“It is worth asking in both the British and American contexts why people who regard themselves as believers in free speech and liberal democracy can be so openly eager to close off – silence, kill, extinguish – different political views from their own. This is the question that is at the heart of the matter and which will remain long after every News International executive who may possibly be incriminated in the current scandal has been purged. There is scarcely any outfit on the Right – be it political party, or media outlet – which demands the outright abolition of a Left-wing voice, as opposed to simply recommending restraint on its dominance (as I am with the BBC). That is because those of us on the Right are inclined to believe that our antagonists on the Left are simply wrong-headed – sometimes well-intentioned, sometimes malevolent but basically just mistaken. Whereas the Left believes that we are evil incarnate. Their demonic view of people who express even mildly Right-of-centre opinions (that lower taxes or less state control might be desirable, for example) would be risible if it were not so pernicious.”
Someone I know quite well said she hoped the problems at Murdoch’s media empire will lead to Fox News being shut down. Not changed in ownership, you understand, but closed. This person is, you will not be surprised to learn, very “liberal”.
Sadly a change in ownership would have much the same effect as a shutdown.
Rupert M. is not a dissentor himself (witness his support for TARP, his closeness to Blair and Brown, and so on), but he tolerates some non left establishment voices (on Fox News) no other likely owner would do this.
That is the real objective of the left – eliminate dissent in the United States (by undermining Murdoch – and thus undermining Fox News, Fox Business and the Wall Street Journal) by useing the British stuff.
The British stuff is itself a sideshow – and totally insincere.
After all (as Guido F. has pointed out many times) the Mirror group (and others – such as Boris Johnson) “hack” and “blag” just as much as any British News International person.
Why are these stories not bashed home every day on the BBC (and the “independent” broadcasters also)?
Because these stories do not fit the agenda of – castrate Murdoch.
And Murdoch it to be hit not because he is a threat to the establishment here – his publications here are weak and conformist (the Times and so on), but because he allows voices IN THE UNITED STATES that are a threat to the left establishment there.
The Guardian newspaper (the house journal of the BBC) has been acting for the New York Times (and the rest) since the start of all this.
Oh do me a favour. This would have to be one of the most ridiculous things I’ve ever read. Perhaps this is the case in the UK but not in the US. As just one example, consider the case of Octavia Nasr, who was hounded out of her job as a CNN journalist after tweeting privately that she had “respect” for Sayyed Mohammad Hussein Fadlallah, a Hezbollah leader. Was this a stupid thing to say? Yes. Ill advised? Most definitely. But the fact remains that she was sacked for expressing an opinion.
Given the Right’s hysterics over Obama and the “socialism” that is supposedly set to engulf the US, anyone who can claim with a straight face that the Right doesn’t regard the Left as “evil” in the US is either brain dead or hasn’t been paying attention.
Well I certainly regard much of the left as evil. Actually I regard a great many people on the so called ‘right’ as evil too as I find them functionally indistinguishable… statists are evil and it really does not matter that much if they are ‘left’ statists or ‘right’ statists.
ChrisV, the left wants to censor and muzzle their opponents. The Tea party conservatives want to give their opponents a wider audience. The more these thugs talk, the worse they sound. I think you’ll find that most of the drive to censor and muzzle the more outspoken leftists in the media comes from other leftists who find their less guarded comments ‘not helpful to the cause’.
Well, duh! She isn’t useful anymore. Throw her under the bus, make ‘shocked and disappointed’ noises and change the topic quickly. SOP.
ChrisV, to state that Obama is a socialist is hardly hysterical, more a correct and accurate use of the English language. The American public voted for the most left-wing politician in modern times, although there is a certain grim amusement to be had in noting that he has also royally pissed off civil libertarians by his stepping up drone attacks in the ‘Stan, failing to repeal the Patriot Act, failing to shut down Gitmo, failing to repeal a single piece of Bush-era anti-terror legislation, etc, etc.
And conservatives are not trying to shut liberal/left media down, whereas the left is constantly trying to undermine things like talk radio, and use things such as net neutrality etc to do the same.
I also don’t recall anyone on the Left calling for repeal of McCain-Feingold, a straight attack on the First Amendment.
statists are evil and it really does not matter that much if they are ‘left’ statists or ‘right them fu ble… statists are evil and it really does not matter that much if they are ‘left’ statists or ‘right statists.
This.
statists are evil and it really does not matter that much if they are ‘left’ statists or ‘right them fu ble… statists are evil and it really does not matter that much if they are ‘left’ statists or ‘right statists.
This.
Repeat after me- Saying something twice does NOT make it true!
Saying something twice does NOT make it true!