My column and blog portraying Rupert Murdoch as a bully for his tactics as Chairman and CEO of News Corporation and its FOX network energized readers. Some opposed my biases. Others cheered me on. Representative comments are listed below in the sequence they arrived. I edited for grammar and length. My conclusions follow reader comments.

    “Unsubscribe. I disagree with you.”

    “Elections this fall will tell the tale. [FOX] news is important media coverage and a balance to the lopsided overload of information expressed by most of the media.”

    “This is a good column on a very important topic. The general citizenry seems to be looking the other way rather than facing Murdoch's threat. Thanks for giving people in NCW a reminder!!!”

    “In the past I've appreciated your balance in assessing events and ideas, but your perspective of News Corp and its derivatives reeks of unbecoming liberal sour grapes and bias.  Much of News Corp's ventures are a direct result of the liberal bias that existed long before FOX et al. were born.  You conveniently ignore liberal outlets in the print media such as the NY Times, Washington Post, McClatchy, and LA Times; cable networks such as CNN, NBC, MSNBC, ABC and CBS; other vehicles such as MoveOn.org, ACLU, NAACP and Congressional Black Caucus; and big players such as George Soros, Jessie Jackson, Keith Olbermann, Dan Rather, Chris Mathews, Bill Moyers, on and on!

    “Today, at least 75 percent of the media and news makers tend to present a liberal perspective of the news.  News Corp has been successful because there is a large percentage of the American population that wants less of the liberal bias in their news.

     “No Jim, you let me down with this one.  You are bigger than this kind of biased blogging.  Hope that, in the future, I will find your blogs to be better balanced.” 

    “This is an important subject that I hope you will continue to pursue. When news purveyors are cynical liars who claim to be "fair and balanced" but don't even try to be either, our country is very badly served. Free speech, when it is dominated by a bully like Murdoch is very expensive. FOX disseminates misinformation and promotes paranoia.

    “News sources have never been perfect, but in prior decades, efforts were made to uphold professional standards. These standards seem to have been all but abandoned.”

    “I think the New York Times has held inordinate power of opinion in NYC, and the challenge that the WSJ -NY Edition has produced is a welcome change to me. I have dropped the NYT weekly and only do Friday, Saturday, & Sunday, while getting the WSJ every day, including their new weekend edition.

     “You may not like the FOX point of view, but it counters some of the weight of the media who absolutely fell for Obama and all his policies.”

    “I wasn’t convinced that Murdoch is a threat. I guess I needed more.“

    “Right on!!”

    Several threads are important to me. First, readers abhor an unbalanced media perspective. Critics of FOX believe its bias is too unbalanced, while supporters believe FOX balances the liberal bias in the preponderance of the media.

    Second, my original intent was to reveal how a concentration of power influences our communities. That point rarely came through.

    Finally, I worry that combative media styles obscure too much truth unless people follow both sides. Instead people frequently shut off opposing opinions. I’m committed to politely poke balanced perspectives into people’s perceptions to unite us as we build better communities. I think this article fell short of that commitment.