Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


On June 23, Geoffrey C. Bible, the chairman and CEO of Philip Morris, was voted onto the board of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation. Articles about business synergy fill the front pages, but this drew virtually no coverage. The next day, the Wall Street Journal ran a four-sentence item buried on Page B9, and Murdoch’s own New York Post printed a slightly more celebratory announcement on Page 32. A week later, a Lexis-Nexis search using the keywords “Geoffrey Bible and Rupert Murdoch” turned up no additional items. A second search another week later yielded just one more column, written by Chip Jones, a tobacco reporter at the Richmond (Va.) Times Dispatch.

What drew Jones’ attention? An anti-tobacco activist, Michigan lawyer Cliff Douglas, had sent the Journal item to every reporter he could think of and urged them to look into the story. The result? Other than Jones, nobody paid the slightest attention.

In this issue ofMother Jones, which features a new-fashioned design, you’ll find several old-fashioned articles on topics not likely to be covered elsewhere. For example, we attended a seminar that teaches modern union-busting techniques to executives. Having worked at a major news corporation for nine years, I can assure you that in the mainstream media such stories are not censored by the higher-ups. Their suppression technique is more elegant: Just eliminate the labor beat.

We also have pieces that critique the way America’s top newspapers cover defense and point to covert programs that should be spotlighted. Although a few reporters remain on this beat, they depend heavily upon Pentagon sources and industry officials, none of whom is about to comment on top-secret projects.

A third report examines the massive forest fires in Borneo that darkened the skies over Indonesia last spring. New evidence indicates that big companies—many with close ties to then President Suharto—paid farmers to set fires so they could plant lucrative crops. The American media isn’t eager to cover this now because the story takes place overseas, is a few months old, and brings up daunting questions about the continuing destruction of the planet’s forests to feed growth.

But what’s preventing a Marlboro/Murdoch piece? The story has many readily available news hooks. For example, right when Bible was appointed to the News Corp. board, Bill Clinton was flying to China—the very market that Philip Morris and Rupert Murdoch covet most. According to the World Health Organization (WHO), China has an estimated 300 million smokers and is one of a very few countries where cigarette consumption is on the rise. It also has the world’s largest untapped TV audience. A reporter on any number of beats—business, entertainment, international—could look for behind-the-scenes deals.

There’s even a sports angle: Philip Morris has skirted a ban on tobacco advertising by lending the name of its No. 1 brand to the premier Marlboro Soccer League. The Marlboro sign in sports stadiums is positioned directly in front of TV cameras. This image is beamed to millions of viewers by Star TV, a satellite channel owned by Murdoch.

What’s the impact of this cross-marketing? An executive in charge of developing the Chinese market for Marlboro once told me that the company’s aim is simple: “Get the smoker to associate the first cigarette of the day with freedom, sports, or sex. The second cigarette is just habit.” For “habit,” read “addiction.” According to WHO’s best estimate, “Of all the children and young people under the age of 20 alive today in China, 200 million will become smokers, and at least 50 million of these will eventually die prematurely because of tobacco use.”

In 1989, when Murdoch was appointed to the Philip Morris board (a position he retains today), such statistics were known but unreported by the American press. Why not make a difference now and simultaneously shame the head of a rival media organization? Murdoch has thrown down the gauntlet to journalists. Last year he told approximately 240 executives attending the Forbes CEO Forum, “Philip Morris and the tobacco industry in general are victims of a classic media feeding frenzy.”

Are such pronouncements and shared corporate interests likely to inhibit tobacco coverage within Murdoch’s own media empire? You be the judge. One internal Philip Morris paper unsealed in Minnesota’s tobacco case is titled “The Perspective of PM International on Smoking and Health Issues: Text of the discussion document used at the meeting of top management.” It has as its starting point a memo from Hamish Maxwell, a former chief executive of Philip Morris. Maxwell stepped down from the News Corp. board shortly before Bible’s appointment. On the sixth page, you can find this paragraph:

Another area we intend to exploit more fully is the ad agencies and media proprietors. We have already been helped a great deal by the agencies in Hong Kong for example, in our efforts to resist advertising restrictions. As regards the media, we plan to build similar relationships to those we now have with Murdoch’s News Limited with other newspaper proprietors. Murdoch’s papers rarely publish anti-smoking articles these days.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We canā€™t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who wonā€™t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its futureā€”you.

And we need readers to show up for us big timeā€”again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate