Rupert Murdoch vs Dixie Chicks
puremagic
Posts: 1,907
Honestly, why was it ok to for Murdoch to go before Japanese reporters and minimize the death of American soldiers and receive a "no harm, no foul card"?
----
Murdoch says US death toll in Iraq 'minute'
November 8, 2006
Media mogul Rupert Murdoch says he has no regrets about supporting the US-led invasion of Iraq and argues the US death toll in the conflict is “minute” from a historical perspective.
The News Corporation chief was speaking on the eve of US mid-term elections where President George W Bush’s Republican Party is tipped to lose seats in part due to a backlash over the war.
“The death toll, certainly of Americans there, by the terms of any previous war are quite minute,” Mr. Murdoch told reporters at a conference in Tokyo.
He called their deaths 'minute' [as a time-saver] meaning
1. Exceptionally small; tiny.
2. Beneath notice; insignificant.
Here he is, in a foreign country, minimizing the death of American troops as small and insignificant, like a damn apologetic symbolic offering compared to Japan's losses.
No coverage? No outrage? No anti-American bashing? I guess the words a singing group are more important, more powerful and more deserving of media attention than the comments of the owner of Fox News.
----
Murdoch says US death toll in Iraq 'minute'
November 8, 2006
Media mogul Rupert Murdoch says he has no regrets about supporting the US-led invasion of Iraq and argues the US death toll in the conflict is “minute” from a historical perspective.
The News Corporation chief was speaking on the eve of US mid-term elections where President George W Bush’s Republican Party is tipped to lose seats in part due to a backlash over the war.
“The death toll, certainly of Americans there, by the terms of any previous war are quite minute,” Mr. Murdoch told reporters at a conference in Tokyo.
He called their deaths 'minute' [as a time-saver] meaning
1. Exceptionally small; tiny.
2. Beneath notice; insignificant.
Here he is, in a foreign country, minimizing the death of American troops as small and insignificant, like a damn apologetic symbolic offering compared to Japan's losses.
No coverage? No outrage? No anti-American bashing? I guess the words a singing group are more important, more powerful and more deserving of media attention than the comments of the owner of Fox News.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
Would you have even noticed if he would have called the President an idiot? Would you have cared?
Is he not allowed the same free speech the Dixie Chicks are?
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
I don't believe the Dixie Chicks ever called the lives of our soldiers "minute". don't believe their families would feel too good about that.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
"The death toll, certainly of Americans there, by the terms of any previous war are quite minute,”
Does that say the death of American soldiers is meaningless? No... Let's review...
"The death toll, certainly of Americans there, by the terms of any previous war are quite minute,”
The death toll is minute compared to any previous war. Check.
While we're playing this game for dumbasses...
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/30/104457.shtml
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
You seem to forget that Bush is a "politician" and can be called an idiot whenever, wherever, and by whomever, that's the nature of the political beast.
Instead of the old answer a question with a question? Try addressing the post as it relates to the whole "support the troop" matter.
Give me a second and I'll show you Mudoch view on freedom of speech.
I already have. Your interpretive skills are meager. The topic of your original post isn't even relative to "supporting the troops." That's what you want to make it out to be. Who gives a shit what the Dixie Chicks or Murdoch say, besides you?
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
2.Dixie Chicks, who have no political power or ambience, indirectly insulted somebody who, at best, is more unpopular globally than popular
3.Murdoch, who has the power to influence movements and voters, denied something very obvious was happening
..
In a nutshell, people were primarily pissed off with DC because in the eyes of their fans, they have no right to talk about politics, even in a foeign country where people agreed with what they were saying. Murdoch's words will go unnoticed and unremanded because he is seen by the readers of his (frankly, shite) publications as somebody who knows what he is talking about, and, by still supporting the motions of the administration, he has done nothing to anger these people.
It's all about consumer ideology. Those on either side of the debate will allow themselves to be enraged by one and turn a blind eye to the other.
See, to me, this post is more informative than someone crying because some people don't like what the Dixie Chicks said. I'm sure just as many, if not more, hate Murdoch.
Who gives a dilly shit?
"What I lack in decorum, I make up for with an absence of tact."
Camden 5-28-06
Washington, D.C. 6-22-08
The Power of Corporate Media at work.
