Why is the FCC allowing Australian press baron and all around asshat Rupert Murdoch to change US laws so he can acquire more media holdings?

Via Free Press:

Category: Digital Media, Financial Press, Regulation

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

41 Responses to “Stop Media Consolidation: No More FCC Rule Changes for Murdoch”

  1. VennData says:

    BP needs to merge with Fox. Spin the liberal commenters off to, who cares? MSNBC? So they can scream their liberal lies at each other over there in their echo chamber, but the rest of it should go directly into the Murdock Empire.

    Lot’s of senescent CEOs buy new leadership. Can you imagine BR talking the helm at Fox?

  2. S Brennan says:

    Barry, you and I may disagree on some issues, but you represent what the American Revolution of 1776 was about, Benjamin Franklin observed:

    “Whoever would overthrow the liberty of a nation must begin by subduing the freeness of speech.”

  3. call me ahab says:

    nothing like “talking” the helm-

    as if anyone understands what you’re “talking” about-

    BP and Fox?

    yeah – ok then . . .

    I get it – not

  4. Winston Munn says:

    It is common knowledge that the Constitution was wrong: speech was meant to be fair and balanced, but definitely not free.

  5. formerlawyer says:

    After all a Nobel Prize winner said it best.

  6. Frilton Miedman says:

    After the last five years, a comparison of Murdoch to Goebbels is easily made….constant conspiracy theories and fear mongering, this isn’t journalism.

    I remember when “fair and unbiased” was Harry Reasoner, Walter Cronkite,…to even hint at an opinion or show emotion was an affront to professionalism, the big three prime time news went to great lengths to maintain neutrality, they prided themselves on the trust they earned from viewers.

    Fox has been recently referred to as a branch of the GOP, I wonder if the GOP isn’t a branch of FOX.

  7. Petey Wheatstraw says:

    Speech should, of course, be free. Owning media outlets, OTOH, should be highly regulated.

    IMO, things worked better with our media when they were more strictly regulated.

  8. Ludwig von Mises..

    “The consumers suffer when the laws of the country prevent the most efficient entrepreneurs from expanding the sphere of their activities. What made some enterprises develop into big business was precisely their success in filling best the demand of the masses.”

    Planned Chaos p. 22 AntiTrust Laws

    Ludwig von Mises..

    “What makes a firm big is its success in best filling the demands of the buyers. If the bigger enterprise did not better serve the people than a smaller one, it would long since have been reduced to smallness.”

    Planning for Freedom p. 134 Big Business

    Ludwig von Mises..

    “Big business depends entirely on the patronage of those who buy its products: the biggest enterprises loses its power and its influence when it loses its customers.”

    Economic Policy p. 4 Big Business


    maybe, We’ll note the third one, ’tis Key, no?

  9. Apinak says:

    This issue is much more important than the fiscal cliff Kabuki. The information we get should not be controlled by one person, asshat or otherwise.

    The fact that the FCC is once again trying to sneak this through is just more evidence of how corrupt Washington has become.

  10. sparta47 says:

    You sound surprised this happening.

    Same thing happened in banking & finance & it doesn’t matter who is “in control”. BIG MONEY TALKS”
    With Greenspan at the Fed, he & Wall Street chipped away a little at a time until Glass Steagall hardly mattered & then they pushed it over the cliff. 10 – 15 years later it all blows up & they respond nobody could see it coming.

    The chipping away at rules limiting media consolidation has been going on for years. “BIG MONEY TALKS” & Murdoch is big money in media. The latest is not news. As is the case in banking the Media is much more consolidated today than 15/20 years ago.

    There is a circle between Washington regulators being appointed from the regulated after the appropriate campaign contributions. After a few grueling years regulating they retire with a pension & go back to a higher position or as a consultant to the industry they formerly regulated.

    This is not a new development.

  11. [...] Ritholtz) Share this:TwitterDiggFacebookRedditPrintEmailMoreStumbleUponLike this:LikeBe the first to like [...]

