NewsHounds
We watch Fox so you don't have to!
  • Home
  • About
  • Archives
  • Forum
  • Blogroll
  • Donate
  • Shop
  • Contact
  • Privacy Policy
Home →

Rupert Murdoch's Not-So-Plausible Defense Of NY Post Boston Bomb Coverage

Posted by Ellen -7859.80pc on April 20, 2013 · Flag

News Corporation chief Rupert Murdoch took to the Twitter-sphere today to tweet out a dubious defense of his New York Post's false identification of the Boston bombing suspects. After receiving criticism for having published a photo of a high school track runner as the bomb suspect, Murdoch claimed that the information had come from the FBI. OK, fine. But then Murdoch made the ridiculous claim that once the FBI "changed direction," the pics were "instantly withdrawn." But as many of the retweeters pointed out, there's no way to "instantly withdraw" thousands of papers in print. (H/T Eric J.)

From Mediaite:

News Corp. headRupert Murdoch delivered a seriously belated defense of his New York Post‘s controversial Boston Marathon bombings coverage early Saturday morning, saying succinctly on Twitter, “All NYPost pics were those distributed by FBI. And instantly withdrawn when FBI changed directions.”

...No one expected the New York Post to offer a sincere and heartfelt apology, but Murdoch’s halfhearted defense was clearly unsatisfying, so really, why did he bother?

 

Follow @NewsHounds

Follow @NewsHoundEllen

All NYPost pics were those distributed by FBI.And instantly withdrawn when FBI changed directions.

— Rupert Murdoch(@rupertmurdoch) April 20, 2013

Do you like this post?
Tweet

Showing 14 reactions



    Review the site rules
Aria Prescott commented 2013-04-22 04:47:09 -0400 · Flag
Many people on the hard right are leading a jihad to try getting people to “stop victimizing Fox News and attack CNN.”

Newsflash for those people… no one was happy with CNN, either. But as much as CNN phucked up, they have a legacy on this story past “We hope it’s a Muslim, so we can get a pass on calling for an Inquisition!”

Fox News will always be the top name in pissing people off. Nothing will rob them of that when they’re coming in third.
Bemused commented 2013-04-22 03:11:51 -0400 · Flag
@al in la: You robbed me of my line!

I think the FBI and other authorities had to lay down the riot act to the journalists, too many of whom were spewing out speculation in hope of getting the scoop. They had become a danger to themselves and – what’s worse – to the public.

Nothing else can explain CNN’s complete turnaround from four days of frantic rumor-mongering to refreshingly responsable journalism during the man hunt.

I’m actually unhappy, though, because that tells me they have the capacity but not the will to be credible journalists.
mj - the same one commented 2013-04-21 23:38:42 -0400 · Flag
@ Visitor 55: I keep forgetting — reading comprehension, like basic math, is not the wingnut’s strong suit . . .

.
mj - the same one commented 2013-04-21 19:39:11 -0400 · Flag
Earth to Stick Stones:

But as many of the retweeters pointed out, there’s no way to “instantly withdraw” thousands of papers in print.

.
Antoinette commented 2013-04-21 18:39:43 -0400 · Flag
When you dealing with the likes of Ruthless Rupy and his boy James, you have to think twice about their credibility. Never forget the hacking scandal in the U.K.
Michael McDaniel commented 2013-04-21 17:05:20 -0400 · Flag
S&S, Did the FBI tell them this is him?
Ellen followed this page 2013-04-21 14:05:57 -0400
Kent Brockman commented 2013-04-21 07:40:23 -0400 · Flag
Rupert SEZ
I bribe politicians, police and hack phones and so far the Pope hasn’t slapped my wrist. What’s the problem?
Bemused commented 2013-04-21 07:21:08 -0400 · Flag
@david: While anybody capable of a modicum of critical thinking cannot but realise that Fox is a total, unmitigated joke, people who watch CNN may be under the illusion that this is the same channel that existed during the first Iraq war.

It ain’t.

Although I have to admit that their reporting during the manhunt in Boston was very good. I guess the FBI read them the riot act after they’d jumped the gun earlier.

My point: when they want to, they can be very very good. I doubt that the same can be said of FoxNews.
david pavlak commented 2013-04-21 07:12:50 -0400 · Flag
As often as I criticize Fox “news” for their intentional misinformation, such as identifying republicans caught in sex scandals as democrats, publishing charts of unemployment rates of past presidents while leaving out Ronald Reagan’s (which was higher than Obama’s), substituting photos while claiming they are from something they are not, manufacturing controversies where none exist, using the split screen to associate demonstrations and falling stock markets with democrats, editing video, or not even to bother showing video (such as Obama’s address to Congress about health care), it should be noted that CNN has taken a lot of much deserved heat this past week as well.

A few month’s ago, Rupert Murdoch gave a compliment to CNN president Jeff Zucker by saying that CNN has ‘sharpened up in the last couple of months’. Given the fact that CNN recently ran a chyron that read: ‘War On Religion’, Wolf Blitzer’s obsessive use of words “Ground Zero Mosque” and “Fiscal Cliff” , then got rid of Soledad O’Brien and then added on a new evening show with Erin Burnett, who seems to have an unhealthy fascination with Ted Nugent by having him on her show not once, but twice, one could see how Murdoch would approve of such things, as they are taken right out of Roger Ailes’ playbook of shoddy journalism.

There was a study done recently published by Psychology Today that shows that conservatives relied more on a part of the brain that is thought to be associated with the body’s fear-based fight-or-flight system, while liberals use the part of the brain that is associated with self-awareness. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/caveman-politics/201302/why-politics-makes-your-head-hurt
This would explain conservatives preference to watching Fox (besides the obvious reason of being told what they WANT to hear), but it may also explain how CNN is going to go about ways of increasing their audience share: by scaring people….

Cable news in this country is disgraceful. The 24 hour news cycle needs to be filled with something other than endless ads for Viagra and Vagisil. And most of it is shit…..
doors17 commented 2013-04-20 22:30:53 -0400 · Flag
He doesn’t care about ethics, intergrity or the truth.

It’s all about making money and getting the ratings for higher advertising revenue. It’s only the bottom line. If it help sell more newspapers that day, then that’s want matters to him. Is any one really surprised by this?
Aria Prescott commented 2013-04-20 19:56:22 -0400 · Flag
I would ask how stupid Murdoch thinks we are… but his record of defending his outlets racism and ethics scandals not only answers that…

But it also answers the question of which people really are that stupid, when they left evidence that they’ll believe anything he says. (Hint: It rhymes is Donny Jollar, BewsNusters, and Nox Fation.)
truman commented 2013-04-20 19:03:45 -0400 · Flag
If only Wrinkled Rupert’s father had practiced withdrawal that fateful night 80 years ago, we would not be listening to this ridiculous excuse.
NewsHounds posted about Rupert Murdoch's Not-So-Plausible Defense Of NY Post Boston Bomb Coverage on NewsHounds' Facebook page 2013-04-20 18:05:08 -0400
Why did he bother?








or sign in with Facebook or email.
Follow @NewsHounds on Twitter
Subscribe with RSS


We’ve updated our Privacy Policy
Sign in with Facebook, Twitter or email.
Created with NationBuilder