The Rethuglican Resurgence: Fox News Audience Knows Less

Murdoch also served on the board of directors of the libertarian Cato Institute backed by funds from the Billionaire Koch Brothers

Watching Fox News is detrimental to your Intelligence.

Misleading and False Information

World Public Opinion, a project managed by the Program on International Policy Attitudes at the University of Maryland, conducted a survey of American voters that shows that Fox News viewers are significantly more misinformed than consumers of news from other sources. Whats more, the study shows that greater exposure to Fox News increases misinformation.

Voters Say Election Full of Misleading and False Information

December 9, 2010
Poll Also Finds Voters Were Misinformed on Key Issues
Full report(PDF)
Questionnaire with Findings, Methodology (PDF)
So the more you watch, the less you know. Or to be precise, the more you think you know that is actually false. This study corroborates a previous PIPA study that focused on the Iraq war with similar results. And there was an NBC/Wall Street Journal poll that demonstrated the break with reality on the part of Fox viewers with regard to health care. The body of evidence that Fox News is nothing but a propaganda machine dedicated to lies is growing by the day.
In eight of the nine questions below, Fox News placed first in the percentage of those who were misinformed (they placed second in the question on TARP). Thats a pretty high batting average for journalistic fraud. Here is a list of what Fox News viewers believe that just aint so:
91 percent believe the stimulus legislation lost jobs
72 percent believe the health reform law will increase the deficit
72 percent believe the economy is getting worse
60 percent believe climate change is not occurring
49 percent believe income taxes have gone up
63 percent believe the stimulus legislation did not include any tax cuts
56 percent believe Obama initiated the GM/Chrysler bailout
38 percent believe that most Republicans opposed TARP
63 percent believe Obama was not born in the U.S. (or that it is unclear)
The conclusion is inescapable. Fox News is deliberately misinforming its viewers and it is doing so for a reason. Every issue above is one in which the Republican Party had a vested interest. The GOP benefited from the ignorance that Fox News helped to proliferate. The results were apparent in the election last month as voters based their decisions on demonstrably false information fed to them by Fox News.
Keith Rupert Murdoch, born 11 March 1931 is an Australian-born American media magnate and the founder, Chairman, and CEO of News Corporation.
Beginning with one newspaper in Adelaide, Murdoch acquired and started other publications in his native Australia before expanding News Corp. into the United Kingdom, United States and Asian media markets. Although it was in Australia in the late 1950s that he first dabbled in television, he later sold these assets, and News Corp.’s Australian current media interests (still mainly in print) are restricted by cross-media ownership rules. Murdoch’s first permanent foray into TV was in the USA, where he created Fox Broadcasting Company in 1986. In the 2000s, he became a leading investor in satellite television, the film industry and the Internet, and purchased a leading American newspaper, The Wall Street Journal.
Expansion in Asia
In 1993, Murdoch acquired Star TV, a Hong Kong company founded by Richard Li for $1 billion (Souchou, 2000:28), and subsequently set up offices for it throughout Asia. It is one of the biggest satellite TV networks in Asia. However, the deal did not work out as Murdoch had planned, because the Chinese government placed restrictions on it that prevented it from reaching most of China. It was around this time that Murdoch met his third wife Wendi Deng.

Acquiring American Citizenship

In 1985 Murdoch became a United States citizen to satisfy legislation that only United States citizens could own American television stations. This also resulted in Murdoch losing his Australian citizenship.
Murdoch’s publications generally have conservative leanings, in comparison with other national newspapers.
McNight (2010) identifies four characteristics of his media operations: free market ideology; unified positions on matters of public policy; global editorial meetings; and opposition to liberal media bias.
In 2010 News Corporation gave $1M to the Republican Governors Association and $1M to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which is largely working to elect Republicans this year. This drew condemnations from Democrats and non-partisan watchdog groups, who claimed that it represented a conflict of interest for the owner of a major publishing empire to contribute directly to political campaigns in this way. A spokesman for the Wall Street Journal would not comment.
Murdoch also served on the board of directors of the libertarian Cato Institute backed by funds from the Billionaire Koch Brothers
The Rethuglican Resurgence:
How Koch Brothers and Murdock money secretly controls American Politics, Politicians, and the citizens

