Jewish media

With each passing year, popularization of the Holocaust increased. from the Heroism Quiz on national television, live from Auschwitz, to the publication of a Hebrew edition of Maus, an American book that depicts the murder of Jews in comic-book form, consciousness of the Holocaust became part of everyday life and a staple theme of popular culture in films and plays, books and television. By the late 1980s there was hardly a day when the Holocaust was not mentioned in one of the newspapers.

The American Jews: portrait of a split personality

61-- Movie Moguls’ Shaky Egos Keep Them Out of Clubs

Many of the most influential men in the movie industry, which still dominates the Los Angeles area, are Jewish. Yet the leading Los Angeles businessmen’s club, the California Club, has never accepted Jews. The movie moguls have quite enough power to force this club to open its doors to them, but they have never made the attempt. To do so would mean to admit that non-Jews consider them inferior, and their shaky egos won’t allow that — so they have dealt with the situation by pretending it doesn’t exist.

225 -- Jewish Graduates Move Into ‘Intellectual’ Professions

Jewish involvement in the intellectual professions is equaled by Jewish participation in the arts. Much has been made of the renaissance of Jewish writing in the last decade — Norman Mailer, Saul Bellow, Philip Roth, Bruce J. Friedman, and so on. ..

... In the peripheral areas of the arts Jews are active too. The movie theater and television worlds are full of them. Many actors and even more comedians are Jewish; the percentage is very high among directors, designers, and producers. Sixty percent of the art dealers in New York and just under 50 percent of the major American book publishers are Jewish. Many of the leading concert managers are Jewish.

West German Reparations to Israel

212 -- Anti-German Propaganda and Stereotypes Perpetuated in Media

The revival of Nazism in the Federal Republic of Germany seems to be an idée fixé of American journalism, film, and television. except for Chancellor Adenauer, Germans are seen as being unable to become good democrats. In 1969 it was reported in the West German weekly Der Volkswirt that, according to Mr. Erwin Single, the editor of the German-language New Yorker Staatszeitung und Herold, CBS permitted week after week the presentation of Germans as spies, mad scientists, puffed-up blockheads, sadists, and other unpleasant figures. The appearance of old movies on television — especially the heavy-handed, anti-German wartime dramas — is still frequent. Such reruns are cheap inputs that earn money for the TV stations. Although there is no malice intended in showing them, their effect may nevertheless be cumulative upon the subconscious mind, and therefore upon the formulation of attitudes. In the fall of 1965 the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung also quoted the New Yorker Staatszeitung und Herold which protested against the presentation on American TV of the entire German nation as a collection of subhumans and idiots. In many American homes, viewers are thoroughly familiar with such widely serialized shows as Hogan’s Heroes and Combat, in which Germans are depicted as stupid, repulsive, obedient, and always arrogant aggressors.

The British mass media have exhibited similar attitudes toward Germans. One Englishman felt that the British “popular press . . . had proved itself both unable and unwilling to free itself from the clutches of war-time propaganda,” and “ . . . news of positive trends [was] ignored.

A Certain People: american jews and their lives today

147-- Jews in the Movies and TV

ITEM: The motion picture industry was largely a Jewish invention, and it remains a predominantly (although not exclusively) Jewish industry. In a study of the most influential writers, producers and executives, the political scientists Stanley Rothman and S. Robert Lichter found that more than three out of five of the “movie elite” are Jews. Not surprisingly, since television entertainment is in good measure an outgrowth of film production and is still closely connected with it, Jews make up almost as large a proportion of the “TV elite.”

153, 154 -- Jews in the News

ITEM: Jews are equally influential, if less well known, in the management of television news. It is the network correspondents, of course, who have become household names, among them Jews like Mike Wallace, Morley Safer, Bernard Goldberg, and orton Dean of CBS; Marvin Kalb and Irving R. Levine of NBC; and Herbert Kaplow, Barbara Walters, and ted Koppel of ABC. The greatest concentration of Jews, however, is at the producer level — and it is the producers who decide what stories will go on th air, and how long, and in what order they will run.

An Empire of Their Own

119 -- Fabricating America in Their Image

[Louis B.] Mayer’s real accomplishment was translating his own way of holding on into America’s. By the early thirties, MGM had clearly displaced Zukor’s Paramount as the supreme studio, and Mayer certainly was due a large share of the credit — credit he wasn’t always given. What Zukor had done in the twenties — what he was situated to do as an assimilating Jew — was mediate between a traditional America and a new America of immigrants and cities, between the upper and middle classes on one side and the working class on the other. What Mayer did in the thirties — what he was situated to do as a Jew yearning to belong — was provide reassurance against the anxieties and disruptions of the time. He did this by fashioning a vast, compelling national fantasy out of his dreams and out of the basic tenets of his own dogmatic faith — a belief in virtue, in the bulwark of family, in the merits of loyalty, in the soundness of tradition, in America itself.

