Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox News as well as tons of newspapers across the world, threatened switching allegiances of his media holdings in Britain from the Labour Party in England to the Tory conservatives.
"We'll have to see how the Tory frontbench looks .... we will not quickly forget the courage of Tony Blair in the international sphere in the last several months, so we may be torn in our decision. So let's wait and see."
When asked "So it's no shoo-in that you'll support Labour at the next general election?" Mr Murdoch replied: "No, there's no shoo-in we'll support the Tories either." He went on to warn about the dangers of British involvement in a more economically united Europe... in other words, he threatened the British PM with a withdrawl of support if he doesn't do more or less what he dictates.
What we should be asking is whether it is right for one man -- a foriegner, no less -- to set the tone and editorial focus of huge media organizations in order to push his private political agenda. Given such outright declarations, we are kidding ourselves if we think that Mr. Murdoch isn't doing the exact same thing with FoxNews on some level.
Here's a thought... It is a known fact that newspapers and television news networks get significantly higher ratings during times of war. Given this fact, isn't it safe to say that the corporate management of large, "for profit" media conglomerates could be predisposed to support unnecessary wars?