  12. capitalistic says:

    Ahhhh, but isn’t that what the “job creators” want, less govt regulation?

  13. Moss says:

    The British consider Murdoch unfit. Why has News Corp not been charged under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act? They should not even have a license.

  14. JimRino says:

    Harry Reasoner, Walter Cronkite, those were the days.

    Do we have to WATCH THEM on every God Damned Issue?

  15. SEG says:

    Great now we have people railing against free speech. I am sure it will be so much better once some government regulator has authority to determine what speech is OK and what speech is not.

    There has to be consolidation to some extent. It is crazy for people in various cities reproducing similar content over and over again. Buggy whips and home town media have been changed by technology. Wishing to keep the good ole days is unrealistic. Things will change.

    That said this does not mean the government will not screw up the changes. So I think there needs to better alternatives to government proposals that also recognize the NEED for change.


    BR: Fail. No one’s “railing against free speech” — this is an argument against granting a special exemption to Murdoch from the FCC rules for ownership concentration.

  16. Expat says:

    You will be assimilated. Resistance is useless.
    Anyway, who cares? Not Americans or they would be doing something about it. Perhaps burning down (metaphorically, for my dear friends at the NSA/DHS working on TIA) Washington? Or they would stop watching Fox.

    Murdoch gives us what we want: drivel, propaganda, bullshit, and tits. Who could ask for anything more?

  17. I find it amusing that some of you are equating the special waiving of rules governing who owns how much PUBLIC airwaves (& can have local monopoly power) as a restraint on free speech.

    Do some reading, learn your constitution and its history, and stop being corporate toadies

  18. rd says:

    You are missing the point.

    Corporations are people too (John Roberts et al have ruled this). Therefore, it doesn’t matter if Rupert Murdoch is Australian because his US subsidiary is a US citizen.

    Rupert Murdoch doesn’t need to be able to vote in the US as an actual physical person with citizenship. His corporation can vote for him as a proxy by buying all the votes he wants on Capital Hill through the Super-PACs that the corporation can invest in through its personhood.

    The other way to look at it is: each Benjamin has its own right to vote during an election. Since Rupert Murdoch has almost as many Benjamins as there are voters in the US, then he obviously has the right to be able to swings elections and votes on Capital Hill.

  19. CrownCity says:

    1. Rupert Murdoch IS a US Citizen

    2. Rupert Murdoch was given this citizenship & specific relaxed media ownership rules as repayment for his role in “overthrowing” Australian Prime Minister Gough Whitlam.

  20. DeDude says:

    @Mark E Hoffer;

    I guess Ludwig von Mises really was a clueless fool who needed to get out a little more. What makes a business big it its destruction of competitors by any means necessary – legal or not. Then after it has become big enough it can squeeze suppliers and the road to monopoly is wide open. After it has become a monopoly it can squeeze its customers, who will have no other place to go. I know theoretical frameworks have a role, but what a naïve idealistic clown that von Mises were – living in his theoretical lala-land and never going out there to observe if it actually fit with reality.

  21. rhkaplan says:

    Walter Cronkite wasn’t biased. Seriously??? Please do some research.
    Also, how many media options were available when Cronkite was broadcasting?
    Is it okay for the (bankrupt) Tribune company to own LA Times and Chicago Tribune?
    All the media is biased because people are biased. Fox is no different than ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN……With the internet, you can do your own research from many, many sources and develop your own conclusions.
    What about the largest( 2 million plus employees) and most corrupt corporation in the United States, the United States federal government? Shouldn’t we break it up? Too much power?

  22. Tim says:

    Fucks News.

  23. hawks5999 says:

    But if there was no government, who would hand out the monopolies?

  24. Frilton Miedman says:

    DeDude Says:
    December 7th, 2012 at 10:44 am
    @Mark E Hoffer;
    ” I guess Ludwig von Mises really was a clueless fool …”
    Fool indeed, Von Mises was an “Austrian school” philosopher, as with Ayn Rand and Friedrich Hayek.

