So, all the villagers still have their knickers in a wad over the White House making the apparently shocking charge that Fox News is not actually an unbiased news source. And the New York Times supposedly tries to get to the bottom of the feud:
...
I suppose the White House could have sat back and allowed the Republican propaganda machine to literally set the news agenda based on the lunatic ravings of Glenn Beck and Andrew Breitbart, but it wouldn't have been very smart. There is an awful lot at stake,after all.
And I would like to know why everyone thinks it's normal that Roger Ailes is having so many high level "negotiations" with his competitors in the news business and ideological rivals in the government. Who the hell is he and why should people have to negotiate with him?...
Am I the only one who thought that the NY Times assigning a reporter to follow what Fox and the talk radio lunatics are saying simply because they "missed" the ACORN story was just a bit weird? The videos were entertaining and all, but the story was dripping with racial overtones and the substance simply wasn't all that important. And yet the paper of record actually went to the trouble of issuing a mea culpa for missing it and promised to do better in the future.
If I were the White House I'd be very, very concerned about that too. Rupert and Roger are making a move to dominate the media agenda and they aren't afraid to use muscle to do it. They are enemies, there's simply no doubt about it.
Roger Ailes is a Republican political operative, fergawdsake, who also happens to be a television genius and Rupert Murdoch is a conservative billionaire who seeks to dominate the media of the entire planet. If you don't take them seriously, you are a fool --- and all the Democrats and the political establishment had better wake up to what they are dealing with.
http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/2009/10/respecting-bing-by-digby-so-all.html