Importance Score: 85 / 100 🟢
Echoes of the Past: When Tycoons Weaponize Media – From Henry Ford to Elon Musk
An innovator celebrated for transforming the automotive industry decides to reshape global perspectives, acquiring a media outlet to amplify his voice. His pronouncements embolden negative sentiments and embolden adversaries of democracy globally. This scenario might evoke Elon Musk and his social media platform X in 2025, but it mirrors Henry Ford and his publication, The Dearborn Independent, in the 1920s. Ford, the mastermind behind the Model T, purchased a local paper and repurposed it to disseminate his antisemitic beliefs.
The Dearborn Independent: A Vehicle for Antisemitism
The Dearborn Independent ran a lengthy series titled “The International Jew,” which attributed the world’s problems to Jewish people & popularized “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion,” a fraudulent document. Subsequently, the Nazi regime honored Ford with a medal.
Media Moguls and Their Agendas
Ford’s case stands out as a stark example of influential figures acquiring media platforms to propagate reprehensible viewpoints. These magnates frequently leveraged cutting-edge technology to broaden their reach, from high-speed printing presses to, in Ford’s situation, his widespread network of car dealerships.
The Reach of Ford’s Message
Imagine driving off in Model T and noticing The Dearborn Independent placed inside. During that time newspapers ran as local businesses. With dealerships, The Dearborn Independent rose to become one of the most circulated publications in the nation, printing over 750,000 copies per issue at its peak.
Ford vs. Murdoch: A Matter of Direct Control
A notable distinction separating Ford from other media magnates such as Rupert Murdoch lies in the fact that the latter typically advances their agendas by enlisting editors and broadcasters who share their perspectives. In contrast, The Dearborn Independent prominently declared itself the “Ford International Weekly” on its cover and featured a full-page editorial authored by Ford himself.
Musk’s Approach: A Throwback to Ford?
Musk’s actions suggest a return to Ford’s hands-on approach as the Tesla and SpaceX CEO has actively promoted and reposted inaccurate and inflammatory claims on X. These include assertions about Social Security being fraudulent, allegations that Democrats are importing immigrants for electoral gain, and calls for the impeachment of federal judges ruling against the Trump administration.
While there’s precedent for Musk’s behavior with X, he’s taken it to unprecedented heights. X claims 220 million followers, though this is hard to verify. Even if a fraction is accurate, the platform is designed to amplify Musk’s posts. People are seeing & hearing, one way or another.
X as a Weapon: Political Influence and Government Oversight
Musk’s $44 billion acquisition of Twitter, now X, in 2022 initially appeared to be a misstep, even to him. Later, observers viewed it as a billionaire’s pastime. However, during the past year’s elections, it evolved into a tool. He leveraged his political views to forge an alliance with Donald J. Trump, which he then employed to integrate himself into the government, with the explicit goal of curtailing various aspects of it.
Consequences continue to unfold. But for Musk, it was a win. In the context of government efficiency, agencies dismissed regulators that were in a position to oversee his company. Musk now enjoys greater autonomy over his car and rocket ventures.
Rick Perlstein, author of a four-part historical account of modern American conservatism, stated, “This is like nothing we’ve ever seen.” Pointing to Musk’s frequent use of memes & images, he added, “It’s the politics of the nervous system, not the higher functions of the brain. There’s no argument, just fear mongering.”
Historical Parallels: Media Ownership and Political Influence
Since the inception of the modern newspaper in the late 19th century, tycoons in the United States and Britain have owned media outlets intending to assert influence. For example, during World War I, Viscount Northcliffe of Britain held approximately 40% of the morning circulation and 45% of the evening circulation. His holdings encompassed The Daily Mail, which catered to the working class, and The Times, which was geared toward elites.
Viscount Northcliffe, whose given name was Alfred Harmsworth, played a pivotal role in the ouster of Prime Minister Herbert Asquith in December 1916. Winston Churchill noted that the press magnate “aspired to exercise a commanding influence on events.” Northcliffe’s impact on the war was so profound that the Germans dispatched warships to assassinate him in 1917, bombarding his coastal residence.
Local Control and Media Bias
In the United States, media control often manifested on a more localized scale. In West Texas during the early 1960s, the ultraconservative Whittenburg family possessed The Amarillo Daily News, the NBC television station, & the dominant radio station. There were few competing voices.
Jeff Roche, a historian who authored “The Conservative Frontier,” a forthcoming exploration of the region’s politics, stated, “If you feed people a far-right media diet, you’ll end up with a population almost exclusively on the far right. Amarillo became the right-wing city in America.”
Simon Potter, a Professor of Modern History at the University of Bristol and specialist in mass media, states that, “Media ownership and political influence have gone hand in hand since the newspaper industry’s earliest beginnings.” Adding that “For just as long, people have worried about this intimate relationship between the media and politics — does it really serve the public interest?”
The Hearst Example: Influence vs. Reality
Behind this question is another: Does their megaphone truly grant them power or is it merely a shout into a void? William Randolph Hearst, an American precursor of Musk, provides an answer. Hearst, the proprietor of the upstart New York Journal, dispatched correspondents to Cuba in 1897 to report on the war against Spain. However, his objectives were more promotional than altruistic, as he was embroiled in a circulation battle.
The Myth of “You Furnish the Pictures, I’ll Furnish the War”
According to one version of the story, Hearst was an dominant media mogul:
- The Journal’s correspondents found no war, resulting in Frederic Remington cabling Hearst stating no war would occur and requesting to leave.
- Hearst responded by requesting to remain so that he could then ignite the war.
Hearst then pushed his papers for the conflict, begun in short order by President William McKinley. It liberated Cuba and acquired parts of the Spanish empire for the United States.
This account, initially printed in a novel by Hearst’s colleague James Creelman and later immortalized in Orson Welles’s “Citizen Kane,” has faced thorough scrutiny over time, with no proof that Hearst ever pledged to instigate a war. However, the story has persisted, because it depicts a mogul sufficiently powerful to fabricate war from nothing.
Hearst’s Political Stumbles: Limits of Media Influence
When Hearst tried to capitalize on his wartime exploits to advance his political ambitions, he faltered. He managed to secure a seat in the House of Representatives in 1902 but failed in two mayoral bids in New York. Additionally, he suffered defeat in a 1906 campaign for governor of New York.
Musk’s Influence: Inside and Outside the Room
David Nasaw, biographer of William Randolph Hearst, thinks Musk’s utilization of X to gather supporters is wrong, like Hearst’s alleged creation of war.
“I haven’t seen anywhere that Twitter gets out the MAGA vote,” he said.
Nasaw believes that Hearst reflected his viewers sentiments rather than leading them. However, the historian agreed that something new was occurring with Musk. According to Nasaw, Hearst, Ford, and even Viscount Northcliffe all shared a common constraint that limited them which was that “They were outside the room, screaming,”. Adding that “Twitter was important for Musk but only to get him inside the room, into the government. He’s unique in being both inside and outside with no constraints on his behavior. There’s never been anything quite like that.”
Echoes of History: The Perils of Courting Controversy
Tesla sales are declining. Hearst and Ford could have warned Musk: stirring up controversy with hurtful views is bad for reputation, & commonly bad for business.
Ford was prosecuted for libel over The Dearborn Independent & boycotted. Closing the paper in 1927, although he didn’t repent views. A stain lingered.
Hearst confronted Franklin D. Roosevelt in the 1930s, posting anti-Roosevelt tirades on his paper front pages. As the editorials became extreme, readers had to choose between the president and the author.
“They chose Roosevelt,” Nasaw stated. “Which meant Hearst eventually destroyed himself and his newspapers.”