Do Jews Dominate in American Media? And So What If We Do?

Israel/PalestineUS Politics
on 48 Comments

At least a half dozen times in recent months, the suggestion has come from serious people that Jews predominate in the American media–that if we are not dominant, we are a major bloc. In a Yivo event on Jews in journalism I’ve blogged about, a questioner said that Jews’ outsize proportion in the media has granted us "a large influence over power." In his groundbreaking paper on the New York Times’s role in shaping American policy toward Israel, Jerome Slater spoke of "religious beliefs and identifications" that affected the Times, and cited former executive editor Max Frankel’s admission in his memoir (one also cited by Walt and Mearsheimer): "I was much more deeply devoted to Israel than I dared to assert."

Lately broadcast reporter John Hockenberry related that he wanted to do a piece on the hijackers’ motivation after 9/11 but that NBC executive Jeff Zucker scotched the notion:

"Maybe," Zucker said, "we ought to do a series of specials on
firehouses where we just ride along with our cameras. Like the show Cops,
only with firefighters."… [H]e could make room in the
prime-time lineup for firefighters, but then smiled at me and said, in
effect, that he had no time for any subtitled interviews with jihadists
raging about Palestine. [Weiss's emphasis]

Then last month at a forum at the Nixon Center, former Bushie Dov Zackheim said, Jews  don’t dominate the policy-making process, but the media is a different story…

I don’t know that anyone has visited the simple question raised by these statements: Do Jews dominate the media? This is something I know about personally. I’ve worked in print journalism for more
than 30 years. I’ve worked for many magazines and newspapers, and for a time my whole social circle was editors and writers in New York. I don’t know television. I don’t
know Washington journalism well. I don’t know the west coast. My sample is surely skewed by the fact that I’m Jewish and have always felt great comfort with
other Jews. But in my experience, Jews have
made up the majority of the important positions in the publications I worked for, a majority of the writers I’ve known at these place, and the majority of the owners who have paid me. Yes my own sample may be skewed, but I think it shows that Jews make up a significant proportion of power positions in media, half, if not more.   

Before considering what this means, let me make my experience concrete: 

My serious journalism began at the
Harvard Crimson in the 70s.  A friend
said the paper was a Jewish boys club; it was dominated by middle class
Jews– as apparently today there are a lot of Asians. Many of these Jews are now
powerful presences in the media. Zucker is one of them. My first paying job was in Minneapolis. Five Harvard guys started a weekly; four of them were Jewish, including the publisher paying our meager salaries. I remember our editor walking the halls parodying the
jingle we had on the radio. The jingle went: "We’ve got the news, we’ve got the sports…" He sang it as
“We’ve got the Jews, we’ve got the sports.” Funny.

I was hired by a Jewish
editor at my next job, the Philadelphia Daily News in 1978, and when I started freelancing in 1981, Jewish Harvard friends
got me work at the Columbia Journalism Review and the Washington
Monthly. A gentile brought me in at Harper’s and the New Republic.  It was at the New Republic, a launching pad for any number of highly-successful journalists, that I briefly associated with Marty Peretz, and did a story for him mocking the United Nations, whose judgment  he seeks at every turn to nullify because the U.N. is critical of Israel.

Fast
forward. In New York, I have worked for a dozen magazines. Most of my editors
have been Jewish. Both my book publishers were Jewish. At one point at one
publishing house, the editor, his boss, and her boss were all Jewish, and so was the
lawyer vetting the work—I remember her saying she would never travel to Malaysia because
of the anti-Semitic Prime minister. Oh–and the assistant editor was half-Jewish.

I should point out that I have worked with many gentile editors and
writers, and I have never been aware of any employment discrimination against them (though I may not be the best source). In fact, at Spy,
the three top editors were all non-Jews and when I used the epithet WASP it was
removed from my copy. But that is the exception. Generally it’s been Jews Jews
Jews. When I hear NPR do a piece with its top political team and both are Jews…
when a Jewish friend calls me and gossips about lunches with two top news execs
at major publications who are both Jewish and who I’ve known for 20 years… when a Jewish editor friend tells me that Si Newhouse would be disturbed if Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter– who has done such courageous work against the Iraq war– did anything to expose the Israel lobby… and when I say that my income has been
derived overwhelmingly from Jewish-owned publications for years—this is simply the ordinary culture of the magazine business as I know it. 

I have some ideas why Jews have predominated,
but that’s not the purpose of this posting. Last year Senator Russ Feingold,
buttonholed on CSPAN about why so many speakers on air were Jewish, said, “Well, we’re
good at talking…” That’ll do for now.

The real issue is, Does it matter? Most of my life I felt it didn’t. It’s just the way it is, at this point in history. It will change (as Clyde Haberman pointed out at that Yivo event). Jews are the latest flavor
of the establishment. In his landmark book, The Jewish Century, Slezkine reports that Jews were the majority of journalists in Berlin and Vienna and Prague, too, in the late 1800s, if I remember correctly.

Now I think it does matter, for two reasons. Elitist establishment culture, and Israel. As to
elitism, I worry when any affluent group has power and little
sense of what the common man is experiencing. I feel the same discomfort with my prestige-oriented "caste" that E. Digby Baltzell did with his calcified caste, the WASPs–when he called for an end to discrimination against Jews in the early ’60s. The values of my cohort sometimes seem narrow: globalism, prosperity, professionalism. In Israel the values are a lot broader. None of my cohort has served in the military, myself included. A lot of our fathers did; but I bet none
of our kids do. Military service is for losers–or for Israelis.

So we are way overrepresented in the chattering classes, and way underrepresented in the battering
classes. Not a great recipe for leadership, especially in wartime. 

Then there’s Israel. Support for Israel is an element of Jewish religious practice and more important, part of the Jewish cultural experience. Even if you’re a secular Jewish professional who prides himself on his objectivity, there is a ton of cultural pressure on you to support Israel or at least not to betray Israel. We are talking about a religion, after all, and the pressures faced by Jews who are critical of Israel are not that different from what Muslim women who want greater freedom undergo psychically or by evangelical Christians who want to support gay rights. It is worth noting that great Jewish heretics on the Israel question suffer anger or even ostracism inside their own families. Henry Siegman talked about this on Charlie Rose once, I recall–that even close family were not speaking to him over Israel. And I have seen this for myself on numerous occasions. There is not a lot of bandwidth on this issue. Conversations about Israel even inside the liberal Jewish community are emotionally loaded, and result in people not speaking to one another.  I lost this blog at a
mainstream publication because the editor was Jewish and conservative
on Israel and so was the new owner, and the publisher had worked for
AIPAC. And all of them would likely call themselves liberal Democrats. 

As former CNN correspondent Linda Scherzer has said, "We, as Jews, must understand that we come with a certain bias …We
believe in the Israeli narrative of history. We support the values that
we as Americans, Westerners, and Jews espouse. Thus, we see news
reporting through our own prism."

There are many American Jewish journalists who have done great independent work re Israel/Palestine. Richard Ben Cramer and the late Robbie Friedman leap to mind. But both these guys are exceptional, and had to overcome/ignore a ton of pressure that most of us would quail under. They had to step outside the Jewish family to do their work…

The result is that Americans are not getting the full story re Israel/Palestine. Slater says this dramatically in his paper–that the Times has deprived American leadership of reporting on the moral/political crisis that Israel is undergoing, one that Haaretz has covered unstintingly. At Columbia the other night, Jew, Arab and gentile on a panel about the human-rights crisis in Gaza all said that Americans are not getting the full story. Ilan Pappe has marveled in his book The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine, that the Nakba is all but unmentioned in the U.S.–while Haaretz has sought at times to document it, for instance a former officer saying in 2004 that if he had not helped to destroy 200 villages in southern Israel in ’48, there would be another million Palestinians in Israel. To repeat Scherzer’s admission: "We believe in the Israeli narrative of history…"

Why does the American press behave differently from the Israeli press? I think the answer is guilt. The Jewish cohort of
which I am a part has largely accepted
the duty that Max Frankel felt, of supporting Israel. This duty is rarely interrogated, and yet consciously or not we all know that American public opinion/leadership is critical to  Israel’s political invulnerability; and we think that if we take their fingers out of the dike, who knows what will happen. That is a
ton of responsibility. This responsibility is not executed with special care.
Generally, my cohort hasn’t been to Israel, hasn’t seen the West Bank. But they do feel kinship with Israeli Jews, and–above all–have guilt feelings about the Holocaust, or the American Jewish silence about
it during the event, the Jewish passivity; and they are
determined not to be passive during Israel’s neverending existential crises. And thus they misunderstand Israel and fail to serve their readers. 

48 Responses

  1. Robert
    February 17, 2008, 4:40 pm

    This must have been made by the controllers- they probably paid that Cleric to say that 'young Arabs become terrorists because they are broke in Egypt'

    link to video.on.nytimes.com

    PATHETIC

  2. Richard Witty
    February 17, 2008, 4:47 pm

    Jews participate in the media. They serve in the media.

    They rise to the responsibility of candor and proportion in the media.

    They probably dominate the New York media, and even the Los Angeles media.

    They don't dominate the newspaper publishers or television stations in Kansas, or Texas, or even New Hampshire.

    They don't dominate the press services, domestic or international.

    Its a canard.

  3. Shuresh
    February 17, 2008, 4:59 pm

    Malaysian police fired tear gas and water cannon to break up an illegal rally Saturday by ethnic Indians demanding racial equality ahead of general elections.

    More than 60 people — including two leaders of the Hindu Rights Action Force, or Hindraf, that organized the protest — have been detained in a police crackdown since late Friday, said lawyer N. Surendran, a Hindraf member.

    The group planned to hand roses and a protest note to Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi, but police banned the rally citing national security.

    Barricades were set up along main roads leading to Parliament but more than 200 people managed to gather nearby Saturday shouting "Long Live Hindraf" and "We want our rights."

    Police sprayed water and fired tear gas after the crowd ignored warnings to disperse. At least 20 people, including a Hindraf leader S. Manikavasagam, were detained Saturday, said a police official, who declined to be named citing protocol.

    Surendran said at least 40 others were arrested since late Friday.

    "This is ridiculous … We just want to express our right to freely assemble," Surendran told The Associated Press. "This is a massive campaign of intimidation."

    It was the first public gathering by the group since police used tear gas and water cannon to crush a Nov. 25 demonstration by at least 20,000 Indians in Kuala Lumpur.

    The rally came ahead of general elections on March 8.

    The November protest sparked fears of racial tension in this ethnic Malay Muslim-majority nation, and led to the arrest of five Hindraf leaders in December under the Internal Security Act, which allows indefinite imprisonment without trial.

