee or candidate ..."

Has Murdoch's organization found a way to skirt campaign finance laws by making huge, undisclosed, payment-in-kind, independent media expenditures to support or attack political candidates and push an issue agenda by running infomercials as news stories?

Does this practice enable the Murdoch organization to become the STRING PULLER, who makes their candidates POLITICAL PUPPETS?

 

Rupert's NY Post Goes After Mayor like Rabid Dog

There were 80 stories published about the Mayor by Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch's NY Post in the first 24 days of April.

That's more than three stories per day - and not a single one was positive [a few were neutral]. The stories were authored by 20 reporters, some of whom shared the bylines. This is the equivalent of having the entire editorial staff of a medium-sized daily newspaper, working full time on publishing stories about just one government official.

I'm pretty sure that the Washington Post didn't dedicate this kind of resource to covering the Nixon Watergate scandal in the early 1970's. It seems like overkill, which is generally indicative that something is not right.

I say not right because it has been my experience that this kind of overzealous attack oftentimes reflects more upon the prosecutor than the prosecuted.

 

Abusive, Power-Hungry Media Moguls in Film - 1941 & 1997

What I found while working on this story had some parallels to the 1997 James Bond movie, Tomorrow Never Dies. In the movie, Eliot Carver is the Media Mogul, and he uses his presses and TV stations to hype a war between China and Britain. In 2002 the NYT did a piece which they entitled 'Mr. Murdoch's War' which was about Murdoch's urging the U.S. and Britain to go to war in Iraq, which we'll have more about later in this story.

During my research a character profile of Billionaire Murdoch began to emerge that was something right out of the film Citizen Kane, who was portrayed by Orson Welles in 1941. It's interesting to note that 1941 was the same year that the FCC capped TV media ownership by a single person / entity at 35%. And this FCC ownership limit was overturned, some say because of Media Mogul Rupert Murdoch, and this will also be covered in more detail a bit later in this story.

 

The image to your right shows a page out of The Guardian, one of Britain's most respected newspapers, about the culture of Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch's organization.

 

 

Consider The Source

 

I. Criminal Acts: Murdoch Declared 'Unfit'

In 2012, only four short years ago, Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch was declared "Not a Fit Person" to lead his company by a British public official who led a commission that investigated the criminal operations conducted by people working for Billionaire Mogul Murdoch's media empire.

 

Murdoch's Hires Convicted of Bribery & Hacking Crimes (911 Victims)

For alleged crimes committed over the course of years within roughly the first decade of the 21st century, British authorities arrested and / or convicted dozens of people working for Murdoch's organization.

 

The crimes they were convicted of, alleged to have committed, or were arrested for - included bribing government and law enforcement officials, and hacking the phones of relatives of murder victims, the relatives of soldiers who died in Afghanistan and Iraq, relatives of the victims of the London terrorist attacks, relatives of 911 victims, a four year old's cystic fibrosis medical records, and the mother of a slain daughter.

It appears Murdoch's organization did this to build viewership for his media outlets. Investigation into the 911 allegations were dropped by the FBI, but reportedly to the dissatisfaction and without the consent of some of those believed to be affected.

 

II. Coincidental Events or Propaganda For Profit?

NewsCorp Influence on Elections Followed by Favorable Gov't Rulings

We found three examples of Murdoch's news organization appearing to meddle with electoral outcomes by using their media assets as a propaganda machine, rather than as a news organization.

 

1. Fox News Role in 2000 Election of Bush

Followed by Bush FCC Expanding TV Ownership Limits

In 2000, Fox News declared Bush the victor of the election around 2.30 am, the morning after the election. Later than morning, in New York City the media capital of the nation, an Election Extra morning edition of the NY Post hit the newsstands announcing Bush's victory in a definitive manner. This came after all four [including Fox] of the American TV networks had already declared Al Gore the probable winner on election night. A confused NYT headline appeared to follow Murdoch's Fox News and NY Post definitive announcement by declaring that Bush 'appeared to defeat Gore'.

 

In less than three years the Bush Administration's FCC rolled back limits on ownership of TV station coverage in the nation, which enabled Billionaire Murdoch's Fox Television to expand its TV station coverage, thus giving Murdoch's Fox network a competitive advantage. Coincidence, or does the NY Post headline below apply to Murdoch here?

 

 

 

 

2. Murdoch's Support of Cameron for British Prime Minister

Followed by Cameron's Gov't Presiding over Regulatory Approval Process of Murdoch Deal

In 2009 as the Murdoch's were reported to be contemplating making a bid for the shares of British Sky Broadcasting [aka B Sky B] that they didn't already own, David Cameron was contemplating a run for Britain's Prime Minister.

That summer a Cameron aide was reported to have spent five days visiting the Murdoch's news organization in New York. Following the visit, Murdoch began supporting Cameron's bid for Prime Minister [he won]. Roughly around the same time, Murdoch made a bid for B Sky B. The completion of the B Sky B acquisition was within a month of regulatory approval, but halted, because of 'near industrial scale' phone hacking scandal and news reports of bribes which were alleged to implicate Murdoch's news organization in 2011.

 

3. NY Post Endorses Cuomo for Governor

Followed by Murdoch NO-BID Deal Negotiations with New York State

In 2010 Murdoch's NY Post endorsed Andrew Cuomo's bid for NYS governor. In August 2011, a Murdoch company was about to be awarded a no-bid contract to track students' performance by the State of New York.

But the deal was halted because of the serious criminal charges of phone hacking by Murdoch's organization, as well as allegations regarding his organization's bribes of police and government officals.

This third coincidence leads us to consider the possibility of a possible NYC or NYS profit motive behind Murdoch's NY Post's barrage of attack stories on Mayor de Blasio.

 

III. Murdoch Organization & Disinformation

Murdoch's NY Post Hazing of Mayor: Propaganda for Profit?

In the story that follows you'll find some additional source material, including a book about Murdoch sold by British Amazon.com.

 

We make comparisons of Murdoch to William Randolph Hearst who reportedly told one of his newsmen - "You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war." Some believe Murdoch's role in stridently urging the English-speaking world into the Iraq war was for ratings.

 

We provide accounts of details about the criminal acts done by hires for Murdoch's organization.

 

We provide the names of the seven independent organizations which conducted studies showing that frequent viewers of Fox News appear to be disinformed.

 

And lastly, we conclude with a cursory look - because it's mostly allegations and innuendo - at the NY Post incessant barrage of attack stories of Mayor de Blasio.

 

Suggestion for New NY Post / WSJ / 21st Century Fox News Slogan: 'We Decide by Disinforming You.'

Fox News has used the slogan, 'We Report. You Decide.' But after doing the research for this story I wondered if the slogan in the headline above, 'We Decide by Disinforming You.' might be a better fit.

As mentioned above, seven studies, by independent and respected institutions, found that frequent viewers of Fox News are more likely to be disinformed about key issues of the day than other segments of the public. We'll have more on this later.

TV, Newspaper & PC Smoke Screens?

Is Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch using propaganda to enhance his organization's profit - OR is this all just an unusual series of coincidences?

You can judge for yourself whether you think Murdoch is running his media empire as a credible, contextual, balanced news reporting organization - OR - as an organization with a history of connections to criminal acts, and a propaganda-for-profit machine running near full capacity to topple the NYC Mayor.

Let's take a closer look into the facts behind our investigation into whether Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch is making efforts to media haze the NYC Mayor by using the NY Post as a propaganda tool.

 

Is Murdoch's Org Skirting Campaign Finance Laws?

Are They Disguising Advocacy & Attack Infomercials as News Reports to Skirt Campaign Finance Laws?

At the end of this report we question whether the Murdoch organization is passing off what appears to be its frequent, one-sided, unbalanced, propaganda-like reports - or what some might call advocacy or attack infomercials - as news reports to skirt campaign finance laws.

 

 

Click Link & Scroll down for rest of story & Video

Murdoch's NY Post appears to be used as propaganda machine working to oust the NYC Mayor

Who's Behind NY Post's Media Hazing of Mayor?

Will Billionaire Rupert Murdoch Profit from NY POST's Attack Stories?

Updated May 13, 2016 / NYC Neighborhoods / NYC Politics / News Analysis & Opinion / Gotham Buzz. Continued.

Click links to be taken to the section below.

1) criminal history of the [NY Post owner] Rupert Murdoch organization's hires,

2) how Murdoch's organization appears to have targeted key officials in the U.K. to bring down,

3) Murdoch organization's hires' history of arrests and conviction for alleged bribes of law enforcement & public officials,

4) Murdoch organization's history of illegal phone hacking,

5) 'Mr. Murdoch's War',

6) Murdoch organization role in elections & subsequent favorable treatments,

7) Murdoch organization's history of disinformation and propaganda,

8) Murdoch's current efforts to single-handedly oust the NYC Mayor

 

A Brief & Incomplete Overview of Murdoch's Organizations

In this part of our report we're going to delve into some greater detail regarding the events outlined above, starting with the history of criminal acts perpetrated by Billionaire Rupert Murdoch's organization.

Bear in mind that it is very challenging for government and law enforcement officials to convict people working for Murdoch. Murdoch was reportedly worth about $12 billion within the past few years, and it appears his organization has incredible influence with government and law enforcement officials, and can afford to hire talented & expensive lawyers.

Murdoch's Reach: News Corp & 21st Century Fox

Keith Rupert Murdoch is the Chairman of News Corporation [under $9 billion revenue] and is Co-Chairman with his son of 21st Century Fox [under $29 billion revenue]. Together these operations generated about $38 billion in revenue in fiscal year 2015. The companies were split in 2013.

Influence in Britain. Murdoch's organization TV, papers and online presences reached about 31 million Brits [and Britain's population numbers 64 million] according to a July 7, 2011 report by the British Broadcasting Company [BBC]. There's likely overlap of these audiences, which means the overall reach is probably less.

Influence in the United States. Murdoch's organization's reach includes Fox News which has a potential reach of about 95 million homes [81% of nation] although it's daily reach is a fraction of that. According to Wikipedia, the median age of the Fox News viewer was 65+ in 2013. It seems octogenarian Billionaire Keith Rupert Murdoch is appealing to people closer to his own age group.

