Ownership Not Required – An Examination of Jewish Media Control

It’s commonly said that in the West, the Jews run the media. Who says this? Anti-Semites, and some folks who are not anti-Semites. I have a degree in journalism and I worked in the field for a bit. At one time, Jews were pretty dominant in the US media, but I’m not sure anymore. Papers are not that profitable anymore, and more and more, they seem to be getting bought out by standard corporate brands as just another business and way to make money. Putting the Washington Post, Newsweek, etc. in with the Jewish media is problematic. Katherine Graham is not Jewish. Her Dad was Jewish. She’s not even Jewish under Jewish law. Half-Jews or folks with some Jewish ancestry sometimes have some Jewish identity, but in other cases, they don’t. I’ve known some half-Jews who were ferocious supporters of the Palestinians and had no Jewish identity whatsoever. Others seemed to have a pretty strong dose. The impetus is on the anti-Semites to prove that K. Graham sees herself as a Jew and not as an ordinary very wealthy high society blond White woman, which is what she looks like. As the media industry corporatizes and consequently democratizes ethnically, the media control charge holds less and less power. Seeing how the US media stood up to Israel in the strongest way it ever has in the course of this latest Gaza outrage was instructive. No Jewish-controlled industry would have done such a thing. If the US media was really Jewish-controlled, it would have read like the Israeli press in this latest Gaza blowup. Nevertheless, Jewish media control does exist, but not necessarily through ownership. You don’t need to own a paper folks! All you need is one badass, kickass, muthafuckin’ Lobby. And that the Jews have. They also have a very deadly weapon called the “boycott” – for that, read “Jewish advertiser boycott.” This is one of the real reasons why US papers shy away from criticizing Jews or Israel. Even if no boycott is announced, there is always the veiled threat of one. When something Jewish or Israeli-critical is published in a newspaper, the Lobby goes into action. They all rise up and very loudly demand an apology. If none is forthcoming, well, then there’s the boycott threat. Before that kicks in, there are usually mass cancellations of the paper by Jewish subscribers, followed by noisy demos outside the paper’s office and floods of letters, emails and phone calls. I don’t think there is anything criminal or evil about this. That’s the way any effective Lobby, ethnic or otherwise, probably ought to work. They get the job done, hey. An instructive case is that of Michael Backman, a Business editor for The Age, an Australian newspaper. He recently wrote an article entitled, Israelis Are Living High on US Expense Account. The original article has incredibly been taken down from the web (!!) and the link is to a Malaysian paper that reprinted it. The counter-reaction was stormy indeed. Articles in JTA and the Australian Jewish News were typical. The Jewish Community Council of Victoria (JCCV) and the Zionist Council of Victoria (ZCV) both threatened, incredibly, to sue the paper, on what insane basis, God only knows. The organizations termed it “blatantly anti-Semitic”. “This is not 1930s Germany,” they said. “We will not accept this hatred.”

“The Victorian Jewish community’s experience is that such commentary rouses violence and hatred against local Jews,” the groups went on.

This is the typical moral argument used by Super-Jews against their critics. They used to throw it at me in the newsgroups. The idea here is that if you say Boo to Jews to Israel for even 10 seconds, you’re gonna set off a fuckin’ pogrom. Jewish activists actually wrote me emails telling this. As if some peaceful, loving person reads Robert Lindsay, goes insane, turns into a skinhead maniac, and beats up some Jew on the street. This is designed to hit you in your heart – where it hurts. My words were resulting in poor innocent Jews getting bashed over the head. So how did I feel about that? This is really just moral blackmail. It’s like the Borderline Personality Disorder patient threatening to commit suicide unless the therapist stops criticizing.

“It is inexplicable why The Age would publish such a pernicious article, and why by one of its business columnists, a man whose field of expertise is Asian business and art, a man apparently without credentials on the Middle East, international politics or contemporary religion,” the groups said.