    Many Indians allege they are deprived of employment and education opportunities and say their temples are being systematically destroyed.

    The government says it does not discriminate against ethnic Indians, who form 8 percent of Malaysia's 27 million people and remain at the bottom of Malaysia's economic and political hierarchy.

  4. D.
    February 17, 2008, 7:03 pm

    Phil wrote: "Now I think it does matter, for two reasons. Elitist establishment culture, and Israel."

    Right on. The price we're paying for the attachment to Israel is obvious. The more interesting question is what are the broader, more "social fabric"-type consequences of the whole media culture. I wouldn't put the problem in in terms of elitism (which is unavoidable), but in terms of the hostility or alienation of that elite (cf. MacDonald).

    BTW, Jeff Zucker is more than an NBC exec. He's the President of the whole NBC Televison Group. And the person under him in charge of news at NBC is Neal Shapiro.

    Americans have access to five sources of electronic news: ABC, NBC, CBS, Fox, and CNN. The news departments of all five are either Jewish run or Jewish supervised — or, as in the case of NBC, ABC, and CNN, both.

  5. the sword of gideon
    February 17, 2008, 8:30 pm

    We've got to put yellow stars and tattoos on these guys. It's the only way, isn't it?

  6. the sword of dude
    February 17, 2008, 8:54 pm

    "We've got to put yellow stars and tattoos on these guys. It's the only way, isn't it?"

    Or you can finally proceed with the painful but desperately needed introspection and reversal of course Bill. Your choice.

  7. anon
    February 17, 2008, 8:55 pm

    "It's the only way, isn't it?"

    I hear they're making great progress with drug treatments for anxiety attack. Try that before you go in for your tattoo, Bill.

  8. Corey
    February 17, 2008, 10:31 pm

    Charles Krauthammer's column for the Washington Post is dedicated exclusively to one subject matter: his perception of threats to Israel. Only a media dominated by like minded individuals would coddle such a columnist.

  9. LAX
    February 17, 2008, 10:33 pm

    Jews are clearly a media market-dominant minority. It's not a canard.

  10. Charles Keating
    February 17, 2008, 11:02 pm

    Ron Paul Who?

  11. Charles Keating
    February 17, 2008, 11:07 pm

    How does Phil experience fit in the canard model? BTW, there's lots of information in the internet, with lists of names, titles, etc regarding media domination.

  12. Gene
    February 17, 2008, 11:07 pm

    The notion that Jews predominate in the media is a "canard," says Richard Witty. Abe Foxman says the same thing and so does Alan Dershowitz. And all three use the same word–"canard."

    A request. Can't the Super Semites among us come up with a new word with which to demonize any criticism of the Israel Lobby? Instead of a cliche like canard, how about "ludicrous lies," or "pimply-faced falsehoods" or "preposterous threadbare blather"? Anything please but "canard."

  13. Richard Witty
    February 18, 2008, 4:12 am

    Gene,
    If you and the rest of the blogosphere renounce the use of the term "Israel Lobby" in favor of more specific references, I'll renounce the use of the term "canard".

  14. J. Martillo
    February 18, 2008, 5:55 am

    I prefer the term Judonia, which I explain in link to eaazi.blogspot.com .

    I disagree with M&W when they argue that Judonia is simply an extremely effective lobby, which engages in perfectly legal activities.

    If M&W had analysed Judonia from the standpoint of process rather than in terms of policy, they would have had to conclude that it is involved in massive civil and criminal violations.

  15. kei & yuri
    February 18, 2008, 2:42 pm

    We have addressed this subject with not so much hand-wringing, wasteful and unnecessary show-care and tip-toeing as Weiss, and we think our approach is worth another look. Weiss mentions that a large number of Jews work in media (it is worth noting, for example with comic books, in unglamorous, ill-paying, hand-dirtying jobs that yield no influence).
    It's good to see someone capable of the basic is-the-sun-up-or-not truth, namely, (0 conditional) that the Jews control in the media ((0a) in those situations where they merely control and did not build it from the ground up, out of nothing, like in Hollywood), (1) that the Jews overwhelmingly populate and constitute American media, (2) that these facts are bleeding obvious, (3) that despite the obviousness of these facts all who aspire to be known as intelligent and educated MUST vehemently deny them and attack anyone who even in a joke implies them, (4) that in fact this is so rigidly enforced that it is possible to sketch personality or defame a character in a work just by having them utter this idea (which is seen very elsewhere in ben-Eisenstein's Potemkin, but not many other places outside of this unique situation), but (5) also that Jewish media control is hardly the straightforward centrally organized pseudo-government which critics of this part of reality ALWAYS reach for as a straw man.
    The Jews who control American media are different individuals, at different levels, from different subtribes, with slightly different ideologies (the advantage of being a "one issue guy" like Haim Saban is you can be sincerely for or against anything else, and then point out your irrelevant attitude towards schwartzes or schnauzers as proof that you're not in league with people you are in league with) and different kinds of influence.
    Wolf Blitzer for example strikes us as not very bright; his influence is intended only for gullible outsiders and his actions are probably following proscribed guidelines.
    Our original response to this laid out ten different ways the Jews control the media, with ten different kinds of restrictions and capabilities. Jews own the media by owning the media, through simple ownership and editorial prerogatives (Sumner Redstone et al). Jews control the media through sheer population, but that's a dead statistic without ideological overlap (Kenyans control Kenyan media; so what?). Jews control the media by having already controlled it for enough of the past that present actions are pre-determined or hemmed in not by some evil angel with a burning sword but just by the human impulse to do what you did yesterday; here is a dimension Weiss perhaps hasn't considered and which is effectively irrelevant to the present Jewish population within media industries. Jews control media *externally* by complaining and threatening to withhold their sponsorship over "controversial" content.
    Weiss we must say it is adorable that you assert you can't say if Southern California and its various media industries might be Jewish because you haven't worked with them. That is adorable. May we say we've never been to Germany so we're not sure if there are any Germans there, and that Steven Spielberg is a Chaldean.
    All in all a good post but we want to point up the [possible backdoor or] weakness that is the same as in the laughable right wing argument that American media is "liberal." In those rare cases where it's not just a slur and they try to throw together a case, they usually cite statistics which prove most toilet cleaners and folks who do actual work (let's call them "Jews" for the purposes of this article) identify as "Liberal", are sympathetic to traditionally lefty ideas like civil rights, and vote Democrat. They then ignore the fact that all these powerless replaceable functionaries are lorded over by some jerk who owns the company, can fire any of them at whim, and is an extreme right-wing nutjob who thinks Margaret Thatcher tastes good. So this is something to keep in mind: there are poor Jews, there are powerless Jews, and then there's a tiny handful who are in wealth, in power and in ideology like Lev Leviev, who are crucially perfectly happy to sacrifice all the good Jews and the neutral Jews for the crimes of a small gang of disciples of Lansky.