Native born, white, Anglo-Saxon Protestant Americans could share this fantasy with Mayer and even call it their own. But it is unlikely that any of them could have or would have invented it. To do so, one would have needed the same desperate longing for security that Mayer and so many of the other Hollywood Jews felt. One would have had to suffer the same compulsion to merge oneself with the world. One would have had to be so fearful of being outside and alone that one would go to any lengths to fabricate America as a sanctuary, safe and secure, and then promulgate this idealization to other Americans. Finally, one would have had to identify so closely with this fabricated America that one would have had to been reborn on the Fourth of July . . . Just as Louis B. Mayer had.

277, 278 -- Henry Ford on Jewish Control of Hollywood

For the Hollywood Jews who [Rabbi] Magnin served, his philosophy had the added force of self-defense. It hadn’t taken long for anti-Semites to seize the issue of Jewish control of the film industry. The movies, fulminated Henry Ford’s Dearborn Independent early in 1921 are Jew-controlled, not in spots only, not 50 percent merely, but entirely; with the natural consequence that now the world is in arms against the trivializing and demoralizing influences of that form of entertainment as presently managed. . . . As soon as the Jews gained control of the “movies,” we had a movie problem, the consequences of which are not yet visible. It is the genius of that race to create problems of a moral character in whatever business they achieve a majority.

A month later, the Independent conceded, “It is not that producers of Semitic origin have deliberately set out to be bad according to their own standards, but they know that their whole taste and temper are different from the prevailing standards of the American people. . . . Many of these producers don’t know how filthy their stuff is — it is so natural to them.”

Others couched their attack against the European-born Hollywood Jews in a cloak of nativism — the notion that immigrants were corrupting this country. “No foreign bunch can come over here and tell us how we ought to observe the Lord’s Day,” preached evangelist Billy Sunday while thumping for laws that would prohibit the showing of movies on the Sabbath. “The United States at heart is a God-fearing and a God-loving nation and most of our laxity on this point I lay at the door of those elements which are a part of our population, but are not yet assimilated.” Another religious zealot blasted the movies’ alleged “seduction of hundreds of thoughtless girls every day,” which he saw as part of America’s general “Europeanization,” and he pressed for federal censorship laws.

278, 279 -- ‘Jews Always Make More Noise’

Even within Hollywood itself there was mumbling about Jewish control. For some it was the handiest rationale for thwarted dreams. Theodore Dreiser had been lured out to Hollywood in the thirties to oversee the film production of his monumental novel An American Tragedy, but he had battled hammer and tongs with Paramount over what he felt was the “traducing” of his masterpiece, and now he had departed, trying to raise money for a new project on tobacco monopolist James Buchanan Duke. When that failed, Dreiser blamed the Jews. He wrote a Swiftian satire suggesting that Jews be rounded up and packed off to Kansas where they could do no more harm. To a friend he wrote, “The movies are solidly Jewish. They’ve dug in, employ only Jews with American names. . . . The dollar sign is the guide — mentally and physically. That America should be led — the mass — by their direction is beyond all believing. In addition, they are arrogant, insolent and contemptuous.” Director Howard Hawks complained that Jews were loud. “Do you notice how noisy it is in here suddenly?” he asked actress Lauren Bacall over lunch. “That’s because Leo Forbstein just walked in — Jews always make more noise, Bacall, née Betty Perske from New York, said nothing — afraid that Hawks might find out she was Jewish and fire her.

294 -- Use Hollywood’s Power to Meet Attacks on Jews and Motion Picture Industry

Among the activities of this new group, [Mendel] Silberberg [of the American Jewish Committee] recommended that it “militantly meet attacks on Jews or upon the motion picture industry by using for these purposes the talents and abilities of those engaged in the motion picture industry,” and he concluded, “I feel that if the opportunity Hollywood presents were properly harnessed to some of your activities, it could not fail to be of advantage.”

299 -- Proposed Movie ‘Pretext For A Sermon On Tolerance’

On another trip to California, in February 1947, Rothschild had learned that RKO was making a film of The Brick Foxhole, a contemporary novel that used the murder of a homosexual as the pretext for a sermon on tolerance. There was nothing wrong with that, except in adapting the book, RKO had decided to make the victim a Jew instead. “Dick understood perfectly that the producers of the picture were animated by the best of motives,” stated an AJC memo, “but he felt that the basic idea of killing Jews just because they are Jews, was an extremely dangerous idea to project on the screen before 50 million or more people of all shades of emotional maturity or immaturity.”

299 -- Film Made in Spite of Poor Audience Survey Response

A few days later Rothschild received the film’s script, now called Crossfire, from Silberberg and arranged to meet RKO’s president, Peter Rathvon, who apparently expressed his own doubts about the movie. (How much of this was concern over Jews and how much over box office is hard to say; Crossfire had tested poorly in an audience survey asking moviegoers whether they wanted to see a film about its subject.)

