Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards is calling on Democrats to oppose News Corp.’s purchase of Dow Jones & Co. and “take the necessary steps to stop the merger,” in a major step-up of his previous criticism of Fox News Channel.
In an e-mail today to his supporters, the former North Carolina senator said continuing media consolidation “threatens the health of our democracy.”
“News Corp.’s purchase of Dow Jones and the Wall Street Journal should be the last straw when it comes to media consolidation,” he said in the e-mail.
“The basis of a strong democracy begins and ends with a strong, unbiased and fair media—all qualities which are pretty hard to subscribe to Fox News and News Corp.
“The reality is that Americans deserve more news outlets—not fewer,” Sen. Edwards said. “It’s time for all Democrats, including those running for president, to stand up and speak out against this merger and other forms of media consolidation.”
Sen. Edwards didn’t say how the Democrats should block the merger.
FCC Commissioner Michael J. Copps suggested on Tuesday that the FCC should look closely at the cross ownership implications in New York, where News Corp. would own the Journal, the New York Post and TV stations.
Sen. Edwards also called on Democrats to refuse donations from News Corp. execs. Both Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. President-Chief Operating Officer Peter Chernin have contributed to the presidential campaigns of Democrats Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Joe Biden and Sen. Christopher Dodd. Mr. Chernin also was co-host, with Steven Spielberg and Haim Saban, of a major Hollywood fundraiser in May for Sen. Clinton.
“Given Fox News’ consistent efforts to demean Democrats—they have attacked the character of Sen. Obama, Vice President Gore and many others—no Democrat running for president should accept campaign money from top News Corp executives,” Sen. Edwards said in his e-mail. “So today I’m challenging every Democratic presidential candidate to refuse contributions from News Corp. executives and return any they've already taken, beginning with Rupert Murdoch. The time has come for Democrats to stop pretending to be friends with the very people who demonize the Democratic Party.”
Sen. Edwards was the first Democratic candidate to decline to participate in any Fox News Channel debates, and he has used his refusal in fundraising efforts.
News Corp. declined comment.
(Editor: Horowitz, Updated at 11:53 am)
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Fark 
StumbleUpon 
Comments (9)
John Edwards is getting more weird and irrelevant by the day!
Posted by Red Blanchard | August 2, 2007 1:10 PM
Although I am a Hillary Clinton supporter and will continue to be, I totally agree with John Edwards on this issue. It is frightening how bias FOX News is. It is blatantly biased and they have the gall to say, "fair and balanced." That is an outright lie. That is something I noticed right from the start of FOX News. I cannot believe it has taken this long for someone to forcefully challange them. It would be a disaster for News Corp. to take ownership of Dow Jones. Haven't the American people learned their lesson with the media giant, Clear Channel? Let's hope so. Clear Channel does what it wants, when it wants and the public be dammed. With Clear Channel and now News Corp. owning probably 75% of the media affecting news coverage, it could be extremely dangerous to truly fair and balanced reporting. This is not to say that there isn't any bias in other organizations. There is but is it minor compared to the bias from Clear Channel and News Corp.
Posted by Dave DiSisto | August 2, 2007 2:18 PM
I agree with John Edwards. Murdoch is not to be trusted with news since he clearly sees it as his forum, his pulpit, not an objective information organ for informed citizenry. It's one thing to offer an avowed partisan editorial page, as WSJ does, but it's another to slant the news with bias, innuendo and pretend its not. I fear Murdoch will "editorialize" the WSJ news pages like he has Fox News. On entertainment, however, he's okay. Maybe that's Murdoch's problem, he can't differentiate between the two. Clearly Edwards can.
Posted by Stuart Fischoff | August 2, 2007 2:35 PM
"Frightened by how biased Fox News is?"
Oh, please, as in the one media source willing to cover Democrats with anything but unconditional, fawning praise.
So yes, they're "biased," if you consider ever giving Republicans a single moment of positive press. They're "biased" if you consider any criticism of Democrats just plain wrong. They're "biased" if you consider anything but condemnation of the Bush administration at every turn to be right wing agitprop.
However, if you want something other than the massively biased reporting that CNN, ABC, CBS and NBC pump out daily as "news," Fox is the sole source of any information even remotely approaching unbiased.
"But what about O'Reilly, Brit Hume and John Gibson?"
What about Larry King? Wolf Blitzer? Lou Dobbs? Katie Couric? Charles Gibson? Oh, they're non-partisan. Yeah.
Posted by Bill | August 2, 2007 3:40 PM
Why is Hillary Clinton allowing Rupert Murdoch and News Corp executives to sponsor fundraisers for her?? And why is she accepting donations from them??
Didn't Murdoch's Fox News beat the drums 24/7 for her husband's impeachment??
Why would she NOW cozy up to Murdoch? It's the only way to ensure 24/7 positive news coverage of her.
And what is the cost to Americans to have a president indebted to a media mogul??
People wake up!! 28 years of Bushes and Clintons is like a banana republic where a few families rotate the power.
Posted by annefrank | August 2, 2007 7:04 PM
John Edwards is correct. He understands that irresponsible journalism is effective even if it's not really journalism.
Mr. Murdoch has shown himself to be a man interested primarily in advocating for his own self-interest. His media empire promotes some of the most tawdry and ethically challenged print/video available, while other segments of his empire espouse moral values and "fair and balanced" news.
And, I must point out the ovbious. When the media
gives equal time to both "sides", it is based on the premise that each has merit. However, when one group is spreading lies or ideology-based opinion, it merely provides a forum for the lies/opinion.
Bottom line: We ought to be working to limit the Fox/Drudge type of media. Our democracy depends upon it.
Posted by pmthomas | August 2, 2007 9:59 PM
80% of campaign donations from Fox News employees goes to Democrats.
Posted by bjalder26 | August 2, 2007 11:27 PM
"80% of campaign donations from Fox News employees goes to Democrats".
Thank you for showing that even though a reporter may be a Democrat it is irrelevant because the media is owned by conservative corporations who will never report any news which may disrupt the status quo.
Posted by mike | August 3, 2007 10:38 AM
It is the right of any American express their opinion, no matter how stupid. Edwards and his opinions are both.
Posted by joseph a sansone | August 3, 2007 10:39 AM