USA protects Freedom of Speech
which also includes Freedom To Lie
Somehow this doesn’t break any laws
Except for 1 of the 10 Commandments!
if you are concerned with “family values”

Candidates have a legal right to lie to voters just about as much as they want.
That comes as a shock to many.
Consumers have been protected for decades from false ads for commercial products.
But the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution says,
“Congress shall make no law … abridging the freedom of speech,” and that applies to candidates for office especially.
Shouldn’t there be “truth-in-advertising” laws to protect voters, too?

England on the other hand . . .
British judges order rerun of parliamentary vote
By GREGORY KATZ, Associated Press Gregory Katz, Associated Press – Fri Nov 5, 11:56 am ET
LONDON – A British court on Friday threw out the results of a parliamentary election after deciding that the victor had gone too far in distorting his opponent’s positions. Experts warned the ruling clears the way for judges to referee electoral contests ­ a potentially messy precedent. The two judges decided that the winner, Labour Party incumbent Phil Woolas, had violated election law in May by knowingly making false charges about his opponent in campaign literature.
Woolas accused Liberal Democrat opponent Elwyn Watkins of receiving support from Muslim militants who advocate violence. Watkins, who lost the May 6 contest by 103 votes, accused Woolas in court of trying to stir up ethnic and religious divisions.
The ruling, the first of its kind for at least 99 years, costs Woolas, a former immigration minister, his seat in parliament, since the judges ruled he cannot sit in the House of Commons for the next three years. He was suspended from the Labour Party Friday afternoon. George Jones, a professor emeritus of government at the London School of Economics, said the decision may set a precedent by clearing the way for more judicial involvement in the electoral process. “I think judges should stay out of it,” he said. “We haven’t had this happen since the 19th century. I regard it as a dangerous intrusion by the judiciary into what is basically a political process.”
He said that in a typical election campaign numerous accusations are made by both sides. “The general effect will be to curb freedom of expression and candidates will be reluctant and take great care in what they say knowing they could be pounced on and face legal action,” he said.
Woolas announced an immediate appeal and said through his lawyer that the ruling marks a setback for freedom of speech. “It is vital to our democracy that those who make statements about the political character and conduct of election candidates are not deterred from speaking freely for fear that they may be found to have breached electoral laws,” lawyer Gerald Shamash said on Woolas’ behalf. “This decision will inevitably chill political speech.”
It was not immediately clear if a new election would be scheduled before the appeal is heard. Judges Nigel Teare and Griffith Williams ruled that Woolas had gone too far in attacking his opponents’ “personal character or conduct.” They also said he had known he was making a false accusation when he accused Watkins of breaking a promise to live within the parliamentary district.

A Tough Penalty for False Political Claims

November 5, 2010
A tough penalty meted out to a British politician for false campaign advertising:

LONDON – A British court on Friday threw out the results of a parliamentary election after deciding that the victor had gone too far in distorting his opponent’s positions.

The judges voided the May 6 re-election of Labour Party incumbent Phil Woolas, who had accused his opponent of getting support from Muslim militants favoring violence. The court said that violated British election law. British court on Nov. 5 ordered that he be removed from office and prohibited from serving in parliament for three years.
Why can U.S. politicians  make false or misleading claims without paying any penalty, or even a fine?
The short answer is that we have a First Amendment guaranteeing freedom of speech, while Britain does not.
2004 article ­ False Ads: There Oughta Be A Law! – Or Maybe Not.
In the United States, “Candidates have a legal right to lie to voters just about as much as they want.”