The Fox Network has a potential reach of about 297 million homes [95% of nation], but again it's daily reach is a fraction of that. In part because of the Bush FCC expansion of TV ownership limits in 2003, Murdoch's organization has the highest owned TV station reach of any broadcaster in the U.S.

Murdoch's organization owns a number of print publications, but for purposes of this report, I'll focus on the two covering New York City news, and skip Barron's and National Geographic, which are also owned by Murdoch's organization. According to Wikipedia, in 2013 the NY Post circulation was 500,000 and the Wall Street Journal's was 2.4 million. In 2015 I believe the combined revenue of Murdoch's organizations was stagnant - either slightly up or slightly down.

The general trend for both Network TV News ratings and newspaper circulation is downward because of increased competition from the internet. We've seen projections that indicate that advertising prices haven't yet reflected the significant Network News TV audience and newspaper circulation declines of the past decade.

 

CRIMINAL HISTORY

 

I. Is Billionaire Media Mogul K.R. Murdoch Above the Law?

Dial M for Murdoch: Book About Corruption & Billionaire Media Mogul

There's a book sold in the United Kingdom that attempts to capture some of the sordid details about Murdoch's organization's corrupt behavior. The title plays upon a 1954 Alfred Hitchcock movie entitled Dial M for Murder.

 

This is a quote from Amazon.com in the U.K. where the book is sold.

'This book uncovers the inner workings of one of the most powerful companies in the world: how it came to exert a poisonous, secretive influence on public life in Britain, how it used its huge power to bully, intimidate and cover up, and how its exposure has changed the way we look at our politicians, our police service and our press.'

 

The Kindle version of the book is less than $10 and might be worthwhile reading for anyone affected by [including readers / viewers of his news products] or interested in the Billionaire Media Mogul's influence and methods.

There's also a website listed at the end of this story, by someone who documented some of Murdoch's organization's 'technical expertise' in a 402 page online book.

 

A. Crimes by Hires: Murdoch's Org Targeting Officials?

People hired by Billionaire Murdoch's organization were charged with breaking the law while attempting to gather private information about former British Prime Minister Gordon Brown. According to an account in the Guardian on July 11, 2011,

"The sheer scale of the data assault on Brown is unusual, with evidence of "attempts" to obtain his [Prime Minister Brown's] legal, financial, tax, and police records as well as to listen to his voicemail. All of these incidents are linked to media organisations. In many cases, there is evidence of a link to News International."

"Brown joins a long list of Labour politicians who are known to have been targeted by private investigators working for News International [Murdoch's organization] ... Confidential health information for Brown's family have reached the media on two different occasions. In October 2006, the then editor of the Sun [owned by Murdoch's organization], Rebekah Brooks, contacted the Browns to tell them that the paper had learned that their four-month-old son Fraser had been diagnosed with cystic fibrosis. [Releasing this information to the public] appears to have been a clear breach of the Data Protection Act, which would allow such a disclosure only if it were in the public interest. Friends of the Browns say the call caused them immense distress, since they were only coming to terms with the diagnosis, which had not been confirmed. The Sun [owned by Murdoch's organization] published the story."

News International was owned by Murdoch's organization before they shut it down, which pundits believe was to stifle the chatter about their organization's hires' illegal exploits.

 

Scotland Yard

Murdoch Organization Hires, Illegally Hacked Thousands of Phones

An April 4, 2012 update by TheWeek.com stated,

“November 3, 2011 Scotland Yard says that 5,795 people likely had their phones hacked by News of the World [owned & run by Murdoch's organization].”

The Week.com reported that the targets list allegedly included victims of the July 7, 2005, terrorist attack in London.

The BBC reported that Coulson, one of the high ranking hired hands at Murdoch’s News of the World, had apparently signed off on police payments. I believe this charge didn't stick, but the phone hacking charges did and another hire was found guilty of bribing according to a 2014 story by Crikey, an Australian web magazine.

“July 6, 2011, The Daily Telegraph reports that News of the World had hacked the phones of families of soldiers killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.”

"July 14, 2011, the FBI opens an investigation as to whether News Corp hacked the phones of the 911 terrorist attack victims."

This investigation was closed in February of 2015, wherein the representative of the victims called the FBI decision "disappointing".

Apparently the hackings were intended to gather private information to publish as headlines in Murdoch's News of the World and other owned media outlets [like the Sun].

 

B. Murdoch Org: Hires Arrested for Bribes & Hacks

Murdoch Maintains Complete Deniability, Blames Others Beneath Him & Appears to Use His Influence to Clean Up

In an April 4, 2012 update on the Murdoch organization scandal, TheWeek.com reports,

"March 2003 Wade tells a committee of the lower house of Parliament that News of the World [Murdoch's organization] has paid police officers for information; parent company News International says that is not common practice."

According to TheWeek.com's timeline, in December of 2007 James Murdoch [Rupert's son] is appointed Chief Executive of Murdoch's News Corp's European operations.

In July 2009 the Guardian reports that,

“several News of the World journalists had intercepted the voicemails of celebrities and politicians, with the knowledge of senior staff, and that its parent company had paid more than $1.6 million to settle phone-hacking cases that could have unearthed evidence of broader hacking at the paper.”

According to a June 24, 2014 story in Bloomberg,

“July 21, 2009: Under questioning before Parliament’s Culture Committee, News of the World Editor Colin Myler says James Murdoch [Rupert’s son] agreed to the payment to Taylor.”

 

C. Murdoch Org: Criminal Hacking on ‘Near Industrial Scale’

In February 2010 a member of a House of Commons Committee reports that it’s inconceivable that management of the News of the World didn’t know about the “near industrial scale” of the phone-hacking by their organization.

Law Enforcement – Police Refused to Re-open Investigation

Nonetheless, in spite of the facts, British investigators and British law enforcement authorities refused to reopen the case.

Dial M for Murdoch. Remember, law enforcement officials ultimately report to government officials, and some pundits believe that too many government officials report to the billionaire media moguls operating in their jurisdictions.

Much of what follows in this section was sourced from the April 4, 2012 update in TheWeek.com's story entitled Rupert Murdoch's Phone Hacking Scandal: A Timeline.

TheWeek.com states, "September 2010 The New York Times publishes a report ... [which] is also critical of Scotland Yard's efforts to investigate the hacking."

According to Bloomberg story, "Dec. 10, 2010: Prosecutors say they lack evidence to file new hacking charges following New York Times article."

January 26, 2011 Scotland Yard opens a new investigation of News of the World phonehacking, citing new evidence [and Coulson, a top Billionaire Murdoch organization man, steps down]. Editor's Note - Coulson then lands a top communications post working for British Prime Minister David Cameron, but later is eventually convicted and sentenced.

In April 2011 three employees of Murdoch’s organization are arrested. Murdoch’s company “acknowledges its role”, after previously claiming that there was “no evidence” that management knew of the illegal activities. The company sets up a fund for victims.

In July of 2011, Media Mogul Murdoch and his son James, deny any knowledge of the phone hacking events prior to publication of them by a newspaper not owned by them. Billionaire Keith Rupert Murdoch closes the newspaper caught doing the phone hacking, but opens a new paper with son Lachlan, the Sunday Sun, in February 2012 to replace the News of the World.

July 2011 - Metropolitan Police Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson, the highest-ranking U.K. police official, steps down, following the police-bribery allegations and revelations that he had hired Neil Wallis [former Murdoch organization employee] as a communications consultant. Metropolitan Police assistant commissioner John Yates, who made the decision not to reopen the phone-hacking investigation in 2009, resigns.

By August of 2011 twelve News Corp employees have been arrested in connection with the phone-hacking scandal. And Hinton, a 52 year veteran of Murdoch's organization and the Publisher of the Wall Street Journal, steps down because he had previously been the CEO of the phone hacking News of the World.

“November 3, 2011 Scotland Yard says that 5,795 people likely had their phones hacked by News of the World.”

According to Bloomberg,

"Jan. 19, 2012: News Corp. settles 36 lawsuits filed by phone-hacking victims including Jude Law and soccer player Ashley Cole. Settlement amounts range from 5,000 pounds to about 100,000 pounds. For the 18 settlements outlined in court, payouts total at least 642,000 pounds plus legal fees."

"February 11, 2012: Five more staff at The Sun and three public officials are arrested as the police probe widens to include bribes by journalists to public servants outside the police force. The investigation, known as Operation Elveden, leads to more than 80 arrests."

The NY Daily News June 30, 2014 reported that some Murdoch employees and hires were convicted of criminal charges for which they had to do a couple years time. This was the second time they were taken to trial. The NY Daily News also stated,

"But a recently surfaced secret letter confirms that police suspect the wrongdoing ran all the way to the top of Murdoch’s media empire. In the May 18, 2012, letter to Murdoch’s lawyer, Scotland Yard informed the
billionaire and his henchmen that police were probing whether they were in cahoots with the corruption."

Henchmen?

 

D. Murdoch is "Not a Fit Person": Lies & Excuses?

TheWeek.com April 4, 2012 timeline reports,

“July 13, 2011 Rupert Murdoch withdraws his long-sought bid for TV powerhouse British Sky Broadcasting, which days earlier was widely considered a done deal. News Corp retains its 39 percent stake in the company. “

According to a June 25, 2014 Bloomberg report,

“April 26, 2012: Rupert Murdoch testifies to Leveson Inquiry. He blames employees and lawyers for covering up the crimes.”

"On May 1, 2012 the Culture Committee [which had conducted a study investigating Murdoch's organization in the wake of the phone hacking scandal] says Murdoch is “not a fit person” to lead a major international company because he “exhibited willful blindness” to the extent of hacking at the News of the World."

“June 25, 2014: Jury discharged after failing to reach verdicts on remaining bribery charges against Coulson and Goodman.”

As noted above, there were many arrests and some convictions, but like justice in America [remember OJ], never enough and never the people who appear to be pulling the strings behind the curtain.

 

Innocent Until Proven Guilty - How Much Proof is Needed?

This following account was secretly recorded while Billionaire Rupert Murdoch was talking to his staff at the Sun - one of multiple Murdoch organizations that were implicated in the phone hacking and bribery scandals.

I found this reported by the Independent.co.uk website in a story entitled Caught on Tape: News Corp Boss Rupert Murdoch reveals what he really thinks about bribing public officials.

"The idea that the cops then started coming after you, kick you out of bed, and your families, at six in the morning, is unbelievable. But why are the police behaving in this way? It’s the biggest inquiry ever, over next to nothing… I mean, it’s a disgrace. Here we are, two years later, and the cops are totally incompetent.”

“I will do everything in my power to give you total support, even if you’re convicted and get six months or whatever. You’re all innocent until proven guilty. What you’re asking is: what happens if some of you are proven guilty? What afterwards? I’m not allowed to promise you – I will promise you continued health support – but your jobs. I’ve got to be careful what comes out – but frankly, I won’t say it, but just trust me.”

Asked what would happen if he was not around to support them [Murdoch is 85 years old] he said the decision would lie with his son, Lachlan, or Robert Thomson, chief executive of News Corp and former editor of The Times. And you don’t have any worries about either of them.”

The question you, the reader, need to ask yourself is - would you support a staff member who was found guilty of criminally hacking phones and / or bribing officials, if you weren't somehow culpable yourself?

It seems the Murdoch trail of dirty tricks is legendary, as I found plenty more allegations regarding what seemed to be a pattern of unethical and illicit activity by people in the hire of the Murdoch organization. I didn't have the time nor inclination to pursue allegations that Murdoch's organization had tried to intercept information, to cover up their misdeeds, and hacked a competitor's system to make their pay service free [putting the competitor out of business], and so on. I think we have seen enough of the Murdoch's organizational culture to get a sense of who they are, so let's move on.

 

II. "Mr. Murdoch’s War"

The Iraq War Cost U.S. Taxpayers $Trillion(s)

There was an April 2003 story in the NYT entitled 'Mr. Murdoch's War' which provides an account of Billionaire Media Mogul Murdoch's ostensibly public interest in convincing the U.S. and the U.K. to go to war with Iraq.

The NYT headline references a quote attributed to another Media Mogul of over a century ago - William Randolph Hearst. On January 28, 1898, Multi-Millionaire Media Mogul William Randolph Hearst was reported to have telegraphed a reporter,

"You furnish the pictures and I'll furnish the war."

 

In a 2003 interview with the Bulletin, an Australian magazine, Billionaire Murdoch was quoted as saying,

“… I think [President George W.] Bush is acting very morally, very correctly … “

 

In 2003, Fortune Magazine quoted Murdoch saying,

"The greatest thing to come out of this [the Iraq War] for the world economy ... would be $20 a barrel for oil. That's bigger than any tax cut in any country."

 

Political Puppets & Wars For Ratings?

Citizen Kane: W.R. Hearst & K.R. Murdoch?

Murdoch's interest in war appeared to follow in the footsteps of another well-known publisher of yellow journalism - William Randolph Hearst. RKO Radio Pictures released a movie in 1941 entitled Citizen Kane, that characterized the power-hungry, mega-millionaire of a century ago.

Some believe that Murdoch was far more interested in pursuing the war because it would increase his broadcast properties ratings and newspaper circulation sales, than believing his expressed interest in was the cheap price of oil.

 

 

Value of News Rating(s) can be $Billion(s) Per Year

A war for ratings seems ridiculous, until you do the math. I did a very rough, back-of-the-envelope calculation, using a one rating point increase [18 - 54] on daily national TV, which is the equivalent of 1.3 million added viewers. The cost per thousand [CPM] is between $25 - $45. So, for a half hour news show, airing 11 commercials, and running just six months, there's the potential to bring in somewhere in the neighborhood of an additional $100 million in the United States in 2015.

Now multiply by 48 because some media companies have 24 hour cable news channels, and then add in media properties around the world, including many newspapers, and an increase of ratings from war can add up to $billion(s) for a global media company.

The trillion dollar plus COST of the Iraq war was SOCIALIZED because it was footed by the American [and British] taxpayers and their children [the war was fought on borrowedmoney], but Murdoch's organization's PROFITS were PRIVATIZED. It is this war debt, and the lost lives and limbs of those who fought in Iraq, that may be Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch's most lasting LEGACY.

 

 

Billionaires (ab)Using Power of the Press

Media Mogul Murdoch isn't the only billionaire appearing to (ab)use the power of the press to determine which folks are placed in government controlled offices.

We witnessed Billionaire Media Mogul Mortimer Zuckerman's NY Daily News, do what appeared to be a similar media hazing to the former Queens Library President in 2014.

Click here to read the story about the Role of Mortimer Zuckerman's Daily News coverage in the Takeover of the Queens Library.

 

 

Payola Publishing?

 

 

III. Changing Laws, Regulators & No-Bid Contracts

A. Bush Election and FCC Expansion of TV Ownership Limits

Billionaire Media Mogul Murdoch appears to be treating the governments [and the people] of America and Britain like banana republics.

On election night, November 7, 2000, all of the networks [ABC, CBS, NBC & FOX] had declared Al Gore the winner of Florida, based on exit polls. Murdoch's Fox News had hired John Prescott Ellis, a cousin of George W. Bush, as a consultant to call the victors of each state. At around 2.16 am, the morning after the election, Ellis and Fox News declared Bush the winner of Florida, based on 85% of the voting returns from George W. Bush's brother's [Jeb] state of Florida.

The next morning the NY Post, one of the three daily papers in New York City [the nation's media capital], came out with a definitive issue declaring "BUSH WINS" in big bold type. Murdoch's News Organization had reset the narrative of the election, and even though Bush lost the popular vote by over a half million, with Florida's electoral votes, he was sworn in as President in January 2001.

Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch’s support of the presidency of George W. Bush proved to be highly beneficial to his organization. In 2001, shortly after assuming office, the Bush Administration FCC Chairman Michael Powell began reviewing the possibility of expanding TV ownership limits, which had been set at 35% in 1941, during the administration of FDR.

The Federal Communications Commission [FCC] states that the ownership limits were set to,

“… foster a vibrant marketplace of ideas, promote vigorous competition, and ensure that broadcasters continue to serve the needs and interests of their local communities.”

In June of 2003, FCC Chairman Michael Powell, expanded the ownership limit rules set in 1941 from maximum coverage of 35% of nation to maximum coverage of 45% of the nation.

In September of 2003, in a rare and immediate bi-party Congressional response, both the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives forwarded a resolution of disapproval and made plans to reset the ownership limits back to 35%.

But instead of staying the course and challenging President George W. Bush, Congressional leaders negotiated a deal to allow TV ownership coverage in the nation of 39%, grandfathering Vivendi and Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation, thus enabling them to keep all of their stations. This extended ownership of TV station coverage in the nation, provided Murdoch's organization with a competitive advantage.

 

B. British Prime Minister Election and Regulatory Oversight of British Sky Broadcasting Acquisition

The image at right shows that at least two of Murdoch's publications would be very much at home in a totalitarian state. Murdoch's 'news' organization tells its readers that they HAVE ONLY ONE CHOICE. Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch's choice?

According to the Guardian, Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch and his son, James, are reported to have met with Jeremy Hunt in 2009 in New York, during which time pundits opine that the Murdochs decided to acquire the rest of British Sky Broadcasting and to switch the Media Mogul's news organization's support from the Labour [Gordon Brown, father of son with Cystic Fibrosis] to the Conservative Party candidate for Prime Minister [David Cameron].

British Sky Broadcasting is one of the top two internet and phone companies in Britain and the nation's largest pay TV provider. Cameron went on to become the British Prime Minister, and Coulson, a former Murdoch organization man, who was alleged [and convicted in 2014] to have played a role in the scandal, was promoted as Prime Minister Cameron's top press person. When things got hot, Prime Minister Cameron fired him, and apologized to the British public. But that didn't deter Cameron from promoting another of questionable character, Jeremy Hunt [see why below].

Billionaire Murdoch went on to make a bid to acquire the remainder of British Sky Broadcasting and was within weeks of closing the deal in the summer of 2011 when a barrage of criminal phone hacking allegations against his company were publicized.

Why England Slept?

According to the BBC [British Broadcasting Company], one of the things that came out during the inquiries, was that the same Jeremy Hunt who in 2009 met with the Billionaire Murdoch in New York prior to the election, was entrusted by Cameron with the regulatory oversight of the British Sky Broadcasting acquisition.

A June 25, 2014 report by Bloomberg states,

“May 31, 2012: U.K. Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt testifies to the Leveson inquiry after criticism he was too close to News Corp. when he was in charge of regulatory scrutiny of the bid for BSkyB.”

Emails were found which appeared to be from Jeremy Hunt [JH], to a Public Relations firm in the employ of Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch. The emails reportedly sought "guidance". Hunt denied that there was any "back channel" with Murdoch's organization. The opposition party declared it was "collusion" with Billionaire Media Mogul Murdoch's company. Hunt was later appointed to become the Health Secretary for Cameron in 2013, even after a vote of no confidence.

Undeterred? Companies controlled by Billionaire Media Mogul Rupert Murdoch, now largely control British Sky Broadcasting [his son James is Chairman of Sky PLC which is primary shareholder], even if their control is not entirely supported by majority share ownership. B Sky B recently expanded their control of European airwaves through the acquistion of Sky Italia [Italy] and Sky Deutschland [Germany] which essentially gave Murdoch's organization a lot of cash which they could use to purchase British Sky Broadcasting.

According to a September 19, 2014 report in the Guardian,

"Chase Carey, the president of 21st Century Fox, has hinted that a renewed bid to take full control of BSkyB remains on the cards"

Would you trust an organization, whose hires had been convicted for criminal phone hacking to gather private information which was subsequently published, to be your internet and phone service provider?

 

C. NY Post Endorses Cuomo & Deal Negotiations by NYS & Murdoch Org

Murdoch's NY Post endorsed Andrew Cuomo for New York State governor in 2010. About one year later, in the summer of 2011, Murdoch's organization was very close to closing a no-bid contract which would have made a Murdoch organization the service provider tracking students' performance.

Unfortunately for Murdoch, the criminal phone hacking scandal, wherein people from his company intercepted people's private communications and then publicized them, became public just before the deal closed. And, in fact, the explosive scandal nixed it.

Given the multi-millionaire Hedge Fund efforts to privatize public education, one has to wonder if there was more than one agenda at play.

According to Wikipedia, in response to the phone hacking scandal,

"The week of 22 August 2011, Wireless Generation, a subsidiary of News Corporation, lost a no-bid contract with New York State to build an information system for tracking student performance as a direct consequence of the News International phone hacking scandal. Citing, ". . . vendor responsibility issues with the parent company of Wireless Generation," state comptroller Thomas DiNapoli said that the revelations surrounding News Corporation had made the final approval of the contract "untenable"."

 

IV. Murdoch Org: Disinforming Propagandist Publisher?

"State Sponsored News" or Propaganda For Profit?

 

James Murdoch Talks about Propaganda in 2009: What's interesting is that the Billionaire Murdoch and his sons appear to have had the fine art of propaganda on their minds at least as early as seven years ago.

 

 

Billionaire Media Mogul Rupert Murdoch's son, James, a top ranking executive in Murdoch's organization, was quoted in an August 28, 2009 Taggart Lecture accusing the BBC, which has long been a standard of news excellence like our own PBS, with the following statement,

 

 

"He [James Murdoch] added that the BBC was "dumping free, state-sponsored news on the market".

 

 

Murdoch's NY Post Appears to Foam at the Mouth

There are days when Billionaire Chairman Keith Rupert Murdoch’s NY Post appears to foam at the mouth with their infective venom.

On Sunday, April 24th there were FIVE negative stories about the Mayor, on Friday, April 15th there were SIX negative stories about the Mayor, on Sunday / Monday / Tuesday the following week there were a total of FIFTEEN negative stories about the Mayor, and on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday of April 5th through 7th there were a total of EIGHTEEN negative stories about the Mayor.

Not a single day in April of 2016 has gone by without Billionaire Chairman Keith Rupert Murdoch’s NY Post publishing a negative story about the Mayor. In the newspaper business they call this keeping the story alive, so that like a virus, it infects the minds of the public who see it.

There were 80 stories published by the NY Post in the first 24 days of April. That's eighty stories – more than three per day - and not a single one was positive [a few were neutral]. And in looking back on the Murdoch's NY Post's headlines since the Mayor took office, I didn’t really find any headlines that I would classify as positive. This appears to be what I'd call Billionaire Media Mogul propaganda where they treat and repeat allegations as if they were facts.

 

Murdoch Has History of Editorial Meddling

In an April 7, 2003 NYT story entitled Mr. Murdoch’s War, the New York Times reported,

“Mr. Murdoch, however, plays down his personal role in the unanimous views of his papers, explaining that he no longer has the time to dispense day-to-day instructions to his editors or producers” [Murdoch says] “ that is not me calling the editors.''

The British and American journalists covering Billionaire Publisher Murdoch and the war were skeptical of that claim and implicit in his statement is an admission that he has meddled in the editorial content of his papers in the past.

Eight years later, in a July 19, 2011 report by Reuters the story includes in its headlines that Billionaire Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch is a "hands-on newspaperman”, who it seems, makes sure that the people who work for him know what he expects. The story ended with the following quote,

"He [Murdoch] is not necessarily a bloke who wants to discuss ethics in journalism."

Remember as you read the NY Post, the Wall Street Journal and watch Fox News that all of these media outlets are controlled by the same multi-billionaire, and when he wants them to - he can make them speak with 'THE ONLY ONE' voice that really matters - the voice of Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch.

 

FOX: A Disinformation News Source?

7 Independent Studies Show Frequent Fox Viewers Are More Likely Disinformed

Billionaire Media Moguls know that if they keep repeating something often enough on the TV and in the press - regardless of whether it's true - some people will start believing it. And that over time it can become the [false] truth for a sizeable segment of the not well informed people in the population.

Abraham Lincoln said,

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you can not fool all of the people all of the time."

Is Billionaire Keith Rupert Murdoch trying to fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, to gain a competitive advantage for his organization and make billions more for himself?

In the free world we still call this propaganda, but in the free world it seems that propaganda is used to increase profits, not promote an ideology. But in both cases the means are the same - punishing those who defy and promoting those who will submit.

Media Matters, a non-profit media watchdog group, cited seven different, independent studies by a multitude of respectable non-profit and for profit organizations [including Murdoch's own Wall Street Journal] showing that frequent viewers of Fox News are also frequently misinformed about key subjects.

According to Media Matters the studies were conducted by:

• Kaiser Health
• Ohio State University researchers
• Program on International Policy Attitudes
• Stanford University and the National Science Foundation
• University of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes
• Farleigh Dickinson University
• NBC / Wall Street Journal poll

Suggestion for New FOX Slogan: 'We Decide by Disinforming You'

As previously stated, Billionaire Murdoch's News Corp once used the slogan - We Report. You Decide

But while working on this story I came up with what seemed to me to be a better fitting slogan for them - We Decide by Disinforming You.

 

V. Is 'Citizen Murdoch' Single-Handedly Trying to Oust Mayor?

It appears that Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch's organization doesn't respect laws, and by association, the citizenry of the nation.

One need not look far to find evidence supporting this statement given the Murdoch organization’s history of hiring people who break laws, as well as the string of 'coincidences' wherein following the election of Murdoch supported candidates - laws are changed, negotiations on no-bid deals are begun, and regulatory processes are overseen by Murdoch organization supported administrations.

Billionaire K. Rupert Murdoch's NY Post's coverage of the NYC Mayor appears to smell like propaganda. Murdoch's NY Post coverage of the Mayor appears to be repetition of opinions, allegations and innuendo. The NY Post has resorted to name-calling, reposting and replaying 'hot button' amateur video, and has been providing the public with one-sided, out of context, negatively biased headlines disproportional to the facts. This sort of behavior by a powerful Billionaire Publisher is reminiscent of the sad character portrayed in the movie Citizen Kane.

Murdoch's NY Post's targeting of the NYC Mayor, has the appearance of Murdoch's organization's pattern of using their media assets to convince voters to 'elect' government officials friendly to the Murdoch organization's wishes. Murdoch's organization seems to use the same headline to announce their choices on different continents - THE ONLY ONE / OUR ONLY HOPE - even though Murdoch insists he no longer has time to interfere with editorial content.

I don't know if the Mayor has done anything wrong or not, but I believe in the American axiom of due process, and so far it seems most of what the NY Post has done is to keep repeating their opinions, along with allegations & innuendo.

It's worth noting something mostly absent in the NY Post reporting on the matter, which is that,

"It is not clear how direct a role, if any, the mayor played in some of these matters." NYT April 29, 2016

 

Is Murdoch Org Skirting Campaign Finance Laws?

Aren't Incessant Advocacy or Attack Reports - Really Infomercials Presented as News?

Is Propaganda Media Malpractice?

Is the Murdoch organization's apparent use of its media properties as propaganda tools media malpractice?

Isn't this sort of apparent relentless barrage of advocacy or attack reports - really infomercials disguised as news - since it appears to depart from the professional standards of American journalism? And thus isn't the Murdoch organization making huge, undisclosed, independent expenditures to promote or punish candidates seeking public office, and hence skirting campaign finance laws?

Billionaire Mogul Murdoch was adamant about due process when the authorities were hunting down the criminals who worked for his organization, but Murdoch's organization dismisses due process when it comes to the NY Post's reporting of recent allegations regarding the Mayor's fundraising.

I spent my time working on this story to inform the public about an increasingly important issue ... and for Rosebud, Mr. Murdoch. Thanks for reading this.

Thomas Jefferson said that,

"Eternal vigilance is the price of democracy."

There will always be greedy people who no matter how much money and power they have, will always want more. They behave like drug addicts who can never get enough, and whose unbridled greed and lust for power, can be harmful to numerous other humans in a free functioning society.

Additional Reading - Books & Websites

For further reading about Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch, you might find this site of interest - http://thwaites.com.au/wp/murdochs-private-spies/ and the Dial M for Murdoch book is available on Amazon.uk.

 

If Needed Click Refresh to See 1968 Video

NYC Related Links

Click this link for promotions, discounts and coupons in NYC.

Site Search Tips $element(bwcore,insert_search,N)$

Click for NYC Restaurants NYC.

Click for NYC Shopping NYC.

Click for Things To Do NYC - Holidays in NYC.

Click for NYC Neighborhoods NYC.

Or send this story to a friend by filling in the appropriate box below.

---

Back To Top

Corruption? Is Rupert Murdoch Hacking our Democracy?

Has Rupert Murdoch's Organization been Trading Propaganda Services To Politicians in Exchange for Government Favors?

October 3, 2016 / NYC Neighborhoods / NYC Government & Politics / News Analysis & Opinion / Gotham Buzz.

Rupert Murdoch's Fox News, Murdoch's NY Post and even Murdoch's Wall Street Journal - appear to be used as a portfolio of propaganda publicity outlets to support Murdoch-favored politicians and Murdoch-favored public policies.

In this report we'll explore the possibility that Keith Rupert Murdoch's manipulative media machine is corrupting the public dialogue by disinforming and creating chaos in voters' minds, so that he can punish candidates by publicizing them out of office or publicity promote candidates into office. The photo at right shows a 1983 meeting between President Ronald Reagan and media mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch.

Decades of historical and recent coincidences, on three continents, and numerous administrations provide an entire body of circumstantial evidence that suggests Murdoch's organization has been methodically conducting behind-the-scenes deals with government officials to change media laws and regulations - affecting Murdoch's organization and the media industry - in Murdoch's favor.