    With Austrian economics, there is absolutely no acknowledgement that monopoly or concentrated power is a problem.

    This is a thing that pisses me off to no end, when the Media mingles Libertarians with Austrian ideology – Milton Friedman DID NOT endorse monopoly or concentrated power, he FULLY supported Democracy & freedom from tyranny – He promoted a free market to BOTH seller and buyer.

    Libertarians ARE NOT Austrians, the Koch brothers DO NOT represent Libertarian ideals, they’re Austrian by any definition.

    Markhoff believes in an ideology that only works on paper.

  25. Frilton Miedman says:

    rhkaplan Says:
    December 7th, 2012 at 12:23 pm

    “…. Fox is no different than ABC, CBS, NBC, MSNBC, CNN…”

    Uh, yeah, FOX’s constant “reporting” on Obama’s “invalid” birth certificate, their relentless assertion that a government option should be called a “government takeover” after it’s ENTIRE on-air staff was told to reword it that way by Dave Luntz.

    You compare that to Water Cronkite?

    Not one other valid network comes close to this level of bias and blatant lies, Fox news is 24/7 political propaganda, Goebbels style, invoking fear and anger into it’s viewers.

    While MSNBC or Current may invoke opinion, they let you know it’s opinion – they don’t promote conspiracies as fact, they’d NEVER let their staff go as far as violating personal privacy & stealing personal information the way Murdoch will.

    they violated a kidnapped/murdered girls voice mail for a story, left the parents to wonder if she were still alive & deleting her messages.

    Fox is to real journalism, as the National Enquirer was to Time magazine.

    Your inability to see that says all that needs saying.

  26. DeDude says:

    @Frilton 5:42PM

    Agree. ABC, CBS, NBC, etc. will every now and then fuck up a story. But Fox “news”; fucks news – in a calculated and deliberate way.

  27. Frilton y De(Lusional)

    I guess you, both, missed..(from above)
    Ludwig von Mises..

    “Big business depends entirely on the patronage of those who buy its products: the biggest enterprises loses its power and its influence when it loses its customers.”

    Economic Policy p. 4 Big Business

    maybe, We’ll note the third one, ’tis Key, no?

    oddly(?), “expat” seems to understand the Point..with..

    “…Or they would stop watching Fox.

    Murdoch gives us what we want: drivel, propaganda, bullshit, and tits. Who could ask for anything more?…”

    maybe, you two should take a hint from “rhkaplan”, and “…With the internet, you can do your own research from many, many sources and develop your own conclusions…”

    this ‘Stuff’ is soo Old, it’s, even, on Wikipedia..



  28. Frilton Miedman says:

    Markhoff, simply repeating idiocy doesn’t mean it’s no longer idiocy, or as Goebbels once said “Repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth”.

    for the record, he was wrong & Lincoln was right, you can’t fool all the people all the time.

    Austrian economics, the belief in pure Social Darwinism without checks & balances is idiocy, the ideology of Hitler & Mussolini, regardless how many times you repeat it, it’s still propaganda.

    As Hitler once wrote – ” the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily,”

    Fox news, make ‘em angry and afraid, then inform them what to do about it – propaganda.

  29. Frilton,

    toward your point (one of them, anyway..)



    many ~Good Books have been crafted to, well, delineate the scene/its understanding, and..

    with.. http://books.google.com/books?id=9RaDAAAAMAAJ&q=Higgs+Crisis+and+Leviathan&dq=Higgs+Crisis+and+Leviathan&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UZLCUMXSH4mo0AHEiYGoDg&ved=0CDgQ6AEwAQ

    at least, one that illuminates the twisted Ends that it (Fear) is used to promulgate..