304 -- Put Ficticious Jewish Hero Into Movie: Stone

In effect, though, Stone’s [John Stone, formerly John Strumwasser] work mainly came down to picking nits: influencing the producer of The Sands of Iwo Jima to incorporate a fictitious Jewish soldier; advising the producer of I Can get It for You Wholesale, a film about the garment industry, that he must proceed cautiously since the general public associated Jews with the garment trades; trying to beef up the role of Justice Brandeis in a film biography of Oliver Wendell Holmes; leaning on the writer of Murder Inc., about the Jewish gangster Louis Lepke, to include a crusading Jewish prosecutor as well; and most ludicrously, suggesting that Sammy Glick, the conniving Jewish protagonist of Budd Schulberg’s novel What Makes Sammy Run?, be changed to someone of indeterminate ancestry.

374 -- Hollywood Uses Influence to Sway California Governor’s Race

Joe Schenck told reporters that [Upton] Sinclair’s election [as California governor] would destroy the film industry. “I’ll move the studios to Florida, sure as fate, if Sinclair is elected.” When asked if the studios were banding together to defeat him, Schenck answered, “Not as yet. But I’m going to tell the moving picture people who don’t come along with us that they will cut their own throats.”

Schenck wasn’t being entirely truthful about Hollywood’s collusion. Within a few weeks the studios were turning out “newsreels” in which an inquiring reporter would ask ordinary citizens who they were voting for. “I am voting for Governor Merriam,” said a little old lady, her voice quavering. “Why, Mother?” “Because I want to have my little home. It is all I have left in the world.” “Vy, I am foting for Seenclair,” boasted a bedraggled, bewhiskered, wild-eyed immigrant in another newsreel. “Vell, his system vorked vell in Russia, vy can’t it vork here?” In another, an army of hoboes descended upon California in anticipation of Sinclair’s election. In still another, a popular black Los Angeles minister said he would be voting for Merriam because he liked to preach and play the piano, and he wanted to keep a church to preach in and a piano to play. In all, the industry raised nearly half a million dollars for the cause — most of it by exacting two days’ wages from each employee. “This campaign against Upton Sinclair has been and is dynamite,” exulted The Hollywood Reporter eleven days before the election. “When the picture business gets aroused, it becomes AROUSED, and boy, how they can go to it. It is the most effective piece of political humdingery that has ever been effected.” In November Sinclair was soundly thrashed.

343 -- Roosevelt Gives Nod to Hollywood Jews to Step Up Anti-Nazi Propaganda

This was the nature of the executives’ opposition to Hitler over the next three years — tentative and even-handed, making sure to condemn Stalin as well as Hitler. But when war broke out in Europe, and the United States moved closer to open hostility toward Hitler in the late thirties, the Hollywood Jews suddenly found themselves spinning in the dance of neutrality. On the one hand, President Roosevelt seemed to encourage them to take sides, having said, “This nation will remain a neutral nation, but I cannot ask that every American remain neutral in thought as well. Even a neutral has a right to take account of facts. Even a neutral cannot be asked to close his mind or his conscience.” The Warners knew an offer, even a veiled offer, when they saw one and wired the president that “personally we would like to do all in our power within the motion picture industry and by use of the talking screen to show the American people the worthiness of the cause for which the free peoples of Europe are making such tremendous sacrifices.” A few months later Nick Schenck offered to place his entire studio at the president’s disposal “in connection with the movie of national defense and foreign policy in which you [Roosevelt] were interested.”

345 -- Charles Lindbergh, America First, Point to Hollywood Jews As Agitators

Though Wheeler and the other senate isolationists insisted they had no animus against Jews, the new subcommittee was strongly supported and assisted by a rabid isolationist group called America First, which obviously did. (America First’s most prominent spokesman was Colonel Charles Lindbergh, who had warned an audience in Des Moines that the Jews’ “greatest danger to this country lies in their large ownership and influence in our motion pictures, our press, our radio, and our government,” and one of the leaders of the group, a myopic reactionary named John T. Flynn, had actually drafted the resolution that called for an investigation.) On the day it was submitted, August 1, Senator Gerald Nye of North Dakota, one of its co-sponsors, was delivering a speech before a rally of America Firsters in St. Louis. Proclaiming that it was the movies that were agitating for war, Nye asked the crowd, “Who are the men who are doing this? Why are they trying to make America punch drunk with propaganda to push her into war?” The senator then named the executives of the major film companies and drew the inevitable conclusion: “In each of these companies there are a number of production directors, many of whom have come from Russia, Hungary, Germany, and the Balkan countries” — people who were “naturally susceptible” to “racial emotions.”

The Fatal Embrace

1 -- Jewish Influence in American Life

Since the 1960s, Jews have come to wield considerable influence in American economic, cultural, intellectual and political life. Jews played a central role in American finance during the 1980s, and they were among the chief beneficiaries of that decade’s corporate mergers and reorganizations. Today, though barely 2% of the nation’s population is Jewish, close to half its billionaires are Jews. The chief executive officers of the three major television networks and the four largest film studios are Jews, as are the owners of the nation’s largest newspaper chain and most influential single newspaper, the New York Times. ...

22 -- Jews in Journalism

In the middle decades of the nineteenth century, Jews also came to be a major factor in British journalism. The Reuters News Agency, founded by Paul Julius Reuter (whose name was originally Israel Beer Josaphat) in 1948, was the chief purveyor of information on world events to the entire British press and, at times, the government as well. The Sassoons owned and edited the Sunday Times, Harry Marks founded the Financial Times, and Sir Alfred Mond controlled the English Review. Jews were especially important to the popular press. The Daily Telegraph, controlled by the Levy Lawson family, was London’s first penny newspaper, and, in the 1870s, had a circulation of just under 200,000. The Telegraph appealed mainly to a lower- middle- and working-class audience and specialized in sensational coverage of both domestic and foreign events. Harry Oppenheim had a major interest in another mass circulation daily, the London Daily News. Sir Alfred Mond published the Westminster Gazette, a paper that provided its popular audience with dramatic coverage of the exploits of British military forces in the far-flung reaches of the empire.

A Nation On Trial

Introduction:

Rarely has a book with scholarly pretensions evoked as much popular interest as Daniel Jonah Goldhagen’s study Hitler‘s Willing Executioners: Ordinary Germans and the Holocaust. Every important journal of opinion printed one or more reviews within weeks of its release. The New York Times, for instance, features multiple notices acclaiming Goldhagen’s book as “one of those rare new works that merit the appellation landmark, ‘historic,’ and bringing to bear ‘corrosive literary passion.’ Although initial reviews were not uniformly positive, once the Goldhagen juggernaut proved unstoppable, even the dissenting media voices joined in the chorus of praise. An immediate national best-seller, Hitler’s Willing Executioners was hailed in Time magazine’s year-end issue as the “most talked about” and second best nonfiction book of 1996. Before long, Goldhagen was also an international phenomenon, creating an extraordinary stir in Germany.

Jews and Money: the myths and the reality

77 -- That’s Entertainment

The entertainment industry still is a markedly Jewish business, even though the old studio gurus are gone: Paramount’s nominal head is Gulf + Western’s Bludhorn, and Transamerica’s United Artist was run by Arthur Krim before he started Orion, which bought Filmways. Loews Theatres, a part of the hotel real-estate insurance company, is controlled by the Tisch family, M-G-M chairman is Frank Rosenfelt (the highest-paid American in 1979 with compensation of $5.2 million), and one of the largest studios, Universal, is part of MCA.

While MCA goes back to the salad days of movies, it only recently became one of the heavyweights in the industry. In a way, it is an exemplary Jewish organization: it started as a talent agency for brokering high-priced stars, and then entered television production when the home screen showed signs of a rapacious appetite. As an agency it stood halfway between the creative and the commercial worlds, a stimulant to both. The company was founded by the late Jules Stein, a one-time eye doctor who retired to pursue philanthropic work in eye research, but is presently run by Lew R. Wasserman and Sidney J. Sheinberg.

Jewish Power - Inside the American Jewish Establishment

280 -- Jews in the Media

It is true that Jews are represented in the media in numbers far out of proportion to their share of the population. Studies have shown that while Jews make up little more than 5 percent of the working press nationwide — hardly more than their share of the population — they make up one fourth or more of the writers, editors, and producers in America’s “elite media,” including network news divisions, the top newsweeklies and the four leading daily papers (New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post and Wall Street Journal).

In the fast-evolving world of media megacorporations, Jews are even more numerous. In an October 1994 Vanity Fair feature, profiling the kingpins of the new media elite, titled, “The New Establishment,” just under half of the two dozen entrepreneurs profiled were Jews. In the view of the magazine’s editors, these are America’s true power elite, “men and women from the entertainment, communications and computer industries, whose ambitions and influence have made America the one true superpower of the Information Age.”

And in a few key sectors of the media, notably among Hollywood studio executives, Jews are so numerically dominant that calling these businesses Jewish-controlled is little more than a statistical observation.

“If there is Jewish power, it’s the power of the word, the power of Jewish columnists and Jewish opinion makers,” says Eugene Fisher, director of Catholic-Jewish relations at the National Conference of Catholic Bishops, and one of the Jewish community’s staunchest defenders in religious Christian circles. “The Jewish community is a very literate community, and it has a lot to say. And if you can shape opinion, you can shape events.”

282 --Jewish Media Influence Several Distinct Phenomena

On closer examination, Jewish media influence is actually several distinct phenomena. there are entertainment media and news media, which play vastly different roles in America and live by different sets of rules. Within each sphere, there are those who own or manage the media, and those who write or edit the content. And then there is the unique case of the New York Times, America’s “newspaper of record” and arguably the most Jewish of all major institutions in the world of American power — and the one that makes the greatest effort not to be.

The Powers That Be

21, 22 -- Sam Paley

Sam Paley had made his money in cigars, the Congress Cigar Company, and indeed the woman on the wrapper of the La Palina was said to resemble Goldie, wife of Sam, mother of Bill. Sam Paley’s father, Isaac Paley, had been a prosperous businessman in Russia; he had been in the lumber business in a small town outside Kiev, and he had been a good deal wealthier than most Jews in Russia in the latter part of the nineteenth century. But he was discontented with the restrictions which the Russian society placed on Jews and the anti-Semitism that hung so heavily in the atmosphere at all times, and so he had often thought of emigrating to America.

22, 23 -- Sam Paley Invests $400,000 in Fledgling CBS

So in 1928, when through family friends and in-laws the chance came along to buy into a fledgling radio network called CBS, Sam Paley, already impressed by radio’s possibilities, quickly encouraged his son to get in on it, and put up some $400,000 of the family money.

23 -- Paley’s Power and Influence Over American Taste and Culture

Bill Paley was right at the center of the era’s most powerful forces, he had combined the prime energies of American huckstering with the explosive new potential of American technology. He and his imitators achieved vast power and influence over American taste and culture.

24 - Helped Determine What America Saw Each Night

He more than the other early figures of broadcasting was fascinated by entertainment and programming; it was devotion to every detail in programming which made him so important in American life, for he helped determine what the nation first heard and then saw in its home every night. His chosen instruments, particularly with the coming of television, were by the end of the sixties more dominant in most American lives than newspapers, churches, and often the family itself. It was his decisions which created broadcasting as it exists today, with the power and tastemaking centralized in the network.

25 -- CBS Growth Under Paley Stewardship

In the first year of his stewardship CBS went from a gross earning of $1.4 million to $4.7 million, and to $28.7 million by 1937; the number of stations reached 114 in the first decade he was there. Success had come and it had come quickly.

31 -- Paley Sensitive About His Russian-Jewish Roots

All things or almost all things would be possible for Bill Paley despite his Russian-jewish roots. This was and is a point of some sensitivity with Paley. When a recent book about CBS by a reporter named Robert Metz described Paley as a Russian Jew, Kidder Meade, Paley’s PR man, whose great value as a public relations man stemmed in part from the fact that he was not Jewish, sent out a letter purporting to correct factual inaccuracies, noting among other things that Paley was an American Jew, not a Russian Jew.

33 -- The Power of Broadcasting

Broadcasting is a curious profession. It is the most powerful instrument in the world for merchandising soap, and it is potentially the most powerful instrument in the world for public service, and it has always been caught between the duality of its roles: public service because it is licensed by the government, and thus, like it or not, it owes something to the society, and merchandising, because its material norms are relentlessly driven upward by the marketplace and the stock market. So there is an inevitable conflict of great proportions built in here, one that the public-service side rarely wins. No matter that news and public service have brought television most of its finest hours and most of its true respectability. No matter that most of the speeches by network officials justifying most of what they do at all hours are based on the First Amendment. No matter that it is a photo of Ed Murrow, not one of the cast of “The Beverly Hillbillies.” that hangs on Bill Paley’s office wall. Over the year the instinct for merchandising has always been more powerful, particularly since most broadcast executives in their hearts regard news and public service as a form of charity. Indeed, many of the great moments in broadcasting, first in radio and then in television, have come almost involuntarily, when a particular network was behind in programming and had a weak schedule, it had little to lose and therefore might, for a time, emphasize public service. Boosting news and public affairs became the cheapest way to forge ahead and build a reputation.

208 -- New York Times Publisher Adolph Ochs, Son of German-Jewish Parents

He [Adolph Ochs] was very sensitive about being Jewish, which was a dominating characteristic about him and the dynasty he founded. They were good and respectable German Jews at a time when the nation was being flooded with Jewish immigrants from Russia and Poland; the German Jews who had seemed more German than the Germans in the old country, now if anything seemed more Protestant than the Protestants in the new. But the Eastern European Jews, given to beards, long hair, and radical political theories, did not fit in. The smell of the old world and old grievances was about them. Their presence stirred anti-Semitism (Adolph’s brother George believed that those immigrants with their old world ways caused anti-Semitism not just against themselves but against older, better-behaved, more established Jews; if they would just tidy themselves up, cut their hair, and behave themselves, things would be all right). Ochs, good citizen that he was and intended to be, coveted the respect of the good people of the Gentile world. He was what was then called a White Jew. He was determined to show, principally through his newspaper, that Jews were hard-working, trustworthy, and made good citizens. He wanted to succeed, to make the paper profitable, but in truth he wanted and coveted respectability far more than he coveted material profit. That was crucial to the tone of the paper. He wanted the best people to read his paper, and as they did, to think well of him and his kind.

214, 215 -- Sulzberger Next Publisher of New York Times

Ochs had taken his dynasty well into the next century, but it was in the reign of Arthur Hays Sulzberger, his son-in-law, that the Trib was in fact beaten. Sulzberger had married Och’s only child, Iphigene, to no great enthusiasm on the part of the patriarch. If marry she must, he would have preferred she marry someone with a background in journalism. Sulzberger was a very handsome man, scion of a very old and aristocratic New York Jewish family. He was intelligent and gentle, reasonably sure of his place in society, modest by comparison to Ochs. .

