Inside the Mind of Murdoch - News Corp’s Path To Domination
Unlike his competitors in the news business, Rupert Murdoch knows the importance of keeping customers happy, writes Steve Boriss.
Support Pajamas Media; Visit Our Advertisers
Rupert Murdoch and his News Corporation seem determined to completely reshape news as we know it. The Fox News channel now leads in cable news. The New York Post is now the largest city’s largest weekday paper. And now, their newly acquired Wall Street Journal is about to wrestle with the New York Times for control of the “national conversation.” His Fox Business Channel is taking on CNBC. Rupert Murdoch clearly has a vision for news domination, but what might it be?
Murdoch is now surveying the scene and can barely believe his luck. He is simply a businessman seeking to make a profit by focusing on the news business, across all ways that news is delivered. But strangely, this makes him unique.
Network TV news’ parent companies are mostly in the entertainment business. They did not originally launch news programs to make a profit, but to prove to the federal government that their licenses to broadcast profitable entertainment programming should be renewed based on responsible corporate citizenship. Newspapers think they are in the newspaper business, if they think they are in business at all. Decades without serious competition have allowed journalists to engage in the fantasy of being part of a powerful branch of government, and allowed their bosses, many of whom are heirs of founding families, to fancy themselves benevolent, enlightened royalty. They have been at liberty to disregard, if not disdain their readers’ interests, and increase profits by outsourcing to wire services news content that for competitive reasons might have been better kept in-house and proprietary.
Businessman Murdoch knows that success is about keeping customers happy — an obvious idea that is thoroughly rejected by the journalism dogma that pervades his competitors. This dogma insists that audiences are not customers at all, but “citizens” who must be provided with a pure stream of objective truths that only journalists know how to create. Moreover, this truth-flow is thought to be so precious and necessary to this country’s survival that journalists must be independent of pressures from anyone or anything — no pressures allowed from government, employers, business competition, corporate takeovers, advertisers, even the demands of their own readers with their questionable judgment and taste for sensationalism.
Unlike today’s journalists, Murdoch will respect his audiences’ tastes and seek to fulfill their needs. If he sees an opportunity, he will not hesitate to offer news that is sensational, titillating, or compatible with viewers’ worldviews. He will provide them with handsome men and strikingly beautiful women to look at. He will draw them in and make them feel good about being a part of a community, delivering news that makes them proud to be an American, a stockholder, or a conservative. He will not run news that is negative, cynical, and despairing, or that runs-down cherished institutions to which his audiences identify.
Murdoch knows that the decades-old supply chain through which we receive our news is about to snap, and he is replacing it with his own. This chain once began with stories originated by the NY Times, which passed to the TV networks and wire services, then to metro TV stations and newspapers, which served as “middlemen” to carry news the last 50 miles to our homes. But some day, the chain will begin with stories from the Wall Street Journal, which will travel over the Internet directly into people’s homes without ever leaving News Corp properties — Fox News for news, Fox Films for entertainment, FoxSports for sports, MySpace for news of family and friends, and your local Fox TV affiliate for hyperlocal news.
Your local Fox affiliate’s web site will be your portal to news as small as your neighborhood and as large as the world. It will replace your newspaper and the other local TV stations. Their reporters will penetrate your community institutions and their salespeople will find ad revenue in places that no one ever thought to look before, like all those small retailers that never had enough money to buy a TV or newspaper ad.
Since Murdoch was born 76 years ago and not yesterday, he knows that there is a powerful force that will envy his news domination and may seek to destroy him — the federal government. That’s why he has been regularly buying indulgences from the political class, such as contributing $500,000 to the Clinton Global Initiative, hosting a fundraiser for Hillary Clinton, and inviting Al Gore to deliver a talk on climate change.
Fortunately, Americans have nothing to fear should Rupert Murdoch’s grandiose plan to dominate news succeed. In fact, he cannot succeed without providing the news-consuming public what it wants. In the end, it may be an Australian-born magnate who shows us how to provide news the American way.
Steve Boriss blogs at The Future of News. He is employed by Washington University in St. Louis, where he is Associate Director of the Center for the Application of Information Technology (CAIT) and teaches a class called “The Future of News.” He holds an M.B.A. from the University of Michigan.
| Comment | Digg This |
del.icio.us |
![]() |
![]() |
PJM Home |


Digg This
del.icio.us

PJM Home











8 Comments
David Thomson:“…and inviting Al Gore to deliver a talk on climate change.”
I have no problem whatsoever with Rupert Murdoch “inviting Al Gore to deliver a talk on climate change.” As matter of fact, I strongly encourage it. I just want to make sure that those who disagree with Gore on this issue are not shut out of the dialogue. This is what has been going on for the last decade. Will Murdoch wimp out simply to appease the leftist establishment?
Oct 24, 2007 - 5:40 am Laurence Hallas:David,
if Murdoch “wimps out”, someone will walk over him - just like he is doing now to the MSMedia.
Oct 24, 2007 - 5:53 am dougf:He will not run news that is negative, cynical, and despairing, or that runs-down cherished institutions to which his audiences identify,
Unhappily as one who used to watch Fox News, he won’t actually deliver very much ‘news’ either. It is an absolutely abysmal news provider and I don’t care if it is politically ’simpatico’.
Missing Coeds.
OJ
Celebrity Trials
Fires
Crime
Brittany
Paris
24-7 JUNK.
If you watched just Fox News you would be probably be the stupidest person on your block. I don’t think he should be eulogized for that. Celebrated for his ’success’, sure, but that is all. It is like eulogizing ‘The National Enquirer’ for ‘respecting its audience tastes’.
I’m sorry folks but Fox News is a disgraceful product catering to the lowest possible denominator. It just is. And I approve of its ‘tendencies’.
It’s still garbage.
Oct 24, 2007 - 7:09 am Fred Beloit:dougf writes: “I’m sorry folks but Fox News is a disgraceful product catering to the lowest possible denominator. It just is.” But, doug, in comparison to what, CBS or CNN? Thanks, but no. At least the Hume show is the best of its kind in television.
Oct 24, 2007 - 9:32 am RE:Brit Hume and Chris Wallace are excellent on Fox. I live without the rest of Fox’s tabloid trash.
So the score is Fox News 2, Others 0 in my book.
Oct 24, 2007 - 11:13 am dougf:At least the Hume show is the best of its kind in television.
That’s 5 hours per WEEK. Plus 1 hour for the Sunday News Show with Chris Wallace + maybe another 3 or 4 hours for other Weekend Shows.
So lets round it up to an even dozen and maybe even throw in O’Riley for another 5. And another 5 just to be fair.
That’s 20 hours per WEEK of halfway intelligent programming. On a 24-7 NEWS CHANNEL. At a time when it is important for Americans to learn about the Wider World which is increasingly impinging on them, Fox cocoons them in mindless trash.
Think BBC without the BBC spin and that’s a News Channel. That’s what Fox should be compared to.
Fox is deliberate cynical ‘garbage’ designed for the lowest possible denominator. The information equivalent of musak. I sometimes visit sites such as the Free Republic just because they post articles that I might never catch otherwise. But usually the commentary accompanying those pieces is often ,umm, shall we say less than stellar.
And most people there think Fox is a complete waste of time because it’s tabloid heaven, 24-7.
Where is Fox’s coverage of Iraq for example? Fox coverage of Iraq in 2007 has been almost non-existent and yet 2007 is proving to be the tipping point there. That’s pathetic.
Let’s sum up —- Fox News is to a decent NEWS Channel what the Head-On commercials are to decent advertising.
And Murdoch is responsible for it. I don’t think he merits much of a salute for that.
Oct 24, 2007 - 2:06 pm pch1013:“Rupert Murdoch knows the importance of keeping customers happy”
Or, in the case of his Star TV network, the importance of keeping the Chinese Communist Party happy.
Oct 25, 2007 - 2:07 pm RE:Yikes. I forgot to mention the other honest broker up at Fox - Neil Cavuto! Sorry Neil!
So it’s Brit Hume, Chris Wallace, and Neil Cavuto. So the score is Fox News 3, others 0.
Oct 25, 2007 - 3:28 pm