    “…Independent Institute, Apr 1, 2007 – 202 pages
    The history of the United States, from the 19th century to present day, is included in this examination of the very foundations of unwarranted government intrusiveness that illuminates the two essential elements that have led to the expansion of the state’s authority—the ideology that the government should serve as a savior whenever people face threats to their well-being and the public fear that follows the perception of a large-scale threat to peace or prosperity. When these two factors operate simultaneously, people demand that the government take protective measures on their behalf. Hence, in an outburst of opportunism, the growth of government accelerates during the crisis, at the expense of liberty. Dr. Higgs’s conclusion is undeniable: placing confidence in the government to function as savior or problem solver does not lead to the peace, prosperity, and safety that people crave. On the contrary, that misplaced confidence ultimately leads to tyranny and diminished security—in Benjamin Franklin’s words, “Neither liberty nor safety.”…” (from the second GOOG-Link)

    ‘This’ has been Known for Centuries..

    Quotation: “If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed.”


    “If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be.[1] If we are to guard against ignorance and remain free, it is the responsibility of every American to be informed.”

  30. bazzab says:

    Lets remove Fox, Limbaugh, GOP senators (Go Harry Reid with his proposed Senate changes!!) and the entire GOP majority in the House of Representatives … anything Republican.

    I think that’s what everyone on this thread wants, no?

    You have no use for people that disagree with you.

    Then watching the news will just be liking nodding in agreement with yourself while standing in front of a mirror.

  31. Beleck says:

    getting rid of Republican would BE a step in the right direction, though i’m not sure what that has to do with this thread. lol

    idiot America, in all its’ glory.

  32. Beleck says:

    oh you mean the part where the Republicans have sold out America to the highest Bidder? well Democrats to that too. But getting rid of the Republicans would definitely be the a way to return to ” Real news”. lol

    see, there is some reasoning for getting Republicans, i mean, if you want NEWS! lol. at least we would have people who could do MATH, too! imagine that! people who can add and subtract and not tell outrageous lies. But i won’t hold my breath waiting for that day. i’ll just watch Faux News to see what the “latest” lie is. Goebbels style, Corporated approved, and idiot certified.

    to think my taxes pay for these “Corporations” to spread their “stuff” over the public airwaves. now that is a good enough reason to do away with Government approved anything. I”m a Tea partier now.

  33. Frilton Miedman says:

    bazzab Says:
    December 7th, 2012 at 10:03 pm
    ” Lets remove Fox, Limbaugh, GOP senators (Go Harry Reid with his proposed Senate changes!!) and the entire GOP majority in the House of Representatives … anything Republican.

    I think that’s what everyone on this thread wants, no? ”


    The issue is when those views are imposed as journalistic fact, fully knowing they’re lies, just as Goebbels once did.

    As for removing officers of the United states for colluding to legislate at the behest of wealthy “campaign contributors” – No, that’s not the idea presented solely by people here.

    It’s in the U.S. Constitution –

    “… all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.”

  34. Expat says:

    The Democrats are not worse than Republicans but they are no better. Every elected official in America should be removed from office, waterboarded until they reveal all the bullshit, sent to Jordan for further enhanced interrogation until we find out all the rotten truth, and then sent to work in Foxconn factories.

    Once we have gotten rid of the scum, we have to start afresh. Term limits of two terms maximum for any elected office (and not just consecutive terms). No possibility to serve in Senate after two terms in the house and vice versa. No private meetings allowed with any lobbyist; all meetings with any representative of any interest group must be recorded. Any felony committed while holding a state or federal office should be a capital crime.

    And a frickin’ pony for Christmas.

  35. Frilton,

    care to see some of..

    “…This conclusion points to another key theme of Friedman’s work: scepticism about the role of the state in resolving economic problems.

    But Friedman was not just an academic. He played a key role in popularising his ideas in newspapers and television programmes. For instance, his Free to Choose documentary series was broadcast by the BBC in 1980. Many others also promoted his ideas in the free-market upsurge of the time.

