You've got it backwards.Like when you call Paddy Chayefsky an, "honest-to-God prophet." He wasn't anything of the sort; he was a man with a very clear view of the history of both journalism and corporatism, and a thorough understanding of human nature. He didn't pluck out a bunch of disparate clues and stitch together some eerily-prescient portrait of an otherwise inconceivable future: He simply overlayed the template created by the historical arc of society's earlier mediums (newspapers, then radio) atop society's current medium; television. After that, the script pretty much wrote itself.And just as Chayefsky didn't foresee the future, Rupert Murdoch didn't play a pivotal role in perverting modern journalism. Rupert Murdoch understood a basic truth very early on: That there really is no such thing as modern journalism; that while the mode of delivery may change, journalism itself hasn't changed in 5,000 years, and as long as it's practiced by human beings, it never will.Rupert Murdoch didn't pervert anything. What he did was most-closely comply with what he knew the actual nature of corporate journalism to be.He succeeded not by trying to take control of the machine, but by becoming the most important cog inside the machine.
Fuck that guy. Fuck him right in the goat ass.
It's as if Mr. Murdoch is a giant, larger-than-life poster boy for karma...it'll get you.
Post a Comment