  16. Charles Keating
    February 18, 2008, 2:43 pm

    Driving Arabists out of the US state department was an early important project of Judonia or the Israeli lobby. Walter Winchel was a boon to paint the Arabists as anti-semites, among others in key media positions. Its all documented at the Truman Library. See especially documents on the pressue put on Truman from the Zionists 1945-1948. In the end Truman ignored his own state department because the Zionists convinced him he was Cyrus the Great reincarnated, he needed the NY vote (especially), and the lobby network was a great way to finance his whistle stops–the Zionists told him bluntly, Dewey's on board, if you don't toe our line, we'll go with Dewey. Truman didn't want to go back to selling hats or local ward politics.

  17. Dean Luckey
    February 18, 2008, 2:59 pm

    As a Gentile I somewhat admire your admitting to the Jewish bias that permeates the American MSM but I fear you suffer from the self deception so prevalent in Jewish culture. Western Gentile culture is strongly individualistic as opposed to Jewish collectivism and the result is a strong ethnic group identity(Jewish) opposing a much weaker individualistic (Gentile)culture. I suggest you read Kevin MacDonald's Culture of Critique for a real understanding of the differences.

  18. Charles Keating
    February 18, 2008, 3:00 pm

    A democracy is not run by the masses; it's run by the groups with the most persistent and narrow focus. The goal is always manipulating public opinion by direct or indirect bribes. The more cultural/ethnic diversity within the state, the more this is so. The last time a significant number of Americans rose up to stymie the powers that be, i.e., became focused, they stopped the immigration bill congress was dead set on passing. It was so important to enough of them, they looked beyond the usual smoke and mirrors.

  19. Charles Keating
    February 18, 2008, 3:06 pm

    Life (Who's?), liberty (Who's), and the pursuit of happiness (See Maslow's pyramid?)

  20. q
    February 18, 2008, 3:28 pm

    nice post, k more than a couple of good points in there.

  21. q
    February 18, 2008, 3:29 pm

    I meant to say, nice post kei&yuri

  22. jfc
    February 18, 2008, 3:56 pm

    That was perhaps the meekest apology for the main stream media's unwillingness to cover Israels ongoing attempt at genocide that I have ever read.

    I worked for a Jew. I once mentioned, at an office party, that what was going on in Palestine was genocide. Two days later I was, without warning or cause (at least not work related cause) fired.

    What do you think that does for my feelings and "sympathy" towards the plight of your people and nation?

    Had I been the one that fired him for the reverse comment, I would be the subject of a non-stop ADL attack.

    There is a growing disdain for this "Jewish superiority complex" in America and throughout the world. The "anti-semite" label that your people are so quick to throw around is going to become a boomerang. It used to mean "we hate you", it will soon mean "we're not afraid of you".

    You can fire me, you can investigate me, you can label me, but you can't silence me or scare me.

    You should be afraid…very afraid.

  23. Jingles
    February 18, 2008, 5:03 pm

    The author forgot to mention that Nazi Germany was very much zionist and most of the media was Jewish. What is never mentioned is that the same media declared war on Hitler. Why ? Cause the general public were fed-up with the thousands of Jews streaming into Germany and Hitler was forced to control it. Just like the Jews in Palestine killed the British when they put controls on Jews settling in Arab lands. Jewish media has allowed Bush and gang to pull off the greatest scam and aftermath killings–they know that 911 was an inside job–what is worse is that Israel pull it off.

  24. Paul
    February 18, 2008, 5:10 pm

    I for one am sick of self-serving Jews pretending to all and sundry that they don't exist.

  25. fellowman1976
    February 18, 2008, 6:03 pm

    First, not ALL Jews are zionists.There are Jews who do not agree with what the Zionist's are doing. I do wonder if there is anything we can do to fight back now. Do we boycott products? The only choice in TV is zionist jew controlled. Does anyone have any suggestions.