... On the question of who would succeed him as publisher, Ochs gave one vote to Sulzberger, one vote to his nephew, Julius Ochs Adler, and one vote to Iphigene Sulzberger; in May 1935, one month after Och’s death, not surprisingly Sulzberger became publisher of the Times.

596 -- Lyndon Johnson Says Media Thinks They ‘Own the Country’

Even as Johnson was leaving office he had offered Spiro Agnew the new Vice-President some advice. “Young man,” Johnson said, “we have in this country two big television networks, NBC and CBS. We have two news magazines, Newsweek and Time. We have two wire services, AP and UPI. We have two pollsters, Gallup and Harris. We have two big newspapers, the Washington Post and The New York Times. They’re all so damned big they think they own the country. But young man, don’t get any ideas about fighting.

Separation and Its Discontents: Toward an Evolutionary Theory of Anti-Semitism

52, 53 -- Henry Ford Decries Jewish Domination of Media

In America there is also a long history of overt or thinly veiled anti-Semitism directed at alleged Jewish domination of the media and entertainment industry. The International Jew, published by Henry Ford’s newspaper, The Dearborn Independent, charged that Jews in the media and entertainment industries subverted gentile morals and viewed Jewish media involvement as part of a highly orchestrated Jewish plot described in the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Not only the “legitimate” stage, so-called, but the motion picture industry — the fifth greatest of all industries — is also entirely Jewish-controlled; with the natural consequence that the civilized world is increasingly antagonistic to the trivializing and demoralizing influence of that form of entertainment as presently managed. . . . As soon as the Jews gained control of the “movies,” we had a movie problem, the consequences of which are visible. It is the peculiar genius of that race to create problems of a moral character in whatever business they achieve a majority. (The International Jew: The World’s Greatest Enemy, Ford 1920, 48)

54 -- Jews Head Every Major [Movie] Studio

By all accounts, Jews continue to be disproportionately involved in the American media, especially the movie industry. For example, as of this writing Jews head every major studio — a situation that has not changed in over sixty years (see The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State, Ginsberg 1993, 1; Tribes: How Race, Religion and Identity Determine Success in the New Global Economy, Kotkin 1993, 61; A Certain People: American Jews and Their Lives Today, Silberman, 1985, 147). In a survey performed in the 1980s, 60 percent of a representative sample of the movie elite were of Jewish background (Hollywood’s America: Social and Political Themes in Motion Pictures, Powers et al. 1996, 79n13).

56 -- Jewish Ownership Catalogued in ‘Striking Example of Anti-Semitic Writing’

A particularly striking example of anti-Semitic writing related to the media control issue appeared recently in the National Vanguard Book Service Catalog (no. 16, November 1995), a publication of William Pierce’s National Alliance. The article combined anti-Semitic themes with a detailed cataloguing of Jewish ownership or managerial control over television, popular music, the print media, major newspapers and chains of smaller newspapers, newsmagazines, and book publishing in the United States. The article emphasized the ability of the media to create boundaries of appropriate discussion, as in the case of attitudes regarding Israel, and accused the media of promoting the equality of races and the benefits of immigration and multi-culturalism. The article concludes that:

By permitting the Jews to control our news and entertainment media we are doing more than merely giving them a decisive influence on our political system and virtual control of our government, we also are giving them control of the minds and souls of our children, whose attitudes and ideas are shaped more by Jewish television and Jewish films than by parents, schools, or any other influence. . . .

To permit the Jews, with their 3,000 year history of nation-wrecking, from ancient Egypt to Russia, to hold such power over us is tantamount to race suicide. Indeed, the fact that so many White Americans today are so filled with a sense of racial guilt and self-hatred that they actively seek the death of their own race is a deliberate consequence of Jewish media control. (page 22; italics in text)

57 -- Hollywood Promoting Lib-Left Agenda Even Though American Public Opposed

A substantial percentage of the Hollywood creative community (which now includes the higher levels of control over movie content rather than only the process of screen writing) have self-consciously aimed at a complete restructuring of America’s basic institutions in a left/liberal direction (Prime Time: How TV Portrays American Culture, Lichter et al. 1994; Hollywood’s America: Social and Political Themes in Motion Pictures, Powers et al. 1996). “The elite was [since the 1960s] and remains disproportionately anti-Establishment in its social and political views and . . . remains so even as a large segment of the American public continues to be ambivalent, or opposed to the new social paradigms” (Hollywood’s America: Social and Political Themes in Motion Pictures, Powers et al. 1996, 48). Moreover, the social and political messages emanating from Hollywood have been impervious to election returns, and “if anything, the ascendance of conservative politics in Washington may have accelerated television’s leftward tendencies by alarming and mobilizing the predominantly liberal Hollywood community” (Prime Time: How TV Portrays American Culture, Lichter et al. 1994, 418).

58 -- Pluralism Promoted in Movies and Television

Regarding specific Jewish interests, a major theme of The Culture of Critique is that cultural pluralism has been a major focus of 20th-century Jewish intellectual and political effort in Western societies. Hollywood’s America: Social and Political Themes in Motion Pictures, Powers et al. (1996, 207) characterize television as promoting liberal, cosmopolitan values, and Lichter et al. (Prime Time: How TV Portrays American Culture, 1994, 251) find that television portrays cultural pluralism in positive terms and as easily achieved apart from the activities of a few ignorant or bigoted miscreants. On the other hand, Powers et al. (1996) find that themes of racial conflict resulting from white racism are more typical of the movies: “Today, moviemakers seem preoccupied with exposing and rectifying the evils of racism and are thus inclined to convey a quite pessimistic view of race relations” (p. 173).

192 -- Jewish Groups Force Studios to Subject Depiction of Jews to Censorship

Another Jewish media interest has been to promote positive portrayals of Jews and combat negative images. Gabler (An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood, 1988, 300ff) describes a traditional concern among Jewish organizations regarding the portrayal of Jews by the Jewish-controlled Hollywood studios. Major Jewish organizations, such as the AJCommittee, the ADL, and the AJCongress, developed a formal liaison with the studios by which depictions of Jews would be subjected to censorship. One such group stated in 1947 that “Jewish organizations have a clear and rightful interest in making sure that Hollywood films do not present Jews in such a way as to arouse prejudice. . . . In some cases, such pictures should be taken out of production entirely. In other cases, scripts should be edited carefully to eliminate questionable passages. Everything should be done to eliminate unfortunate stereotypes of the Jews” (p. 303). Gabler describes several instances where scripts were altered to provide more positive portrayals of Jews. The activities of this group were not publicized, out of fear that it could result in “the charge that [a] Jewish group is trying to censor the industry,” which, as Gabler notes, “was exactly what it was trying to do” (p. 304). The period following World War II marked the beginning of anti-anti-Semitic movies such as Gentleman’s Agreement, which won an Oscar for Best Picture (An Empire of Their Own: How the Jews Invented Hollywood, Gabler 1988, 349ff).

Tenney Reports on World Zionism

67 -- Nefarious Operations of ADL and American Jewish Committee

The Anti-Defamation League and the American Jewish Committee do not have any excuse whatever for their operations. Their secret agents spy upon American citizens. Extensive files and dossiers are compiled on those whom they dislike; those with whom they disagree, and those who, in any way, criticize their activities or the ambitions of Zionism. They penetrate the political field injecting racism into political campaigns. Through their multitudinous controls of the media of communication they are capable of destroying reputations and silencing all rebuttal. By “book stifling” and the American Jewish Committee technique of “quarantine”, critics are denied a public audience for either attack or defense.

77, 78 -- Freedom of Speech

The American Jewish Committee utilizes every susceptible non-Jewish organization in its propaganda drives. Every medium of communication — radio, press, magazines, motion pictures, television — are pressed into service by one device or another. Its chapters are stimulated to feverish action and “competent professional” field staffs are used “to activate community-wide efforts” among special interest organizations “such as church groups, women’s groups, labor groups etc.”

Those who understand and oppose AJC and ADL activities are marked down as “rabble rousers.” Similar to the “book stifling” technique of the Anti-Defamation League of B’nai Brith is the “Quarantine Treatment” of the AJC. This device was “developed by a member of the AJC staff” and requires the cooperation of newspapers, radio etc. That its application is as un-American as “book stifling” goes without saying. It is “effective” in “handling rabble rousers,” declares the AJC, as it deprives “them of their life-line, publicity.”

The Fateful Triangle: the united states, israel & the palestinians

31, 32 -- Israel Granted Unique Immunity From Criticism in Media

The truth of the matter is that Israel has been granted a unique immunity from criticism in mainstream journalism and scholarship, consistent with its unique role as a beneficiary of other forms of American support. We have already seen a number of examples and many more will appear below. Two examples noted earlier in this chapter offer a clear enough indication of this immunity: the Israeli terrorist attacks on U.S. facilities and other public places in Egypt (the Lavon affair), and the attack on the unmistakably identified U.S. Liberty with rockets, aircraft cannon, napalm, torpedoes and machine guns, clearly premeditated, leaving 34 crewmen dead and 75 wounded in “the Navy’s bloodiest ‘peacetime’ international incident of the 20th century.” In both cases, the general reaction of the press and scholarship has been silence or misrepresentation. Neither has entered history as a deplorable act of terrorism and violence, either at the time or in retrospect.

286 -- Did Fear of Anti-Semite Label Prevent Media From Criticizing ADL Study?

It is interesting to ask why the media did not expose the self-contradictions, falsehoods and intellectual vacuity of the ADL critique and the astonishing moral values implicit in it. Perhaps they simply did not want to be charged with anti-Semitism or to be subjected to the kind of defamation and slander in which the ADL specializes.