In an October 16, 2006 story in the New Yorker, journalist and former Murdoch employee John Cassidy tells us,

"When I suggested to Murdoch that many people believe that his business interests dictate his politics, he reacted angrily. "Go ask Ed Koch if I ever asked him for anything," he said. "Go ask Margaret Thatcher. Go ask Tony Blair. Ask anyone if I ever asked for anything."

"Koch told me that Murdoch did once ask for something: during a newspaper strike in 1978, he requested, through an intermediary, that the Post's delivery trucks be allowed to use the city's parkways. Koch said yes. (He offered the city's other newspapers similar access.) The Thatcher government provided Murdoch with crucial police support when he fired hundreds of print-union workers, in 1986, and Blair relaxed the Labour Party's policy on media ownership."

Cassidy's listing of Murdoch favors from government officials appears to have only been the tip of the iceberg.

Is Murdoch Pulling Strings to Rewrite American Media Laws?

There have been a whole host of changes to American media laws since Rupert Murdoch arrived on our shores in the late 1970's.

The laws and regulations governing media that have been altered include: 1) media ownership by foreigners, 2) limits on local television stations ownership, 3) ownership of multiple media outlets in the same market [aka duopolies], and 4) media mergers and acquisitions. While I was generally unable to establish a legally verifiable quid pro quo, I did find an incredible number of what could only be described as 'interesting coincidences'. So interesting as to lead me to believe they might not be coincidences at all, including a recent series of events that appear to illustrate the theory that Keith Rupert Murdoch has played a highly influential role in making those changes.

 

 

Was Michigan Congressman Fred Upton's Request to Remove the 'Fairness Doctrine', done in Exchange for Favorable Murdoch Media & Cash?

In an April 27, 2012 story by ABC News, I found this report about Murdoch and his organization's political donations,

"Lately, a particular fundraising focus for Murdoch's American arm has been the Republican chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, Rep. Fred Upton of Michigan. The company has directed $35,500 to Upton's leadership committee, including a $2,500 check from Murdoch himself."

Less than a year earlier, on May 31, 2011 the EnergyCommerce.House.gov website reported that,

"House Energy and Commerce Chairman Fred Upton (R-MI) and Communications and Technology Subcommittee Chairman Greg Walden (R-OR) today sent a letter urging the Federal Communications Commission to remove the Fairness Doctrine rules from the Code of Federal Regulations."

""Further research has revealed that the political-editorial and personal-attack rules also remain intact despite the FCC's decision to repeal them. The media marketplace is more diverse and competitive today than it was ten years ago ... " [Editor's Note: This statement is not true - see facts a bit further below].

Murdoch's Fox News was tracking these events, and reported in a June 8, 2011 story headlined FCC Agrees to take "Fairness Doctrine off the Books",

""I [FCC's Genachowski] fully support deleting the Fairness Doctrine and related provisions from the Code of Federal Regulations," ... Genachowski wrote to Rep. Fred. Upton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce."

"At the time [when the rules were instated in 1949], only 2,881 radio stations existed, compared with roughly 14,000 today."

FCC Chairman Genachowski failed to mention that while the number of stations has proliferated, the ownership of them has not. According to a Business Insider report [info source was FrugalDad.com - a higher education funding website] and also published in Wikipedia.org - the media outlets mentioned above are now owned by six corporations, down from 50 in 1983.

In the graphic at right is a Murdoch's tabloid NY Post roasting the Clintons about Quid Pro Quo. I superimposed Murdoch's face over the Clintons as it appears the pot may be calling the kettle black.

You Decide - Is Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch Guilty of Quid Pro Quo Corruption or are these an Amazing Series of Lucky Coincidences?

Read on to decide for yourself whether you think that billionaire media mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch and his organization, are guilty of many of the same sorts of quid pro quo malfeasance of which they so easily and frequently accuse politicians.

Click here to read the rest of our report - Is Rupert Murdoch Hacking Democracy & Quid Pro Quo Corruption?

Corruption? Is Rupert Murdoch Hacking our Democracy?

Has Rupert Murdoch's Organization been Trading Propaganda Services To Politicians in Exchange for Government Favors?

October 3, 2016 / NYC Neighborhoods / NYC Government & Politics / News Analysis & Opinion / Gotham Buzz. Continued.

This report continues with an account of billionaire Rupert Murdoch's organization's succession of beneficial regulatory exemptions, rulings and changes in media law in three countries on three continents. These legal and regulatory changes oftentimes happened not too long after the candidates supported by the Murdoch organization took office. We start with Murdoch's string of lucky coincidences in America, then Britain and finally Australia where the billionaire media mogul owns nearly two thirds of all Australian newspapers and half of its satellite television. Murdoch is no longer an Australian citizen, so the lion's share of Australian media is owned by a foreign national.

In the photo at right you can see Rupert Murdoch visiting with President Reagan in 1983.

 

I. AMERICA: Is Murdoch Rewriting our Media Laws?

Murdoch entered the American media market when he bought the NY Post in 1976. He agreed to purchase about half of 20th Century Fox in 1984, in a partnership with Marvin Davis. He bought out Davis in 1985 and then proceeded to buy Metromedia's six local television stations in 1986. Ten years later, in 1996, Murdoch launched Fox News, a 24/7 cable news network. Murdoch's organization has one of the top two cable news programs, one of the top four national television networks, one of the nation's two largest daily newspapers [WSJ], and a dominant share of market in the nation's cultural and media capital with two local television stations, a national TV network, one national newspaper and one tabloid paper.

A. Reagan Legislative Changes & Regulatory Exceptions

i. Foreign Ownership Regulatory Allowance

Murdoch and his organization's regulatory exceptions started during the Reagan Administration with Murdoch winning an exemption for foreign ownership of American television stations, which previously had been capped at 25% when Reagan took office. The Reagan Administration also expanded the TV ownership limits and scrapped the Fairness Doctrine Rules, all while Murdoch's organization was buying up TV stations and opening up a national TV network.

Investigative journalist and author Robert Parry, who had formerly written for the Associated Press and Newsweek, published a report on December 31, 2014 on Alternet.org. Parry states,

"In 1984, he [Murdoch] bought a stake in 20th Century Fox and then six Metromedia television stations, which would form the nucleus of Fox Broadcasting Company, which was founded on Oct. 9, 1986."

"... [Murdoch] became a naturalized citizen of the United States in 1985 to meet a regulatory requirement that U.S. TV stations must be owned by Americans ..."

Murdoch moved his company's headquarters to New York City in 1995, nearly ten years later. This was about a decade after his company had assumed ownership of Metromedia, one of America's largest televison station operations. It's my belief that the reason for Murdoch's delay in the move of Newscorp headquarters from Australia to the U.S., is that Murdoch had to get limits on foreign ownership of media properties in Australia off the books before making the move.

ii. Expansion of TV Station Ownership Limits

"At the time, Murdoch and other media moguls were lobbying for a relaxation of regulations from the Federal Communications Commission, a goal that Reagan shared. Under FCC Chairman Mark Fowler, the Reagan administration undertook a number of steps favorable to Murdoch's interests, including increasing the number of TV stations that any single entity could own from seven in 1981 to 12 in 1985."

Please note the serendipitous timing of all of the regulatory changes and Murdoch's acquisitions. Murdoch seems to be in compliance with advice once given by early 20th century propagandist Adolph Hitler who said,

"If you don't like a rule ... Just follow it ... reach on the top ... and change the rule."

iii. Media Ownership of Duopolies Exception

In 1986 Murdoch was given an exception for media ownership of duopolies, which is the ownership of two media properties [eg. newspaper & TV station] in the same market. As mentioned previously, Murdoch had acquired Metromedia TV stations in 1986, which owned a television station serving the New York City market. As mentioned, Murdoch also owned the NY Post, one of the daily newspapers serving the city, thus providing Murdoch with a duopoly [two media properties in the same market] which was forbidden at the time. The FCC rules provided Murdoch's organization with some time to divest itself of the NY Post, which they never did. Murdoch held onto the NY Post for five years beyond the exclusion period, and obtained a permanent waiver for it's duopoly in 1993 because the NY Post was said to be unprofitable.

iv. Removal of the Fairness Doctrine

Parry goes onto inform us that,

"In 1987, the "Fairness Doctrine," which required political balance in broadcasting, was eliminated, which enabled Murdoch to pioneer a more aggressive [brand of reporting] on his TV network."

Parry is being far too kind to Murdoch, as this aggressive reporting is really propaganda disguised as news. And it is the removal of the Fairness Doctrine regulation that is likely one of the contributing causes of the vitriolic debate and divisiveness in America today.

See the complete account by Robert Parry on Alternet.org. Parry is also the author of several books.

http://www.alternet.org/world/how-rupert-murdochs-media-empire-benefited-selling-reagans-cia-propaganda

 

B. Clinton Legislative Changes & Regulatory Exceptions

 

i. Murdoch Granted Waiver of TV Ownership Rule Violation

In an October 16, 2006 story in the New Yorker, former Murdoch employee John Cassidy tells us,

"In 1994, in response to complaints from NBC and the N.A.A.C.P., [FCC Chairman Reed] Hundt launched an investigation of Fox, which ultimately determined that the company had violated laws governing foreign ownership of networks. (Fox announced plans to restructure, though News Corp. remained based in Australia until 2004.) Murdoch was furious about the investigation. In statements that he released to the press, he accused Hundt of "using clearly prejudicial procedures," and of trying to "hurt us." Hundt found himself being attacked by Republicans in Congress and, later, by Murdoch's media outlets. ... Hundt said, "You know, and he knows, that, if he likes you, you are going to get both news and editorial coverage that is different than if he doesn't like you."

ii. Telecommunications Act of 1996

The Clinton Administration signed the Telecommunications Act of 1996 into law. They sold the act telling the public it would open up the various categories of media to increased competition. It did, and as a result there was considerable consolidation in the industry. Wikipedia notes,

"The Act was claimed to foster competition. Instead, it continued the historic industry consolidation reducing the number of major media companies from around 50 in 1983 to 10 in 1996 and 6 in 2005."

