<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<b>Amid the Murdoch scandal, there’s an acrid smell of business as
usual<br>
</b>John Pilger<br>
Published 21 July 2011<br>
<br>
The Fleet Street hacks and men from Westminster are now scrabbling
to rewrite the history of the phone-hacking fiasco. The pact between
press and parliament remains the same.<br>
<br>
In Scoop, Evelyn Waugh's brilliant satire on the press, there is the
moment when Lord Copper, owner of the Daily Beast, meets his new
special war correspondent, William Boot, in truth an authority on
wild flowers and birdsong. A confused Boot is ushered into his
lordship's presence by Mr Salter, the Beast's foreign editor.<br>
<br>
“Is Mr Boot all set for his trip?"<br>
<br>
“Up to a point, Lord Copper."<br>
<br>
Copper briefs Boot as follows: "A few sharp victories, some
conspicuous acts of personal bravery on the Patriot side and a
colourful entry into the capital. That is the Beast policy for the
war . . . We shall expect the first victory about the middle of
July."<br>
<br>
Rupert Murdoch is a 21st-century Lord Copper. The amusing gentility
is missing; the absurdity of his power is the same. The Daily Beast
wanted victories; it got them. The Sun wanted dead Argies; gotcha!
Of the bloodbath in Iraq, Murdoch said: "There is going to be
collateral damage, and if you really want to be brutal about it,
better we get it done now . . ." The Times, the Sunday Times, Fox
got it done.<br>
<br>
<b>Corporate monoculture<br>
</b>Long before it was possible to hack phones, Murdoch was waging a
war on journalism, truth, humanity, and succeeded because he knew
how to exploit a system that welcomed his devotion to the "free
market". He may be more extreme in his methods, but he is no
different in kind from many of those now lining up to condemn him
who have been his beneficiaries, mimics, collaborators, apologists.<br>
<br>
As Gordon Brown turns on his former master, accusing him of running
a "criminal-media nexus", watch the palpable discomfort in the new
parliamentary-media consensus. "We must not be backward-looking,"
said a Labour MP. Those parliamentarians caught two years ago with
both hands in the Westminster till, who did nothing to stop the
killing of hundreds of thousands of people in Iraq, and stood and
cheered the war criminal responsible, are now "united" behind the
"calm" figure of Ed Miliband. There is an acrid smell of business as
usual.<br>
<br>
Certainly, there is no "revolution", as reported in the Guardian,
which compared the fall of Murdoch with that of the tyrant Nicolae
Ceausescu in Romania in 1989. The overexcitement is understandable;
Nick Davies's scoop is a great one. Yet the truth is, Britain's
system of elite monopoly control of the media rests not on News
International alone, but on the Mail and the Guardian and the BBC,
perhaps the most influential of all. All share a corporate
monoculture that sets the agenda of the "news", defines acceptable
politics by maintaining the fiction of distinctive parties,
normalises unpopular wars and guards the limits of "free speech".
This will be strengthened by the illusion that a "bad apple" has
been "rooted out".<br>
<br>
When the Financial Times complained last September that the BSkyB
takeover would give Murdoch dominance in Britain, the media
commentator Roy Greenslade came to his rescue. "Surely," he wrote,
"Britain's leading business newspaper should be applauding an
entrepreneur who has achieved so much from unpromising beginnings?"
Murdoch's political control was a myth spread by "naive
commentators". Noting his own "idealism" about journalism,
Greenslade made no mention of his history on the Sun, or as Robert
Maxwell's Daily Mirror editor responsible for the shameful smear
that the miners' leader Arthur Scargill was corrupt. (To his credit,
he apologised in 2002.)<br>
<br>
Greenslade is now a professor of journalism at City University,
London. In his Guardian blog of 17 July, he caught the breeze and
proposed that Murdoch explain "the climate you created". How many of
the political and media chorus now calling for Murdoch's head
remained silent over the years as his papers repeatedly attacked the
most vulnerable in society? Impoverished single mothers have been a
favourite target of tax-avoiding News International. Who in the
so-called media village demanded the sacking of Kelvin MacKenzie as
Sun editor following his attacks on the dead and dying in the
Hillsborough stadium tragedy of 1989?<br>
<b><br>
The kowtowing class</b><br>
This was an episode as debased as the hacking of Milly Dowler's
phone, yet MacKenzie is frequently feted on the BBC and in the
liberal press as a "witty" tabloid genius who "understands the
ordinary punter". Such vicarious middle-class flirtation with
Wapping-life is matched by admiration for the successful Murdoch
"marketing model".<br>
<br>
In Andrew Neil's 470-page book Full Disclosure, the former editor of
Murdoch's Sunday Times devotes fewer than 30 words to the scurrilous
and destructive smear campaign that he and his Wapping colleagues
conducted against the broadcasters who made the 1988 Thames
Television programme Death on the Rock. This landmark, fully
vindicated investigation lifted the veil on the British secret state
and exposed its ruthlessness under Margaret Thatcher, a confidante
of Murdoch's. Thereafter, Thames Television was doomed. Yet Neil has
his own BBC programme and his views are sought after across the
liberal media.<br>
<br>
The Guardian of 13 July editorialised about "the kowtowing of the
political class to the Murdochs". This is all too true. Kowtowing is
an ancient ritual, often performed by those whose pacts with power
may not be immediately obvious, but are no less sulphuric. Tony
Blair, soaked in the blood of an entire society, was once regarded
almost mystically at the Guardian and Observer as the prime minister
who, wrote Hugo Young, "wants to create a world none of us have
known [where] the mind might range in search of a better Britain . .
." He was in perfect harmony with the chorus over at Wapping. "Mr
Blair," said the Sun, "has vision, he has purpose and he speaks our
language on morality and family life." Plus ça change.<br>
<br>
On 7/21/11 8:48 AM, C. G. Estabrook wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4E282E41.8040007@illinois.edu" type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html;
charset=ISO-8859-1">
[Murdoch is a symptom, not the disease - which is chronic, as
Louis Proyect notes here.]<br>
<br>
<b> Why Cenk Uygur left MSNBC after refusing to "tone it down"<br>
</b><br>
I was partial to Cenk not just because he is a Turk. He was also <br>
one of the sharpest critics of the DP on MSNBC despite being--in <br>
the final analysis--just another DP spokesperson.<br>
<br>
For the last week or so, Al Sharpton has been hosting his 6pm <br>
show. At first I thought Cenk was on vacation but it turns out <br>
that he was too critical of Obama and the other rightwing assholes
<br>
in the DP. All he wanted was the DP to be more liberal. Fat chance
<br>
of that.<br>
<br>
For those not familiar with American politics, Sharpton is an <br>
African-American one-time FBI informant and "radical" street <br>
demonstration organizer in NYC. He has "matured" into a total DP <br>
hack who can be called upon to spin Obama's latest rightwing <br>
offensive against workers and the Black community.<br>
<br>
Here's Cenk's take on what happened:<br>
<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrKKkGl3TnY&feature=player_embedded">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrKKkGl3TnY&feature=player_embedded</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">This body part will be downloaded on demand.</pre>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>