The Zionist Connection - what price peace?

132 -- American Press Ignores Bigotry in Israel

Virtually nothing of the story of bigotry against the “black Jews” of Israel had ever been carried previously by the American media, even though the New York Times, as well as other major newspapers and press associations, have long had permanent representatives based in Jerusalem and/or Tel Aviv. The 60 percent Sephardim (from North Africa or Asia) have had to content themselves with three percent of all top executive government posts and just 20 percent of the seats in the Knesset. Under the premiership of Golda Meir, the eight-man Cabinet included only Iraq-born Police Minister Shlomo Hillel to represent the Arab-speaking Jews (Iraqis, after the Poles and Rumanians, constitute the largest Israeli ethnic group).

356 -- Media Bias and Deceit

The role of the Times in molding public opinion by means of such persistent deceit and bias cannot be exaggerated. This giant possesses a tremendous, monolithic influence directly on the public, as well as on opinion-molding leaders, although a 1978 Harris poll showed that the people “running” the press stood sixteenth in public esteem in a listing of twenty professions and occupations. How to curtail this power without breaching the prohibition against interference with freedom of the press constitutes one of the great challenges of our times, a problem which Chief Justice Warren E. Burger touched upon in a concurring opinion of April 26, 1978, when he declared that “large media conglomerates had no special claim on First Amendment rights of free expression or other constitutional liberties.” For the major peril that now faces Americans has been spawned by widespread missing information and myth-information underlying their country’s Middle East policy, no small part of which has been caused by the double standard applied to terrorism.

464 -- Zionist Media Control

The takeover of G. P. Putnam’ Sons publishing house by Music Corporation of America (whose chairman, Lew Wasserman, was described in the Robert Scheer Los Angeles Times 1978 controversial series as “the most powerful Jew in Los Angeles as well as the most powerful leader of the entertainment industry”) was reflected in the publication and promotion of such books as 17 Ben-Gurion.

474 -- Media Keeps Holocaust Alive ‘Whenever Jews Will It’

As the one weapon that will never let “them” forget how “we” suffered, the holocaust continues to be immemorialized whenever Jews will it, and their multifold actions, exacted as many pounds of flesh, are never questioned.

474 -- Holocaust Resurrected Only to ‘Prick the World Conscience Anew’

The greater the need for Israel to defend itself against pressure to yield the occupied territories, the more the holocaust was pushed before the American public. Two days before Begin’s March talks with President Carter, the Times Op-Ed piece, “Ein Volk, Ein Reich,” illustrated with a swastika, described the takeover of a suburb of Vienna, the burning of the synagogue, and other Nazi criminal actions. At a time the Middle East was in flames over the Israeli invasion of Lebanon, the recital of this forty-year outdated, newsless, and unrelated incident could have had no other purpose than to prick the world conscience anew.

475 -- Public Opinion is Not Published Opinion

Spread over three pages of TV Guide of April 15 was the article “A Wreath on the Graves of the Six Million” to kick off the NBC telecast April 17-20 of its series. The showings, originally scheduled for the fall, were moved up to coincide with the start of Passover and more importantly, when disaffection with Begin was increasing in the U.S. following his most unsympathetic visit with Carter in Washington and the invasion of Lebanon. NBC’s publicity department grinded [sic] out release after release during the series, claiming that 120 million had seen one or more installments, outdrawing “Roots.”

... The Nielsen ratings revealed that the viewing audience of “Holocaust” did not nearly match “Roots”; on the first night “Laverne and Shirley,” “Three’s Company,” and “M.A.S.H.” outdrew the televised dramatization of Jewish extermination. But network officials expressed satisfaction when Part Two outdrew ABC’s offbeat Western, “A Man Called Horse.” The 370 phoned complaints (390 calls praised the telecasts) “appeared to be part of an organized campaign,” said NBC to the Times.

477 -- Rival Networks Jump on Holocaust Bandwagon

Rival networks picked up on NBC’s theme. For a full week of afternoon movies ABC Channel 7 showed Leon Uris’s “QB VII” and “Exodus” so that the spirit of the holocaust would not be entirely lost. To CBS’s “Sixty Minutes” Mike Wallace brought on April 16 the “Annual Reunion of Auschwitz Survivors,” ...

481 -- Old Nazi Hunter Taken Out of Mothballs to Renew Flagging Interest in Holocaust

Whenever all else failed and the Zionist juggernaut seemed to be stalled, Nazi pursuer Simon Wiesenthal was brought into the limelight. Although Israel has proclaimed a new relationship with West Germany, she has not been adverse to accepting any propaganda gains that might be reaped from the James Bond “007”-like efforts of manhunter Wiesenthal, whose continuing search for Nazis spasmodically erupts into healthy media coverage. “The Nazi Hunter” was the subject of a June 19, 1977, interview on CBS’s “Who’s Who” on “Sixty Minutes,” and a vast field was opened by introducing Dan rather to the notorious anti-Nazi.