In 1996, Rupert Murdoch launched Fox News.

iii. Did Murdoch Have a Hand in the Clinton Administration Further Loosening TV Duopoly Ownership Laws?

Katrina vanden Heuvel, in a March 10, 2011 report in the Nation provided us with this in a story headlined,

'When Murdoch Wins, Citizens Lose - FCC leniency has allowed News Corp to create countless coverage-restrictive duopolies'

"According to Santa Clara University's Allen Hammond, a staggering 109 duopolies were created between 2000 and 2006."

Prior to this time, duopolies were only allowed by the FCC on an exception basis. But the FCC rules were changed in late 1999. Murdoch's company has 9 of those 109 duopolies and it has enabled Murdoch's Media Machine to cut its [news] operating costs by reducing / rationalizing the two station's total resources.

The media law changes made since Murdoch's arrival in America have been undermining our democracatic system by providing Murdoch with an outsized voice in selecting and government officials and influencing public policy.

C. G.W. Bush Legislative Changes & Regulatory Exceptions

 

Coincidence vs Causality: Murdoch, Propaganda, Political Puppets, Public Policy?

In 2000, Fox News declared Bush the victor of the election early the morning following the election - at around 2.30 am. Later that morning, in New York City the media capital of the nation, an Election Extra morning edition of the NY Post hit the newsstands announcing Bush's victory in a definitive manner. This came after all four of the American TV networks [including Fox] had already declared Al Gore the probable winner on election night. A confused NYT headline appeared to follow Murdoch's Fox News and the NY Post's definitive announcement / narrative by declaring that Bush 'appeared to defeat Gore'.

The graphic at right shows Murdoch in his limousine and one real headline 'Bush Wins' from his NY Post, alongside a headline I wrote capturing what I believe he really means, 'Fox Wins'.

i. Relaxation of TV Ownership Coverage Limits

In 2002 / 2003 Murdoch's organization received a waiver for TV station ownership coverage limits in local markets, when the Bush FCC approved changes to the 1949[?] FCC rule limiting TV ownership coverage. The Bush FCC relaxation of television coverage rules were subsequently reversed in a highly unusual and near unanimous agreement by both the House and the Senate which threatened to overturn them. But Rupert Murdoch's acquisitions were allowed to remain exemptions.

In less than three years after George W. Bush's election, the Bush FCC rolled back limits on ownership of TV station coverage in the nation, which enabled Murdoch's Fox Television to expand its television station footprint, and thus giving Murdoch's Fox network a competitive advantage vis a vis the other networks.

Click here to see prior story about Murdoch's apparent abuse of his manipulative media assets.

ii. America & Britain - A War in Iraq for Ratings?

In 2002 & 2003 Murdoch appeared to succeed in urging British Prime Minister Tony Blair, U.S. President George W. Bush and Australian Prime Minister John Howard - to expend trillion(s) of the public's money to produce a 24/7 war [show] in Iraq.

In an April 7, 2003 NYT story entitled Mr. Murdoch's War, the New York Times reported,

"Mr. Murdoch, however, plays down his personal role in the unanimous views of his papers, explaining that he no longer has the time to dispense day-to-day instructions to his editors or producers" [Murdoch says] " that is not me calling the editors.''

The war turned out to be a boon to Murdoch, as it provided him with high ratings. And given the war program was being funded and produced by American and British taxpayers, the Iraqi War was also a very low cost 'show' to produce - at least for the Billionaire Mogul's Media Machine - because Murdoch could cover the war with a very limited team and distribute / use the content on three continents. The Iraq War was likely very good for Murdoch's financials, but it came at a very high cost to America's reputation and its taxpayers who are now on the hook for trillion(s) of war debt and still enmeshed in Middle Eastern conflicts.

At right, the same photo of Murdoch in his limousine, along with some headlines published in his NY Post.

 

II. BRITAIN: Did Murdoch Hack Britain & Betray Working Class?

Murdoch made his first media purchase in Britain in 1968 when he bought into News of the World. oA year later he bought the British tabloid The Sun. And in 1981 made a successful bid for the [London] Times and the Sunday Times. In 1989 Murdoch launched a British satellite television operation, which in 1990 merged to form British Sky Broadcasting, leaving Murdoch with 50% shares and management control. Murdoch has the largest share of media in Britain and an incredibly dominant position in the nation's cultural and political capital: London.

The Dirty Digger: Murdoch's Rise in Britain

In 1968 Press Lord Robert Maxwell was reportedly planning to make an attempt to takeover the News of the World, which at the time was the world's widest read English newspaper selling between 8.5 and 9 million copies weekly. Murdoch stepped in as the white knight and eventually assumed full control of the operation.

Murdoch Propagates Smut in Britain

In an April 28, 2013 BBC video entitled Battle For Britain, the wealthy press lord Rupert Murdoch was accused of turning the News of the World into a smut rag. Go to 12.45 - 13.45 in the video to see how Murdoch earned his nickname - The Dirty Digger. The Dirty Digger nickname / reputation has followed billionaire press lord Keith Rupert Murdoch throughout his life, and it still seems to fit - even to this day. 43,797 / 2006.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tUQufg6QGk

In 1969 Murdoch bought the British tabloid, the Sun, and reportedly pushed it further to the edge of sleaze than its nearest competitor. The move proved good for business, and the paper's circulation grew to become the largest daily newspaper in Britain. The Sun remains Britain's largest daily paper even to this day, even though they have lost half their print audience over the past decade or so.

The image at right is just one of many lewd photo depictions of women propagated by the Murdoch media empire dating as far back as the 1960's. This one was shown in a April 2013 BBC documentary video Battle With Britain.

Murdoch Betrayal of the Working Class?

One of the people interviewed on the BBC documentary said the Sun was a newspaper that carried sports and sex for people who weren't 'overeducated'.

 

Another said it was a working class paper, a group that Murdoch is alleged to have betrayed by telling them to vote for the union-busting Thatcher in the 1979 election. 44,404.

 

One pundit on the BBC show referenced above, says that Murdoch caught the public's dissatisfied mood, and then amplified it in the Thatcher election of 1979 [see 24.00 - 25.00 in video].

 

A practice he seems to continue to this day. In the image at right was taken from the April 2013 BBC documentary, Battle With Britain, depicting what some Brits thought of Murdoch's methods dating back over four decades.

 

How Much a Stretch From Smut to Propaganda?

According to the BBC report, Murdoch's media participation in politics was a change in how he used his media assets. But the BBC report didn't appear to delve into Murdoch's history in Australia, so it might have been that this was the first time he used propagandistic practices ... in Britain.

In the Thatcher election of 1979, Murdoch not only told Sun readers how to vote, but he's alleged to have also launched a full frontal attack on the Labor Party leading up to the election [more on this below].

Murdoch using his media organization as propaganda machine is a practice that appears to continue to this day on three continents ... or more.

Murdoch's Propaganda Machine Tells People how to Vote on Three Continents?

I saw recordings of Murdoch calling his competitors 'the elitist media' as far back as in the late 1960's. There's a real cynicism to this, because multi-billionaire Keith Rupert Murdoch was born into the elite, with a silver spoon in his mouth, attended Oxford University in England, and has been an international globetrotter ever since.

Isn't Murdoch the elitist? Doesn't he, through his organization, talk down to their audience? Don't they carefully work to shape their audience view of issues and politicians with purposefully framed diatribes, rather than by providing them contextually framed balanced accounts? And isn't it Murdoch's organization that oftentimes tells their working class audience, point blank, exactly how to vote?

This seems to me to be a one-sided parent-child relationship. Propagandist Hitler also appears to have understood and capitalized on this dynamic. In the image above, Murdoch doesn't inform, but rather appears to instruct the populace to vote for his preferred candidate.

 

A. Thatcher Regulatory Exceptions & Government Support

i. No Regulatory Review for Murdoch's Acquisition of London Times & Sunday Times

In 1980 the London Times went on the market. Murdoch's group bid on it. It was believed the merger would have to be reviewed by the Monopoly & Mergers Commission - as there are only exceptions if the entities involved are not considered going concerns.

In the April 2013 BBC report there was an interview with an official of Thomson, the Times owner, who said the London Times and the Sunday Times were not going concerns. It's worth mentioning that the Times & Sunday Times had just gotten over a strike costing 40 million pounds.

A former Times insider seemed to think that the merger should have been reviewed by the Monopoly & Mergers Commission, as the papers could have been made going concerns [and in fact continue to this day].

 

It's also worth noting that in 1981 Murdoch already owned the News of the World and the Sun - the dominant daily and weekly papers in London and Britain - which alone should have been sufficient rationale to warrant a Monopoly & Mergers Commission review.

 

 

Murdoch Propaganda Formula: Smut the Opposition & Promote Favored Candidate?

Is Murdoch a Corrupt Propagandist Deal Maker?

Nonetheless, Murdoch prevailed in acquiring the London Times & Sunday Times without a review by the Monopolies & Mergers Commission. Thereafter, many in Britain came to believe that Thatcher and Murdoch had cut a private quid pro quo deal.

In 2012, it was revealed that Keith Rupert Murdoch and Margaret Thatcher had met privately - and in secret - while negotiations regarding the Times and Sunday Times mergers were ongoing.

 

A handwritten note by Murdoch indicated as much, but Murdoch denies he and Thatcher talked about the merger [video 27.30 - 29.00]. According to the April 2013 BBC report, while it was never proven that Murdoch and Thatcher had cut a deal, it also was never proven that they didn't.

The April 2013 BBC report questions why Murdoch and Thatcher kept the private meeting secret from the public, and why Murdoch was only bidder allowed access to Thatcher during the talks?

 

According to a report in the Guardian on April 28, 2015,

"In 1981, Mrs Thatcher needed a boost from the press. By supporting Rupert Murdoch's bid for the Times and Sunday Times, she made sure she got it."

 

ii. Thatcher Stands by Murdoch as He Cuts Employees & Greatly Enriches Himself

Showdown at Wapping - Murdoch & Thatcher Bust the Printing Unions

In the elections of 1983, 1987 and 1992 Murdoch's British propaganda outlets appeared to fight hard supporting Thatcher, while simultaneously skewering the opposition, including a scathing attack in 1992 on Neil Kinnock, the opposition leader.

In 1986 Thatcher is reported to have assured Murdoch that he would be given all the police support he needed to go about the lawful conduct of his business, prior to Murdoch locking out the newspaper printing and distribution unions after a strike was initiated by the unions.

The strike lasted about a year [ending January 1987], with 574 policemen sustaining injuries having made in the range of 1,000 - 1,500 arrests. In the end hundreds [or possibly thousands] of Murdoch employees who were union members lost their their jobs and their livelihoods, while Murdoch significantly increased his organization's profits and greatly enriched himself. By replacing people with machines, Murdoch is reported to have succeeded in cutting his labor force by over 80%, and the other British newspapers quickly followed suit.

The happy couple, British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and Rupert Murdoch shown together during their 1980's heyday.

We live in capitalist countries, and for better or worse, this is how the system works, so Murdoch was within his rights. But that said, according to reports from the time, Murdoch appeared to take a very callous approach to the negotiations with the workers and their subsequent loss of livelihoods.

 

Betrayals: Did Murdoch's Sun Convince Readers to Vote for Murdoch's Interests & Against their Own?

According to Professor James P. Allan who is a political scientist at Wittenberg University in Dublin, Ohio,

 

"In both 1987 and 1992, the Labour Party again had to deal with an extremely hostile national press, which relentlessly attacked Labour and its Leaders often using dubious evidence and arithmetic to question Labour's tax and spending plans. McKie cites several studies which suggest that the press had an influence on the outcome of the 1992 election, accounting for what appeared to be a late swing to the Conservatives."

 

Professor Allan goes on to tell us, that Opposition Leader Neil Kinnock noted in his resignation speech in April 1992 the following,

 

"I make, and I seek, no excuses, and I express no bitterness, when I say that the Conservative-supporting press has enabled the Tory Party to win yet again when the Conservative Party could not have secured victory for itself on the basis of its record, its programme or its character."

 

 

Deception & Betrayals: Murdoch Publicly Proclaims Victory for his Propaganda Press

Decades Later, Murdoch's Duped 'British Subjects' Still Follow Master's Orders

The day of the 1992 election the Sun mocked Labor candidate Neil Kinnock on the front page telling readers that if Kinnock wins to turn off the lights on their way out of the nation.

The day after the election Rupert Murdoch's newspaper, the Sun, declared,

"It's the Sun Wot Won It."

Up until this time Kinnock's party had been ahead in the polls.

Both headlines from Murdoch's Sun are shown at right. The red type in the graphic at right is my commentary.

In 2012, during the Leveson Inquiry of the Murdoch's organization's criminal phone hacking and bribe scandal, the Guardian reports,

"Rupert Murdoch has told the Leveson inquiry the Sun's notorious 1992 general election headline, "It's the Sun wot won it", was "tasteless and wrong"."

Keep reading to see how sincere Murdoch's apology really was.

 

B. Blair Inaction on Foreign Ownership Media & Iraq War

Loyalty: Murdoch Dumps Conservatives to Support Liberal Tony Blair.

Tony Blair won the leadership of the Labor Party in 1994 and reportedly met with Rupert Murdoch only weeks later. In 1997, Tony Blair went onto run for and become the British Prime Minister, with the support of Murdoch's media.

In an October 16, 2006 story in the New Yorker, former Murdoch employee John Cassidy tells us,

"During the 1997 general election campaign, the Sun and the News of the World, Murdoch's Sunday scandal sheet, backed Blair. (The Times and the Sunday Times, which have greater editorial independence, stuck with the Tories.) After Blair's victory, which ended eighteen years of Conservative rule, Murdoch became a frequent visitor to Downing Street, although neither side publicized the meetings. In 2001 and 2005, most of the Murdoch papers supported Blair for reelection ..."

and this,

"Like the legendary press barons to whom he is often compared--Hearst, Pulitzer, Northcliffe, Beaverbrook--Rupert Murdoch has relished playing kingmaker."

 

 

ii. Blair Joins Murdoch is Supporting Iraq War

In a May 29, 2012 story in a story in the Daily Mail in Britain it was reported that,

"[Tony Blair] spoke to Rupert Murdoch three times in days before 2003 Iraq War - including on March 19 - the day before the invasion."

NYT called it "Mr. Murdoch's War" - see the United States section above.

 

 

ii. Blair Inaction on Foreign Media Ownership Laws

During the Blair years, British media ownership laws were not reviewed in spite of foreign control of much of Britain's press.

The Daily Mail in a May 29, 2012 story reports,

"Rupert Murdoch was 'key decision maker' regarding the political affiliations of his newspapers - but Mr Blair insists no deal was made with the mogul."

"Mr Blair said Mr Murdoch had never lobbied him over media policy - and denied ditching a planned review of media ownership rules to please the tycoon."

"Lord Mandelson said it was 'arguably the case... that personal relationships between Mr Blair, (Gordon) Brown and Rupert Murdoch became closer than was wise', but denied there was any 'Faustian pact' involving commercial concessions for Mr Murdoch."

 

C. Cameron Oversight of Murdoch TV Bid, Stalled

i. Murdoch's Nearly Complete B Sky B Satellite TV Bid Stopped due to Phone Hacking Scandal

Murdoch launched a new satellite TV operation in Britain in 1989. In the early 1990's, after sustainingheavy losses, Murdoch merged with B Sky B, and assumed management of the combined entity.

According to the Guardian, in 2009 Murdoch and his son, James, are reported to have met with [soon-to-be British Culture Secretary] Jeremy Hunt in New York. Pundits opine that it was around this time that the Murdochs decided to acquire the rest of British Sky Broadcasting, while simultaneously deciding to switch the Media Mogul's organization's support from the Labour [Gordon Brown, father of son with Cystic Fibrosis] to the Conservative Party candidate for Prime Minister [David Cameron].

British Sky Broadcasting is one of the top two internet and phone companies in Britain, and Britain's largest pay TV provider. Cameron went on to become the British Prime Minister, and Coulson, a former Murdoch organization man, who was alleged and convicted in 2014 to have played a role in the phone hacking scandal, was promoted as Prime Minister Cameron's top press person.

Say Something?

Billionaire Murdoch went on to make a bid to acquire the remainder of British Sky Broadcasting and was within weeks of receiving regulatory approval and closing the deal in the summer of 2011, when a barrage of criminal phone hacking allegations against his company went public.

According to the BBC [British Broadcasting Company], one of the things that came out during the inquiries, was that the same Jeremy Hunt who in 2009 met with the Billionaire Murdoch in NewYork prior to the election, was entrusted by Cameron with the regulatory oversight of the British Sky Broadcasting acquisition.

A June 25, 2014 report by Bloomberg states,

"May 31, 2012: U.K. Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt testifies to the Leveson inquiry after criticism he was too close to News Corp. when he was in charge of regulatory scrutiny of the bid for BSkyB."

Emails were found which appeared to be from Jeremy Hunt [JH], to a Public Relations firm in the employ of Billionaire Media Mogul Keith Rupert Murdoch. The emails reportedly sought "guidance". Hunt denied that there was any "back channel" with Murdoch's organization. The opposition party declared it was "collusion" with Billionaire Media Mogul Murdoch's company. Hunt was later appointed to become the Health Secretary for Cameron in 2013, even after a vote of no confidence.

Murdoch's Desire to Control the Western World Resumes

Companies controlled by Billionaire Murdoch, now largely control British Sky Broadcasting [his son James is Chairman of Sky PLC which is primary shareholder], even if their control is not entirely supported by majority share ownership.

In November of 2014, B Sky B recently expanded their control of European airwaves through the 100% acquisition of Sky Italia [Italy] and the 57% acquisition of Sky Deutschland [Germany], which essentially gave Murdoch's organization a lot of cash, which they hinted might be used to purchase British Sky Broadcasting. These acquisitions increased Murdoch's organization's satellite subscriber reach from 30 million to 90 million in Europe. The graphic at right is my satirization of Murdoch's lust for power.

According to a September 19, 2014 report in the Guardian,

"Chase Carey, the president of 21st Century Fox, has hinted that a renewed bid to take full control of BSkyB remains on the cards"

The 'Fox' Continues to Intimidate the British Chicken Coop

Would you trust Murdoch's organization - whose hires had been convicted for criminal phone hacking of private citizen's information, which Murdoch's organization subsequently published - to control your nation's largest internet and phone service provider?

Edmund Burke, an 18th century English politcal philosopher said,

"All it takes for evil to succeed, is for enough good [wo]men to do nothing."

 

Brexit: Should British Policy be set with European Public Officials or Unilaterally by Billionaire Propagandists?

ii. Did Murdoch Push Public Policy Referendum Vote in his Favor?

In an October 16, 2006 story in the New Yorker, former Murdoch employee John Cassidy tells us,

"For the past decade and a half, Murdoch has been trying to fend off what he sees as the encroachment of a European super state. One of the reasons he turned against John Major was that Major wanted Britain to establish closer ties with the European Community. "I thought that was abdicating responsibility to unaccountable bureaucrats in Brussels," Murdoch told me. "And I still think that. There are good things about Europe, such as a unified market, but that's a different matter. To give social policy, legal policy, human rights, and so on over to some anonymous body is crazy."

"Tony Blair was pro-Europe, too, when he came to office, but many British commentators, including some of his own former aides, believe that he modified his policies to satisfy Murdoch. "Blair was very keen to join the European monetary system," Lance Price, a former media adviser at 10 Downing Street, said to me. "But at every stage of the way he stepped back. And one of the main reasons he pulled back was that Rupert Murdoch was vehemently opposed to closer links with Europe." Price recently published a book, "The Spin Doctor's Diary," in which he writes about Murdoch's influence on the Blair government. "It was never discussed in black-and-white terms," Price told me. "Nobody ever said, 'We have to do this because Murdoch supports it.' But his views were always heard. And they were heard ahead of many Cabinet ministers'."

Murdoch's organization reportedly urged Prime Minister Cameron to hold a vote on Brexit, the term used to describe the referendum designed to tear England out of the European Union. Murdoch is reported to have supported the exit, and did so with the coverage of the issue by Murdoch's leading British newspaper for morons - the Sun.

According to the European Centre for Press & Media Freedom,

"Posters attacking the multi-national media owner Rupert Murdoch have appeared, claiming "Rupert Murdoch can buy the British government. But not a union of 28 countries".

"This refers to the widely-held belief that popular newspapers owned by Murdoch's News UK company can swing enough votes to influence the outcome of an election or referendum. The posters imply that Murdoch uses the power of his national newspapers (Sun, Times and Sunday Times) and his TV networks (Sky News, Sports, Arts and Atlantic) to back politicians who will serve his business interests."

Murdoch's propaganda outlets appear to be creating chaos. This is a propagandist technique, because if you create enough confusion in voters' minds, you increase the likelihood that with a LOUD, decisive endorsement just before the election, you may be able to convince a confused electorate to vote for your chosen candidate. This appears to be what happened with the Brexit referendum, as many Brits voted for Murdoch's interests - and against their own - in June 2016.

 

BETRAYALS? Did Murdoch Convince Brits to Vote For Murdoch's Interests & Against their Own?

According to a report in the WSJ, a Murdoch newspaper,

"Would leaving the EU make Britain economically better off? A report by several euroskeptic economists led by Patrick Minford at Cardiff University argues Britain could enrich itself by lowering trade barriers with countries such as China below levels the EU now permits. Politically, that looks like a stretch. Nor would it compensate for the loss of tariff-free access to Europe."

"The British Treasury estimates the British economy would be 3.8% smaller outside the EU in 15 years' time than inside if the country negotiates the same access to the EU thatnonmember Norway now has, and up to 7.5%smaller if it doesn't. This excludes the unknown but almost certainly negative impact of uncertainty as Britain negotiates its new arrangements."

As of this writing, the British FTSE 100 stock index which includes many multi-national corporations, and thus may not be reflective of the British economy, is currently trading about where it started the year [just above 7,000 in January and now in October 2016]. The British currency, the Pound, has dropped from 1.48 at the beginning of the year to 1.28, losing 13% of its value.

The red type in the graphic at right is my commentary, superimposed over a Murdoch Sun front page.

 

III. Hacked Australia - The Land Down Under Murdoch's Dirty Boot?

Murdoch Early Years: Propaganda, Puppet Pols & Public Policy?

In 1952, at age 21, Rupert Murdoch inherited his father's Australian newspaper(s) and radio station. Starting in 1956 Murdoch began acquiring underperforming papers and began turning them around with sensational headlines and racy copy.

Murdoch became known as the Dirty Digger, because his papers sought to dig up dirt from the personal lives of politicians - at first - and then celebrities - and eventually digging up information on anybody with a story that would grab headlines.

The Murdoch Organization is alleged to have gone so far as to have criminally hacked the phone of the mother of a murdered child, using the messages for story headlines, which is shown in the graphic at right taken from the BBC April 2013 video.

It would appear the Murdoch organization's lack of ethics knows no bounds.

 

War Crimes: Propagandists Influence on Policies & Politics

A report by News . com in Australia on July 7, 2016 said,

"The damning conclusions of the UK's Iraq Inquiry, also known as the Chilcot report, has led to calls for [former Australian Prime Minister] Howard to be tried for "war crimes" for going to battle based on a "lie"."

Billionaire Media Mogul & Propagandist Keith Rupert Murdoch appears to regularly slink back into his serpentine hole, hiding behind his media brands after doing incredible damage to the politicians and public.

Oftentimes Murdoch seems to leave his political puppets to suffer the consequences, sometimes piling on them as if he, Murdoch, had nothing to do with setting the policies that made them unpopular.

As you could see in the NY Times quote further above, Murdoch is said to have been one of the most important people lobbying for the War in Iraq, yet was he registered as a lobbyist?

 

Murdoch, no Longer an Australian Citizen, Owns >60% of Australian Newspapers, has a Dominant Position in Australian Satellite Television & Seems to Pick Prime Ministers - INCLUDING ONE OF HIS FORMER EMPLOYEES

Murdoch the Deal Maker: Quietly Trading Propaganda to Politicians / Puppets in Exchange for Favorable Public Policy?

In a February 20, 2013 report by the Guardian noted,

"McKnight [Associate Professor of Journalism at South Wales University & Author of 'Murdoch's Politics'] quotes the former Australian prime minister Paul Keating: "You can do deals with [Murdoch] without ever saying a deal is done.""

The image at right shows a May 2016 Mediaite report regarding Ted's statement about Fox becoming the Trump Network on CNN.

 

According to Wikipedia, Rupert Murdoch's media machine owns all of the major newspapers in Australia - 64% of them in total, which in this nation would likely be classified as a monopoly.

In Australian television Murdoch's Machine owns Foxtel, which is reported to be dominant in all but two of Australia's cities [Darwin & Hobart], and according to Wikipedia Foxtel's main rivals essentially rebroadcast Foxtel's programs.

Australian Media Laws - 'Laws' Only a Global Billionaire Propagandist Could Love

Wonder why Australia has so few laws and such lax laws governing media ownership in their nation? The laws are so limited and so lax as to be laughable. Hence, I found it no surprise that there was a slew of legislative activity regarding Australian media laws in the late 1980's and early 1990's culminating in the Broadcasting Services Act of 1992. Right around the time Rupert Murdoch was switching his citizenship from Australian to American.

Today one of the hottest issues in Australia is winning back its freedom, as Murdoch's media even promoted a former employee of his, Tony Abbott, to be the Australian Prime Minister from 2013 to 2015.

Is Murdoch Hacking the 2016 Presidential Election?

Is Our Democracy Under Attack by the World's Reigning Propagandist?

This election cycle it appears Murdoch has used the NY Post, Fox News and the WSJ to promote Trump and disparage the Republican primary contenders and more recently Trump's Democratic opponent.

As you can see by the 2016 image at right Murdoch and Trump are not strangers. In fact Rupert Murdoch lived in Trump Towers for two to three years according to www.GuestofaGuest.com. During that time Murdoch's then-wife, Wendi Deng, became good friends with Trump's daughter Ivanka. Deng is now reportedly the girlfriend of Russian President Vladimir Putin. And Deng and Ivanka Trump were seen publicly together several times in 2016, including in Eastern Europe in August.

Thomas Jefferson said,

"If a nation expects to be ignorant and free, in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."

We've done two other stories - Rupert Murdoch's Propaganda Factory & Rupert Murdoch's Publicity Pounding of NYC Mayor de Blasio.

Supplemental Information & Things to Ponder

The following are related thoughts and research that came out of the work above. Think of it as outtakes from a film.

Fair Question? Why Isn't Murdoch's Organization on the List of Suspects in the Democratic Party Hacking this Summer?

Means. The combined $60 billion plus revenue twin companies that Murdoch controls have the means.

Criminal Experience. Murdoch's organization hires have been convicted of hacking, by some accounts up to 5,000 phones, including reportedly trying to get dirt on a sitting British Prime Minister.

Methods. Murdoch's organization has access to these kinds of skills as the British phone hacking scandal is said to have gone on for ten years.

Motives. And Murdoch's organization has the motive as it appears they will do almost anything for a sensational headline. And if history is any guide, they also appear to have an interest in shaping the nation's media laws.

So Murdoch's organization appears to have the means, the motives, the methods, as well as a history of colluding with experienced criminal hackers.

But Murdoch and his organization have never even been mentioned as potential suspects. Why? Respect or Fear?

 

Most Informative BREXIT Reporting done by Independents?

Increasingly, it Appears Today's Best Journalism is Coming from Independents

The best piece of journalism I found explaining the issues associated with Brexit did NOT come from any of the established corporate or government run media in Britain, but rather from a non-profit organization which used YouTube to do its best to help inform the British public.

The group is called Arguing From Ignorance and they did the following video which you can visit using this link. 289,014. I found it informative, but complicated, as Britain's relationship with the Continent is. 289.553.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8xdCFwng_k

Murdoch The Great ...

Hacker? Deceiver? Propagandist? Traitor?

Did Murdoch Betray his Employees, While HACKING Private Phones?

The British news site, Exaro, published a transcript in a July 3, 2013 story of a recording made of Murdoch speaking on March 13, 2013 in a meeting with the staff at the Sun on the 10th floor without Murdoch knowing it. The Sun was one of his papers implicated in the phone hacking scandal in Britain which broke in 2011.

In the scandal, over 5,000 phones of private individuals - ranging from the mother of a murdered daughter to celebrities and government officials - were alleged to have been hacked by Murdoch's organization.

Murdoch said many things in the meeting, among which was the following.

" I'm just as annoyed as you are at the police, and you're directing it at me instead ...

"And it was done to protect the business.... we might have gone too far in protecting ourselves. And you were the victims of it."

"You won't get any help from judges - but, I think, juries. I've got - not absolute faith - but a lot of hope in juries. I think you'll all make fine witnesses. And you want a lot of help from your lawyers, and practice. Because your juries are your best hope."

"We went through the NY Post, went through the papers in Australia - everything."

"If they want to see anyone again, don't see them without a lawyer. Anyone. I mean it. Don't speak to anyone."

"It doesn't help you to know that the police are incompetent."

"... we've made a lot of friends too ... where would I or the Sun be most unpopular? It would be with the judges."

A letter is read from the wife of a Murdoch News of the World employee. Among other things she says,

"... There have been suicide attempts. For what? A hideous political game: for what end? To save News International's integrity, put way before the well-being of its employees. They deserve better, these are ... not the debris."

Murdoch response to letter - "Okay. Thank you very, very much, and I'm sorry it's like this. Sorry."

For full text, go to Exaro at - http://www.exaronews.com/articles/5026/transcript-rupert-murdoch-recorded-at-meeting-with-sun-staff