  26. Tom
    February 18, 2008, 6:55 pm

    Yeah, this is big news, and did you hear that John Lennon is dead? Back in the seventies my dad told me to pick up any U.S. magazine and read the names of the staff and writers. Jews, Jews, and more Jews. Were they all Jews? Sure looked that way. Not only that, most of the articles were ABOUT Jews. My, it gave me such a feeling of being included – not! I suspect research would reveal this Jewish domination goes straight back to the early days of Jewish immigration, although in those days the Jews used British names.

  27. United States Citizen First
    February 18, 2008, 7:59 pm

    If Jews do not control the print and telecommunications media then would someone please explain why "Americans are not getting the full story re Israel/Palestine"?

    The statistics are clearly on the side of the people that believe that Jews do control the media. The are numerous non-Jewish and Jewish sites and books that will name the names.

    The real danger is that if some of those Jews in the American media don't start telling the truth about the historical roots of the Palestinian/Israeli conflict and the aspirations of some in Israel for an E'retz Israel the people of the world could very likely to be dragged into another world war. That war will be a true holocaust for the Jews and everyone else.

  28. Peter
    February 18, 2008, 8:26 pm

    If they were all white Christians the Jews would be the first ranting RACISM here the jew is obvious in his RACIST pursuit. He is driven by a concept of god that must be extinguished. I am no fan of muslims but i put jews and muslims in the same boat they are posessed with fanaticsm one thinks to act, the jew. The other reacts, the muslim. Both to me are the most pernicious cultures this world has seen and ALL of them should be held accountable for their fathers actions. david was a fat little poof and his son the bastard of a yet to be muslim whore. Fargh em all. Fargh em off.

  29. Lina
    February 18, 2008, 8:44 pm

    You guys are awesome. I'd give you all out some swords, horse saddles and big furry hats – and you can start a pogrom. But we're not afraid anymore. Not even a little. All thanks to Israel.

  30. Gene
    February 18, 2008, 8:54 pm

    Witty: "If you and the rest of the blogosphere renounce the use of the term "Israel Lobby" in favor of more specific references, I'll renounce the use of the term "canard".

    To me "Israel Lobby" is synonomous with Israel-Firster. I'm willing to go with that.

  31. donald
    February 18, 2008, 10:51 pm

    So Richard, if it's a "canard", why don't you respond to the point D. made above about our five television networks?

    Are you saying it's not true that Jewish influence in the media is overwhelming, or just that it's not a bad thing?

    I could see someone arguing for the latter (although I think they would be wrong), but to argue that Jews do not dominate the media is demonstrably false. It's a simple matter of looking at the record.

    Let's at least agree on the facts, and then we can go on to argue about their implications.

  32. bleuyonder2
    February 19, 2008, 12:10 am

    Ron Paul who? No kidding. MSM run by Jews:Ron Paul wants to let Israel solve its own problems. He's the only candidate not under the influence of the zionists. He is the only candidate being ignored by the MSM. Coincidence? Not a chance.

  33. sgi
    February 19, 2008, 2:02 am

    I almost made it through all of the comments before I started to feel sick to my stomach.

    To the owner of this blog: before you write one more word about Jew dominated media in the US or elsewhere for that matter (if you don't already know, this is a refrain heard 'round the world), before you destroy your credibility entirely, before you contribute any more to the cause of destroying Israel, you must, absolutely must be dead sure of the facts, and I mean all of the facts: who exactly owns the media in the US and elsewhere and is this media unconditionally pro-Israel?

    Nothing else will do. Anything less is simply irresponsible. If you have nothing to offer but personal anecdotes and suspicion, you do every one an injustice.

    I am not a Jew or particularly religious but I am a Zionist, that is I think the Jews have a right to a homeland exactly where it is. I do wish the Israelis and the Palestinians would solve the bloody border problem, but they are only pawns in a much bigger game.

  34. JoeMorgan
    February 19, 2008, 9:31 am

    Here is a report that simply cites who owns or heads the various media giants in America.

    link to natall.com

    Control the mass media and you control how people see the world.

  35. Seth
    February 19, 2008, 10:42 am

    Didn't the former Malaysian leader state, "Jews rule the World by proxy?"

    Ethnic Jews also have played an important role in the media in England and Russia…

    link to csulb.edu

    By all accounts, ethnic Jews have a powerful influence in the American media — far larger than any other identifiable group. The extent of Jewish ownership and influence on the popular media in the United States is remarkable given the relatively small proportion of the population that is Jewish.28 In a survey performed in the 1980s, 60 percent of a representative sample of the movie elite were of Jewish background (Powers et al. 1996, 79n13). Michael Medved (1996, 37) notes that 'it makes no sense at all to try to deny the reality of Jewish power and prominence in popular culture. Any list of the most influential production executives at each of the major movie studios will produce a heavy majority of recognizably Jewish names. This prominent Jewish role is obvious to anyone who follows news reports from Tinsel Town or even bothers to read the credits on major movies or television shows.'

    Media ownership is always in flux, but the following is a reasonably accurate portrait of current media ownership in the United States by ethnic Jews:

    The largest media company in the world was recently formed by the merger of America On Line and Time Warner. Gerald M. Levin, formerly the head of Time Warner, is the Chief Executive Officer of the new corporation. AOL-Time Warner has holdings in television (e.g., Home Box Office, CNN, Turner Broadcasting), music (Warner Music), movies (Warner Brothers Studio, Castle Rock Entertainment, and New Line Cinema), and publishing (Time, Sports Illustrated, People, Fortune).

    The second largest media company is the Walt Disney Company, headed by Michael Eisner. Disney has holdings in movies (Walt Disney Motion Pictures Group, under Walt Disney Studios, includes Walt Disney Pictures, Touchstone Pictures, Hollywood Pictures, Caravan Pictures, Miramax Films); television (Capital Cities/ABC [owner of the ABC television network], Walt Disney Television, Touchstone Television, Buena Vista Television, ESPN, Lifetime, A&E Television networks) and cable networks with more than 100 million subscribers; radio (ABC Radio Network with over 3,400 affiliates and ownership of 26 stations in major cities); publishing (seven daily newspapers, Fairchild Publications [Women's Wear Daily], and the Diversified Publishing Group).

    The third largest media company is Viacom, Inc., headed by Sumner Redstone, who is also Jewish. Viacom has holdings in movies (Paramount Pictures); broadcasting (the CBS TV network; MTV [a particular focus of criticism by cultural conservatives], VH-1, Nickelodeon, Showtime, the National Network, Black Entertainment Television, 13 television stations; programming for the three television networks); publishing (Simon & Schuster, Scribner, The Free Press, and Pocket Books), video rentals (Blockbuster); it is also involved in satellite broadcasting, theme parks, and video games.

    Another major media player is Edgar Bronfman, Jr., the son of Edgar Bronfman, Sr., president of the World Jewish Congress and heir to the Seagram distillery fortune. Until its merger with Vivendi, a French Company, in December 2000, Bronfman headed Universal Studios, a major movie production company, and the Universal Music Group, the world's largest music company (including Polygram, Interscope Records, Island/Def Jam, Motown, Geffen/DGC Records). After the merger, Bronfman became the Executive Vice-Chairman of the new company, Vivendi Universal, and the Bronfman family and related entities became the largest shareholders in the company.29 Edgar Bronfman, Sr. is on the Board of Directors of the new company.

    Other major television companies owned by Jews include New World Entertainment (owned by Ronald Perelman who also owns Revlon cosmetics), and DreamWorks SKG (owned by film director Steven Spielberg, former Disney Pictures chairman Jeffrey Katzenberg, and recording industry mogul David Geffen). DreamWorks SKG produces movies, animated films, television programs, and recorded music. Spielberg is also a Jewish ethnic activist. After making Schindler's List, Spielberg established Survivors of the Shoah Foundation with the aid of a grant from the U.S. Congress. He also helped fund Professor Deborah Lipstadt's defense against a libel suit brought by British military historian and Holocaust revisionist David Irving.

    In the world of print media, the Newhouse media empire owns 26 daily newspapers, including several large and important ones, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Newark Star-Ledger, and the New Orleans Times-Picayune; Newhouse Broadcasting, consisting of 12 television broadcasting stations and 87 cable-TV systems, including some of the country's largest cable networks; the Sunday supplement Parade, with a circulation of more than 22 million copies per week; some two dozen major magazines, including the New Yorker, Vogue, Mademoiselle, Glamour, Vanity Fair, Bride's, Gentlemen's Quarterly, Self, House & Garden, and all the other magazines of the wholly owned Conde Nast group.

    The newsmagazine, U.S. News & World Report, with a weekly circulation of 2.3 million, is owned and published by Mortimer B. Zuckerman. Zuckerman also owns New York's tabloid newspaper, the Daily News, the sixth-largest paper in the country, and is the former owner of the Atlantic Monthly. Zuckerman is a Jewish ethnic activist. Recently he was named head of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, an umbrella organization for major Jewish organizations in the U.S.30 Zuckerman's column in U.S. News and World Report regularly defends Israel and has helped to rejuvenate the America-Israeli Friendship League, of which he is president.31

    Another Jewish activist with a prominent position in the U.S. media is Martin Peretz, owner of The New Republic (TNR) since 1974. Throughout his career Peretz has been devoted to Jewish causes, particularly Israel. During the 1967 Arab-Israeli war, he told Henry Kissinger that his 'dovishness stopped at the delicatessen door,' and many among his staff feared that all issues would be decided on the basis of what was 'good for the Jews' (Alterman 1992, 185, 186). Indeed, one editor was instructed to obtain material from the Israeli embassy for use in TNR editorials. 'It is not enough to say that TNR's owner is merely obsessed with Israel; he says so himself. But more importantly, Peretz is obsessed with Israel's critics, Israel's would-be critics, and people who never heard of Israel, but might one day know someone who might someday become a critic' (Alterman 1992, 195).

    The Wall Street Journal is the largest-circulation daily newspaper in the U.S. It is owned by Dow Jones & Company, Inc., a New York corporation that also publishes 24 other daily newspapers and the weekly financial paper Barron's. The chairman and CEO of Dow Jones is Peter R. Kann. Kann also holds the posts of chairman and publisher of the Wall Street Journal.

    The Sulzberger family owns the New York Times Co., which owns 33 other newspapers, including the Boston Globe. It also owns twelve magazines (including McCall's and Family Circle, each with a circulation of more than 5 million), seven radio and TV broadcasting stations; a cable-TV system; and three book publishing companies. The New York Times News Service transmits news stories, features, and photographs from the New York Times by wire to 506 other newspapers, news agencies, and magazines.