This is another typical feint. Did you know that only “Middle East experts” are allowed to comment on ME matters? Neither did I! This was another common tactic used in the newsgroups. Lack a Jewish education? Haven’t read all 13,000 pages of the Talmud? Never been to the Middle East, not to mention Israel? Then shut the fuck up, asshole, and let the experts take over. The only experts on Jews and Judaism, of course, being other Jews, and in the West, the only ME experts being Jews or pro-Israeli Gentiles. The article in question is actually quite innocuous, though admittedly outrageous by the standards of neutered Western journalism. He takes Israel to task for not making peace with Palestinians and pissing off the whole Muslim World. Then he suggests that the 9-11, Bali and London terror attacks were in part a Muslim response to Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians. Which is all arguably true to some degree or another. According to this over the top slam in The Australian (Murdoch paper?) Backman supposedly lays the Deicide charge on the Jews, but if you read the article, he does no such thing. Backman also supposedly says Jews are cheap, tight, rude, arrogant and flashy (all supposedly “anti-Semitic canards” though there is tons of truth in them), yet once again, he does no such thing. Backman merely pointed out that in Nepal, where there are many young Israeli trekkers, the Israelis are widely despised. This in a Hindu country which probably lacks any deep seated anti-Semitism. Why are they disliked? For acting like Sabras. The Nepalese claim that the Israelis are arrogant and rude and haggle over tiny amounts of money. They are so disliked that hostels will tell Israelis the place is full even when there are vacancies. I can’t see how this is anti-Semitism. I don’t know if Sabras act this way, but this isn’t the first time I’ve heard tales like this. Anyway, this is how they come across to the Nepalese. Are the Nepalese making this shit up because they are evil Jew-hating Gentiles? Really dubious. Is Backman an anti-Semite for reporting reality-based observations of Nepalese? Come off it. The Australian piece gets down to brass tacks and sums up the real beef against Backman’s piece, The Age’s coverage, the UN (nothing less than every nation on Earth), the world media (nothing less than every paper on Earth):

“But Backman shows that one cannot despise the world’s only Jewish state without much of that hatred rubbing off on the Jewish people as well.”

Oh yeah! The old MLK “Anti-Zionism can only be anti-Semitism” game. And these folks have the nerve to accuse their opponents of canards. The heads of these same too organizations marched off to The Age’s editorial offices two weeks ago to complain about “biased coverage” in the Gaza mess. I guess they thought they got somewhere, as The Age assured them that coverage was even-handed. “And yet its editors saw fit to publish this vile piece,” the groups said. So you see how Jewish media control works in the real world, not the fantasy world of the anti-Semites. Owning the press is utterly unnecessary. All you need is one badass Lobby that plays for keeps.

Please follow and like us:
error3
fb-share-icon20
20
fb-share-icon20

5 thoughts on “Ownership Not Required – An Examination of Jewish Media Control”

  1. Very good post.
    Luckily the Jewish media complex is partially crumbling because of the ubiquity of the internet, though American Jews still have the American film industry (which is also failing), American television, and American radio pretty locked down. However, I predict that Jewish domination of these sectors will also soon fall apart, leaving Jewish media power a shell of its former self.

  2. The film industry seems to have gotten a Hell of a lot less Jewish in the past 25 years or so, unless my analysis is wrong. They’ve sort of got radio, but then there’s Clear Channel owned by Texan fundamentalist Christians. Do they really have TV? Fox is owned by a Gentile. He’s more Jewish than most Jews, but you still can’t say Jews own Fox. Do Jews own CNN? Someone help me out here.
    It’s true that if you turn on sitcoms or drama shows and look for the producers, there’s almost always some Jewish names there. I think the Jews are already losing the media. They lost the Daily Show, and they are losing the NY Times and the Washington Post. The Net seems lost. They’re losing The Huffington Post as we speak.

  3. Qoute: “Jews totally run Hollywood.” 19 December 2oo8.
    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-stein19-2008dec19,0,6620255.column
    You surprise me Robert, you know one of the jews secret weapons – boycott. Most people do not understand what you can do with a boycott. The jews have many secret weapons (I’m writing about that right now) and boycott is one of the jew mafias strongest weapon.
    Look at Iraq, it was boycotted for ten years or so. The reason why Bush Sr dident go into Iraq was that the jew mafia knew that Iraq was to strong military, another Nam. But the jew mafia have the time. First BOMB BOMB BOMB, just like Germany in ww2, then ten years boycott and then invade.
    The jew mafia is doing exactly the same thing with Iran.
    The boycott weapon is why it dosent matter if the owner of the MSM is a jew or not. The jews own it anyway by the boycott weapon.

Leave a Reply to Eman Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

error

Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)