A new Moneybox column in Slate has an entertaining, though morally ambiguous article regarding the leadership change-up at News Corp. See it here:
http://slate.msn.com/id/2123835/
And so, given his utter omission of the sick hatred this comany finances 24/7, at the risk of going slightly overboard, I wrote him this email to see if I couldn't see what he was (or wasn't) thinking:
Mr. Gross:
I enjoyed reading your article today like many others of yours in Slate. It was insightful and entertaining. Having said that, I must comment on what seems like a few omissions from your article. The glowing praise of such figures as Roger Ailes belies the much more than "controvertial" content that comes out of News' properties such as Fox News and New York Post. As you're no doubt aware, there are many people who are becoming increasingly tired of the entity known as the "Mainstream Media", otherwise commonly referred to as "Right-Wing Corporate Media" which passes for news these days. They are tired of a gigantic "propaganda" instrument that fancies itself as news while continuing to further brainwash the masses to support the continued unconstitutional power-grabs by the "upper-ups"
How is that all relevant to the article? Well, this is because many people don't know where the simple goal of profitability ends, and pure partisan propaganda begins, and thus when you speak of NewsCorp as if it were just another coproration out to meet its bottom line, the complex reality of the situation gets glossed over. More specifically, as in the case of your suggestion that folks like Ailes might leave if the corporate leadership wasn't up to snuff is misleading. I personally don't think Ailes would go anywhere anytime soon unless someone actually tried making his network report actual fact instead of the daily "science is fascism" Bill O'Reilly rant or "let's kill all the Muslim leaders and convert them to Christianity" Ann Coulter hate-speak. Maybe this is outside the scope of your article; but then again, of all the pet theories there are on why Lachlan really left -- maybe he grew a gasp conscience? Just my 2 cents.
If he responds, I'll update it here. Anyway, I was curious to see if anyone had any comments regarding the mysterious lack of discussion in the media about whether all its right-wing politics had anything to do with the recent shake-up.