    Jewish ownership of the New York Times is particularly interesting because it has been the most influential newspaper in the U.S. since the start of the 20th century. As noted in a recent book on the Sulzberger family (Tifft & Jones 1999), even at that time, there were several Jewish-owned newspapers, including the New York World (controlled by Joseph Pulitzer), the Chicago Times-Herald and Evening Post (controlled by H. H. Kohlsaat), and the New York Post (controlled by the family of Jacob Schiff). In 1896 Adolph Ochs purchased the New York Times with the critical backing of several Jewish businessmen, including Isidor Straus (co-owner of Macy's department stores) and Jacob Schiff (a successful investment banker who was also a Jewish ethnic activist). 'Schiff and other prominent Jews like … Straus had made it clear they wanted Adolph to succeed because they believed he 'could be of great service to the Jews generally' — (Tifft & Jones 1999, 37-38). Ochs's father-in-law was the Rabbi Isaac Mayer Wise, the founder of Reform Judaism in the United States.

    There are some exceptions to this pattern of media ownership, but even in such cases ethnic Jews have a major managerial role.32 For example, Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation owns Fox Television Network, 20th Century Fox Films, Fox 2000, and the New York Post. However, Peter Chernin is president and CEO of Fox Group, which includes all of News Corporation's film, television, and publishing operations in the United States. Murdoch is deeply philosemitic and deeply committed to Israel, at least partly from a close relationship he developed early in his career with Leonard Goldenson, who founded the American Broadcasting Company. (Goldenson was a major figure in New York's Jewish establishment and an outspoken supporter of Israel.) Murdoch's publications have taken a strongly pro-Israel line, including The Weekly Standard, the premier neo-conservative magazine, edited by William Kristol.

    Murdoch … as publisher and editor-in-chief of the New York Post, had a large Jewish constituency, as he did to a lesser degree with New York magazine and The Village Voice. Not only had the pre-Murdoch Post readership been heavily Jewish, so, too, were the present Post advertisers. Most of Murdoch's closest friends and business advisers were wealthy, influential New York Jews intensely active in pro-Israel causes. And he himself still retained a strong independent sympathy for Israel, a personal identification with the Jewish state that went back to his Oxford days. (Kiernan 1986, 261)
    Murdoch also developed close relationships with several other prominent Jewish figures in the New York establishment, including attorney Howard Squadron, who was president of the AJCongress and head of the Council of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, and investment banker Stanley Schuman.
    Another exception is NBC which is owned by General Electric. However, the President of NBC is Andrew Lack and the President of NBC News is Neal Shapiro, both of whom are Jewish. In addition, the Bertelsmann publishing group is a Germany-based company that is the largest publisher of trade books in the world and also owns magazines, newspapers, and music. Most of Bertelsmann's influence is outside the United States, although it recently purchased the Random House Publishing Company.

  36. johnny b. gone
    February 19, 2008, 10:47 am

    Has any Jew, even Benjamin Freedman, renounced the Kol Nidre, the Jewish license to lie, cheat and steal reissued every year on Yom Kippur?

    At least Freedman revealed what he and his fellow Jews did at Versailles. Arthur Koestler revealed that Jews are not Semites, that "anti-Semitism" is a huge lie. And David Cole revealed that there were no gas chambers at Auschwitz. Marcus Eli Ravage revealed that Christianity is the great Jewish crime against the Goyim. But no Jew can condemn the Kol Nidre "prayer" that orders the endless ripoff of the hated Gentile enemy.

  37. Peter L
    February 19, 2008, 12:17 pm

    Of course they dominate WORLD media, ask Ernst Zundel and David Irving. Zionists control every level of media (Carl Cameron's four-part series on Jewish involvement in 9/11 was completely banned). This is all about censorship. After all, censorship is becoming Zionist America's favorite past-time. The US gov't (and their corporate friends), already detain protesters, ban books like "America Deceived" from Amazon and shut down Ron Paul. Free Speech forever (especially for the internet).
    Last link (before Google Books caves to pressure and drops the title):
    link to iuniverse.com

  38. Gene
    February 19, 2008, 3:36 pm

    SGI: "To the owner of this blog: before you write one more word about Jew dominated media in the US or elsewhere for that matter (if you don't already know, this is a refrain heard 'round the world), before you destroy your credibility entirely, before you contribute any more to the cause of destroying Israel, you must, absolutely must be dead sure of the facts, and I mean all of the facts . . . "

    I only wish the IDF would also be "absolutely dead sure of the facts–all of the facts" before it drops any more 2,000 pound bombs on apartment houses in Gaza or calls in artillary strikes on Palestinian picnickers on the beach.

    I also wish Zionish neo-cons in the White House and Defense Department would be a lot more sure of their facts before trumpeting tales of Nigerian yellowcake to convince middle America to support another mideast war.

  39. escapefrombushistan
    February 19, 2008, 5:12 pm

    There is a law that was passed, probably written by AIPAC lawyers, that make it illegal to boycott Israeli products.

    The Israeli firsters write nearly all of our traitorous, unconstitutional bills, such as the bastard dual loyalist Chertoff co-penning the unconstitutional so-called "Patriot" Act which none of representives even bothered to read before they voted for it.

    I'd be questioning our traitorous representatives and asking them who penned the following:

    1. Military Commissions Act NO MORE HABEAS CORPUS
    2. "John Warner" Defense Authorization Act of 2007 NO MORE POSSE COMITATUS
    3. Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terrorism Prevention Act of 2007 (they were dangling the detested hate crimes act out there for us to bitch to our representatives about while they rammed this POS through]
    4. Veterans Disarmament Act (it speaks for itself) Read the Second Amendment (for those Americans who still realize that we actually have a constitution which our ancestors fought and died to obtain for us, their descendants) MOST REPRESENTATIVES HAD LEFT WASHINGTON AND IT WAS PASSED ON A SILENT VOTE. I'd be questioning my representative on HOW and if they even voted or even READ IT first.

    THINK ABOUT IT, WHO IS AUTHORING ALL OF THESE BILLS, that are to the detriment of American citizens????

    When they finally do manage to get our guns–and they will soon–there is a second amendment hearing coming up (have you ever noticed all the school shootings, etc. that always occur immediately before these hearings?–shades of MKUltra and Project Monarch), it will be ALL over.

    Chertoff didn't hire the ex-heads of the
    Stasi and KGB for nothing.

  40. escapefrombushistan
    February 19, 2008, 5:21 pm

    ROFLMFAO!!! my post just got yanked off. It took about five seconds.

  41. escapefrombushitan
    February 19, 2008, 5:22 pm

    Never mind above post, it didn't get yanked.

  42. Bob
    February 19, 2008, 8:17 pm

    To the ZIONIST idiot who said the following…

    "Jews participate in the media. They serve in the media.
    They rise to the responsibility of candor and proportion in the media.
    They probably dominate the New York media, and even the Los Angeles media.
    They don't dominate the newspaper publishers or television stations in Kansas, or Texas, or even New Hampshire.
    They don't dominate the press services, domestic or international.
    Its a canard."

    This is like saying Jews PARTICIPATE in the Diamond trade…Jews are SUPREMACISTS, they never participate, they DOMINATE!

    Jews dominate the following US industries, Clothing/Fashion, Diamonds, Newspapers, Movies, Television, Attorneys, Banking and Publishing.

    Jews DON'T dominate U.S. newspapers? Jews own the NY Times, LA Times, SF Chronicle and Washington Post to name a few, but those are the ones which set agendas and influence the most people.

    I could go on, but it is clear to anyone willing to open their eyes, JEWS own and CONTROL the U.S. Lock, Stock and Barrel!

  43. kei & yuri
    February 19, 2008, 10:39 pm

    The Jews controlled the media in Nazi Germany? Are you quite certain, sir? Or as Jon Stewart would say, oh, I'm sure that makes sense.
    One thing that has come to piss us off in the post-Zionist blogosphere is how you'll have a nice productive discussion and then some "committed Jew" who is painfully obviously who he is shows up and rants the kind of things only committed Jews imagine goyim are capable of saying; the idea that Jews have horns, dust-covered complaints about usury, etc..

  44. kei & yuri
    February 19, 2008, 10:55 pm

    Does Phil read the comments here? Or, we should ask, does he read the comments here without first getting thoroughly drunk? Some of these comments are cool and some are totally batshiat.

  45. anon
    February 20, 2008, 3:21 am

    no, k&y, he has said he doesn't have time to keep up with them, which is probably fortunate. :)

  46. Kathy
    January 4, 2009, 10:47 pm

    Your post is interesting, and months ahead of the question that is now being raised: Why is the US media so biased in reporting on the escalating violence in Gaza? I heard a statement that "the Jews controled the media," which I dismissed immediately as being an anti semitic statement.

    Tonight I googled this, and found, among other things, you blog.

    I guess I could ask: Do you think the news coverage of the Gaza violence would be different of there was a larger presence of Muslims, or lets say, Chinese in the MSM in the US?

    If the answer is yes, then we have a problem, for sure.

    take care, Kathy

  47. Kathy
    January 11, 2009, 5:38 pm

    Thank you for posting this, and hosting all the viewpoints seen in the comments. It is quite a lot of food for thought. I have started a new blog, due to having my comments on the HP repetedly selectively blocked, thet is HP chosing to post some, but not all. And due some intimidation I recieved by a virilant Zionist on MyBO IR group list serve, who claims I am not allowed to post my opinions because they might influence Obama!

    As you can see, I just set up my blog, and already someone has "flaged" it! Oh, my! I have shared this post with others, to help them think about how to deal with these inequities. Please do visit my new blog, and I would very much like your feedback.
    http://shoe08.blogspot.com
    take care
    Kathy

  48. Eric Roth
    January 17, 2009, 2:03 pm

    You raise an important question of media bias and share many personal experiences. Yet you also seem to draw some grand conclusions from small pools of information, and veer into choppy, dangerous waters with visible blood can be seen. What exactly are you suggesting?

    Do you want Arabs to start their own publications in America? Do you want an affirmative action program?

    Let's be clear. The mainstream media essentially prefers visuals of firemen and fires to engaging documentaries. PBS' Frontline series attracts a small percentage of American Idol. The mainstream media also censored our new President's name during the campaign, goes to almost any length to not quote jihadists, and prefers simple upbeat narratives to complicated, depressing ones. Finally, our international coverage of the entire planet is dreadful. Where were the stories on the civil war in the Congo with over 1.5 million deaths in the last decade? Where are the stories on Darfar? What about the involvement of Islamic jihadists in 34 of the 37 wars around the globe today? The silence of the media is astounding.

    Media bias matters. Censorship matters. Free speech matters.

    The solution to the problem of bad media coverage remains more, better, and deeper media coverage. Leave ethnic and racial politics out.

Leave a Reply