Misinformation / disinformation

Federal truth-in-advertising laws apply to ads for products, not political candidates. A few states have such laws, but they are generally ineffective.

Koch Brothers washington post – Google Search
1. The Fix – Who is “Americans for Prosperity”?

    “26 Aug 2010… billionaire David Koch, and his brother, Charles Koch. … Koch, the owner of the Koch Industries oil and manufacturing conglomerate, … check out the Post‘s brand spanking new chart detailing weekly expenditures.) … (The group’s 2010 summit will take place in Washington this weekend; …”

2. PostPartisan – Boehner is right about one thing on taxes

    ““And, yes, we need to acknowledge that what Washington sometimes calls ‘tax …”

3. Story Lab – Story pick: Kochtopus

    “A quick google search shows that the Koch brothers have contributed …”

4. A Citizens United conspiracy, complete with two Supremes – Jimmy

    “Is Ginni Thomas’ nonprofit funded by the Koch Brothers? … was for $500000 according to the Washington Post, a fairly rarified donor level. …”

5. Capital Rivals: Koch Brothers vs. George Soros – OpenSecrets Blog

6. ThinkProgress » MEMO: Health Insurance, Banking, Oil Industries

    “20 Oct 2010 … While the Koch brothers ­ each worth over $21.5 billion ­ have certainly underwritten much …. Charles Krauthammer, Media, Washington Post …”

7. The Koch Brothers and the Tea Parties « The Washington Independent

    “24 Aug 2010 … The Koch brothers, after helping to create Cato and Mercatus, … full post on The Washington Independent advertising Share and […] …”

8. A Look at Tea Party Sugar Daddies the Koch Brothers | Death and Taxes

9. David H. Koch – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    “The Washington Post has reported that both Koch and FreedomWorks deny that Koch has ever … “Koch Brothers Give More to Charity than to Right Wing Causes”. …”

10. Capital Rivals: Koch Brothers vs. George Soros

11. The billionaire Koch brothers ‘ war against Obama – Blogrunner

12. The Tea Party and the Koch brothers « Talking Stuff

    “30 Aug 2010 … The other two, the brothers David and Charles Koch, are even richer, …. The Study of Racialism · The Washington Post Writers Group …”

13. OldTulsan: The Cato Institute was founded by the Koch brothers , the

14. Democurmudgeon: The Koch Brothers? Like Rupert Murdock, these

    “21 Sep 2010 … The Koch brothers have contributed about $1 million, partly because they worry about damage to the bottom line … Washington Post Headlines …”

15. The Koch Brothers Profiled – The Daily Dish | By Andrew Sullivan

    “30 Aug 2010 … The piece on the Koch brothers is worth a look, and includes a lot of … But as best I can tell, the Koch brothers are legitimately upset by some aspects … Drudge Report · Washington Post · New York Times · The Onion …”

16. Who Are The Koch Brothers ? | The New Ledger

    “Print This Post. Tuesday, August 24th, 2010 | Share … Who Are The Koch Brothers? by Ben Domenech …. Texas Governor Rick Perry is Fed Up with Washington · Melissa Clouthier on the Republican Tsunami · LIVE Election Night Coverage …”

17. Enron, the Koch Brothers , and Grandma Millie’s Revenge | MyFDL

    “4 Sep 2010 … Oil billionaire brothers David and Charles Koch have donated over a …. a profit center as told in an exposé in the Washington Post. …”

18. The Koch Brothers, the 2010 election, and the return of the John

    “29 Aug 2010 … For decades, the Koch brothers, billionaire heirs of one of the largest privately … called “ground zero for deregulation policy in Washington. …. UPDATE: The Kochs fight back, posting this on their company website: …”

19. Forbes Faces: The Koch Brothers

20. Capital Rivals: Koch Brothers vs. George Soros

    “Capital Rivals: Koch Brothers vs. George Soros. Koch vs Soros 527 Group Donations … He is a Washington Post columnist and a senior fellow at the Brookings …”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *