In a previous post it was mentioned that Faux News represented one side of the same coin in propaganda information warfare against Americans.
Now it officially has now been conquered, or at least took the mask off.
Bill O’Reily, the last man standing in the way, has finally been removed. As you can see in his case, you don’t even have to be convicted or found guilty of anything. Only enough controversy has to be manufactured, which will suffice as reason for being booted.
It’s now hard to say that there are any reputable outlets left on television. Sadly, many viewers have zero discernment and didn’t see Faux represented the same coin that helped divide America, and definitely won’t see the imminent change now imposed by the leftist Murdoch family.
American minds are being corraled and people don’t even see it.
Instead, they’ll be satisfied enough with the soothing political music-of-the-day playing in their ears, and will continue being convinced Tucker Carlson’s routine pouty facial expression means the station is continuing to take a hard stance on those evil, liberal bad guys.
The left is using allegations of sexual misconduct to organize advertiser boycotts in an effort to destroy Fox News because it can’t compete “in the arena of cable news,” Rush Limbaugh said.
“The standard operating procedure for the left is not to level the playing field but to close it,” Limbaugh said in his April 20 broadcast.
“It’s to deny participation on the playing field, not level it. No tolerance. No fairness. Their objective is to destroy the opposition because they can’t beat the opposition in the arena of competition where both entities are battling — and that would be, in this case, cable news.”
Limbaugh, whose comments came in the wake of Fox News host Bill O’Reilly’s ouster, went on to explain how the campaign to damage O’Reilly and Fox unfolded.
“The New York Times runs a story, and the story talks about how valuable O’Reilly is to Fox News and how much money O’Reilly is generating, and this irritates everybody that reads the New York Times. They don’t want to see this. They don’t want to see how successful O’Reilly is. They don’t want to see how big Fox is ’cause they hate it,” he said.
“And then the New York Times lowers the boom and points out that O’Reilly is a serial whatever and has paid off $13 million to other women to shut up. There has to be an outlet for the anger. Then what happens is where the real story begins,” he said, noting that advertisers are then deluged with complaints.
Those complaints, however, are fake, Limbaugh said.
“It is a bunch of bots, Facebook bots and Twitter bots that may have been generated by no more than 10 people, made to look like tens of thousands. And that’s all she wrote,” he said.
“It’s nothing but a giant, full-fledged, manufactured smear — and don’t forget where it started. It started in the New York Times,” he said.
“The reason that it starts in the New York Times is important is because the second aspect is that corporate intrigue that I mentioned that is also behind this, and it’s… (sigh) I don’t work there, so I guess it’s not any quicksand, but there is a battle for power going on there between sons of Rupert Murdoch and Rupert — and they are not conservatives, my friends,” he said.
“Their friends are all liberal. Their wives. One of their wives works for the Clinton Global Initiative,” he said, noting that because the story was in the New York Times, it had undue influence on the circle in which Murdoch’s sons move socially.
Limbaugh said that the dynamics of Fox are changing, and to expect more change.
“It’s not gonna be the way it is for long. There’s a … shakeup coming, and it’s generational. It’s generational and political. It’s just like anything else: Nothing ever is constantly the same. There’s change everywhere,” he said.
Full article: Rise of the liberal Murdochs, and the politics of advertiser boycotts (World Tribune)
Note: For archiving purposes, a copy of this article will remain here in full.