MURDOCH BACKS LIKELY WINNER SHOCK!!!
Is anyone actually surprised that Murdoch backed Obama? The man knows to back a likely winner. He did it over here with Major, Blair and Boris. He did it in Australia with Howard, backing him then backing away in 2007. He did it in the USA with Bush. Murdoch is a wily opportunist with a good nose for political developments familiar with his various audiences. It’s how he sells his papers.
So, naturally, Murdoch had the New York Post back Obama. He backs winners, he thinks Obama will win, especially with his backing, and so backs him. Perhaps the most telling part there is that Murdoch (presumably) thinks Obama will win - and how rarely Murdoch miscalls an election.
What’ll be interesting is what Fox does now. Murdoch’s rancid TV-tabloid sits even further to the right than the New York Post. It broadcasts to Republicans, and so it backs them. But, unusually, Murdoch’s preference this year genuinely seems to be for Obama (should this worry us?) - the “Yeah” certainly gave that impression.
But that’s probably because Murdoch thinks Obama will win the presidential election. The actual rhetoric must appall Murdoch, surely - he’s the very establishment Obama rails against. If that’s the case, then Fox News probably won’t change line at all. It’d only lose viewers for “going soft” on a Democrat, and could only keep them by endorsing McCain.
It’s if Obama’s victory looks borderline - or, for some inexplicable reason, Murdoch genuinely supports him (at which juncture, the sky will fall) - that change might come. Not in Fox’s overt line, which will remain the same, but it’s slant. The conservatism will stay, the Republicanism will stay - but will the station’s infamous bias relax for a period? Most of the damage Fox News does isn’t through its deranged rantings, but its twisted presentation of political events. Kerry might have stood up better in 2004 if it weren’t for coverage of the swiftboaters by Fox, for example. If that were to relax, just for a while, if Fox refrained from portraying Obama as a crypto-Marxist-limp-wristed-elitist-liberal-etc, then he’d benefit. At the very least, the shit that the GOP turd-monkeys throw come Summer and Autumn won’t fly as far without the overtly biased coverage of Fox News.
And - if Murdoch wants Obama to win, which presumably he does given how early on he’s had the Post call for him and how little he appreciates looking a fool, and if that looks shaky - that might just happen. Which would be interesting…
NOTE: Particularly avid readers (hah…) may have noted that, earlier, another version of this article appeared. It then disappeared, as it was rubbish. In a moment of madness, I for some reason wrote that Murdoch owned the Washington Post - which, of course, he doesn’t. Very odd of me. And a real shame, as it was nicely written daub too…
Another bit from Alastair Campbell’s Diaries springs to mind. Kinnock is ranting about the Murdoch love-in, and says words to the effect of
“You don’t know what it’s like to have you head inside a fucking lightbulb!”