    Yet although Friedman is often associated with the Conservative party under Margaret Thatcher, it was Labour that first started to implement his ideas. As Samuel Brittan, a veteran Financial Times columnist, has pointed out, it was James Callaghan, then prime minister, who argued in 1976 that governments could not spend their way into full employment.

    In practice this meant pursuing cuts in public spending, along with pay restraint, to deal with what was then called “stagflation” – an ugly combination of stagnation and high inflation.

    Where Labour led the Conservatives followed with fervour. What became known as “Thatcherism” involved attacks on public-sector workers and trade unions. In the process the idea that “There is No Alternative” to the market – dubbed “Tina” – was popularised. Socialism and Keynesianism were both discredited in the process…”

    on ‘both sides of the Pond’, the repudiation of the ‘Keynesian Stadt’ was initiated by ‘the Left’–before Thatcher and/or Reagan..

    you know, *important, for those that Believe that there is Any operative Difference–between the ‘Two’ (‘Left’/’Right’)..

    maybe, one of these Daze, We’ll get to ‘See’ that it Is, rather, about “Right” and “Wrong”, instead..

  36. Strasser says:


    Haven’t been here for awhile, Barry, and am quite taken aback by your stance_ in fact I’m nearly speechless.

    Now, since the AP and Reuters own nearly ALL newspapers and TV and they all speak in ONE voice universally _except for a ‘little’ diversity from folks like Fox (and we don’t watch them either)_ the propaganda machine would have free reign for their ‘von vorld oder’.

    People know what’s going on and is clearly reflected in the decline of newspaper and tv viewership. And bazzab, you have it right.

  37. Frilton Miedman says:

    Strasser Says:
    December 8th, 2012 at 11:15 am
    “… except for a ‘little’ diversity from folks like Fox..”

    A “little”?

    Fox owns nearly 60% of the news viewership in America, and Murdoch is continually expanding his stake, owning an increasing percentage of business tabloids & websites.

    To hold such A massive stake in public information, it’s fair to explore motive.

    Coaching their entire on-air staff to re-word “public option” to “government takeover”, talk of “death panels” while ignoring the fact they already exist in the private sector, constantly raising attention to the presidents birth certificate, unending partisan misinformation.

    Fox scares the shit out of it’s viewers with terms like “Socialism” or “death panels” to attain a goal, not to report legitimate “fair and unbiased” news.

    Maybe you’re unfamiliar with Joseph Goebbels, that’s exactly what he did….he too injected a “little diversity”.

  38. Strasser says:

    Frilton Miedman Says:
    “Fox news, make ‘em angry and afraid, then inform them what to do about it – propaganda.”

    lol… I think you got your stations mixed up. Isn’t that what MSNBC does? insight hatred and racial divide

  39. Frilton Miedman says:


    It took decades for followers of Goebbels to accept he was wrong, that Fascism was as evil as Communism, perhaps worse.

    I fully expect the same again, it’ll take some time for the acceptance to kick in.

  40. Francois says:

    “it was James Callaghan, then prime minister, who argued in 1976 that governments could not spend their way into full employment.”


    I got some questions about that:

    1) How is money created in a monetary system w/o a physical standard of value?
    2) Does a cash register discriminates between a 100$ bill coming from the public sector and one from the private sector?
    3) Why are the interest rates on sovereign debt of Japan, Australia, USA, Canada are so low right now?
    4) Why are the interest rates on sovereign debt of the EU countries so all over the map now?
    5) I am Apple. I need 1 billion to build a new plant in CA. Will the loan officer at the bank ask me to wait while he/she check their vault see if they got the dinero available?

    The answers to these questions only goes to show that Callaghan didn’t have the first clue about what a monetary system without a gold standard means.

    Truth be told, this abysmal state of ignorance still rule the day in 2012.

    Bottom Line: We CAN (and should) spend our way toward full employment. It’s not the work that is lacking. It is our vestigial preconceptions about money that are the biggest problem.

  41. DuchessGateau says:

    Why the US media ignored Murdoch’s brazen bid to hijack the presidency, by Carl Bernstein