Play the word game anyway you want. The fact is that you would not go to your local gathering hole and say what Murdoch said. Hell, you probably wouldn't say the same thing in front of friends or family. So don't try your little dumbass games with me, ok. If any Democratic or someone you thought was liberal had said the same thing, it would have been made into a movie of the week, then turned into a commercial and repeated every 30 seconds by Fox News telecaster readers.
At least stand by your damn convictions.
from my window to yours
The US has lost approximately 3,100 soldiers since Iraq started which is:
12.4% of the 25,000 soldiers who died during the American Revolution
15.5% of the 20,000 soldiers who died during the war of 1812
.5% of the 625,000 soldiers who died during the Civil War
2.7% of the 116,516 soldiers who died during WWI
.8% of the 405,399 soldiers who died during WW2
9.2% of the 33,746 soldiers who died during the Korean War
6.5% of the 47,355 soldiers who died during the Vietnam War
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_casualties_of_war
Now I really disagree with making that statement in public like Murdoch did and especially the phrasing he used but you can see why he has that perspective.
- 8/28/98
- 9/2/00
- 4/28/03, 5/3/03, 7/3/03, 7/5/03, 7/6/03, 7/9/03, 7/11/03, 7/12/03, 7/14/03
- 9/28/04, 9/29/04, 10/1/04, 10/2/04
- 9/11/05, 9/12/05, 9/13/05, 9/30/05, 10/1/05, 10/3/05
- 5/12/06, 5/13/06, 5/27/06, 5/28/06, 5/30/06, 6/1/06, 6/3/06, 6/23/06, 7/22/06, 7/23/06, 12/2/06, 12/9/06
- 8/2/07, 8/5/07
- 6/19/08, 6/20/08, 6/22/08, 6/24/08, 6/25/08, 6/27/08, 6/28/08, 6/30/08, 7/1/08
- 8/23/09, 8/24/09, 9/21/09, 9/22/09, 10/27/09, 10/28/09, 10/30/09, 10/31/09
- 5/15/10, 5/17/10, 5/18/10, 5/20/10, 5/21/10, 10/23/10, 10/24/10
- 9/11/11, 9/12/11
- 10/18/13, 10/21/13, 10/22/13, 11/30/13, 12/4/13
You can see this and I can see this. Yet, you're looking to "understand" the meaning and why Murdoch said what he said. Others aren't given that opportunity, they are immediately labelled and judged.
If one is to stand by their actions and convictions, then Murdoch should be judged accordingly.
That would surprise even me.
Bravo !! Well said !
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength
Murdoch is correct in the context of his statement but he should never say things like this.
Since we haven't had the same number of deaths as other wars/conflict does that mean the lives lost aren't important? This is what I take from Murdoch's comments. When, Rupert, should we begin to care about human life? 10,000 deaths? 50,000? Give us a number that will satisfy your quota to make it important you black-hearted bastard!:mad:
he didnt do anything wrong. Your looking farther into this than needs to be
He is only correct in context as it related to the numbers. Yet, we are not asking the families or the country to look at the numbers, are we. No! In fact, we shield the returning caskets from public view and do not release the details of the wounded.
We are asking the families and the country to continue to make sacrifice, so what is an acceptable number? At what number is the lost of a soldier's life not considered 'minute'.
There's nothing right about the statement.
what he said was true. compared to other wars; the death toll is small. compared to death tolls in big cities or even driving the streets of america; the death toll is small.
the dixie chicks upset their fans. and it was their fans that burned their CDs.
how can you compare the two? the news reported the incident because it's news. when john lennon said "it's sad that we are more popular than Christ" the media turned it around and misquoted him reporting him as saying "we are more popular than Christ". the media frenzy was unbelivable.
the man made an honest statement backed by historical facts. why should there be an uproar?
I didnt say there was anything right about the statement. I said it was correct in context. as did you.
the caskets are shielded out of respect of the families. the numbers are there for those who want to see them; but parading around caskets is simply morbid.
That statement was not meant as a reflection on your reply, sorry. It was me trying to understand any justification for Murdoch to make his original statement and I couldn't. I guess my fingers just automatically typed my thought.
wow, you really believe this garbage?
no buddy, this statement is sad.
mainstream media is fully controlled by the Bush administration.
You haven't head about the NASA scientist being threatened by the Bush administration that if he released his latest findings on global warming he'd be relieved of his position, eh?
nice another Fox news basher. its funny how people who dont even watch it assume its all lies.
on Sundays Fox has a show called "War Stories" I believe they are quite truthful on some of the horrors of war.
the Bush administration does NOT control the media.