默多克與布隆伯格 就是愛玩新聞和政治

When Mitt Romney announced on Friday that he would not seek the Republican presidential nomination for a third time, he cited the desire to “give other leaders in the party” a chance to win the White House. He did not mention the public mugging he had received from Rupert Murdoch, the media titan who had called him “a terrible candidate” and whose Wall Street Journal had suggested that his run in 2012 had been “a calamity.”

米特·羅姆尼(Mitt Romney)上週五宣佈，他不會第三次角逐共和黨總統候選人提名，他表示想把贏得總統寶座的機會留給“黨內其他領導人”。他沒有提到傳媒大亨魯伯特·默多克(Rupert Murdoch)公開羞辱自己，稱他是“糟糕的候選人”。默多克的《華爾街日報》(Wall Street Journal)曾形容他2012年的競選是場“災難”。

There are a lot of reasons that the third time did not prove to be a charm for Mr. Romney’s presidential ambitions, but Mr. Murdoch’s public rebuke sure didn’t help.

羅姆尼決定不參加第三次競選的原因有很多，但默多克的公開斥責肯定有影響。

Having tried and failed to get his hands on Time Warner, Mr. Murdoch is back to king-making. As the man who controls both the Fox News Channel and The Journal, he doesn’t exactly have to attend a precinct caucus to exercise political influence.

默多克染指時代華納(Time Warner)的努力失敗後，又回到了頂級政治推手的角色。作爲Fox新聞頻道(Fox News Channel)和《華爾街日報》的控制者，他無需參加哪個選區的黨團會議，就可以發揮政治影響力。

He’s clearly enjoying life as a mogul and newspaper titan, enough to invite others to the party.

他顯然很享受這種媒體大亨和報業巨頭的生活，也樂於邀請其他人加入這個行列。

Rupert Murdoch: Is there a price for lifetime happiness for generous but bored, public spirited multibillionaire? Mike Bloomberg can easily afford NY Times

魯伯特·默多克1月24日在Twitter上發言稱：“對於一擲千金但卻百無聊賴、熱衷公共事務的億萬富翁而言，想買一輩子的快樂要花多少錢？邁克·布隆伯格(Mike Bloomberg)可以輕鬆買下《紐約時報》。”

(New York magazine had earlier reported, based on not very much, that Mr. Bloomberg might try to buy the newspaper.)

（《紐約》[New York]雜誌早前曾報道，布隆伯格可能想購買《紐約時報》，但那篇報道沒有太多依據。）

Only two people in the world could have this conversation, whether in public or private: Both are New York media owners, both with more money than many sovereign republics and both huge fans of the news and the organizations that trade in it.

這個世界上只有兩個人能進行這樣的交談，無論是在公開場合還是私下裏：兩人都是紐約媒體的老闆，個人財富多過許多主權國家，而且兩人都非常醉心於新聞，以及做新聞生意的機構。

Rupert Murdoch has a big national newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, and though Michael Bloomberg does not, they are otherwise similarly situated overlords. And so Mr. Murdoch’s entreaty to his friend Mr. Bloomberg: C’mon in, the water is fine.

默多克擁有《華爾街日報》，儘管布隆伯格沒有這樣的全國性大報，但兩人在其他方面都是屬於同一個檔次的大亨。所以默多克力邀朋友布隆伯格：快來吧，很好玩的。

I don’t think The New York Times is for sale, but it is a telling sentiment, a conversation among kings about what possessions are truly precious to the man, or men, with everything.

我覺得《紐約時報》不會出售，但是他們的心態很能說明問題。這是霸主之間的交談：對於什麼都不缺的人，怎樣的財產纔算真的彌足珍貴。

Even if The Times were for sale, how would it benefit Mr. Murdoch to have a rival paper in the hands of an equally moneyed media baron? It wouldn’t, but it is in Mr. Murdoch’s nature to stir the pot and create mischief.

即使時報會出售，讓一個同樣有錢的傳媒大亨將一家競爭性的報紙收入囊中，對默多克又有什麼好處呢？沒有好處。但默多克本來就喜歡攪局搗蛋。

He’s mostly just having his version of fun, all the while tweaking a competitor, which is another hobby.

他基本上只是在以自己的方式消遣，同時刺激一下競爭對手，這是他的另一個愛好。

Mr. Bloomberg had his own version of fun running the City of New York for three terms. Now that he is on the other side of that, he did not take long to realize that he was not going to sit in the back seat of the huge data and media company he built while others drove.

布隆伯格也享受了自己的消遣，當了三任紐約市長。卸任政府職務之後，布隆伯格很快就意識到，他不會坐在自己創辦的大型數據和媒體公司的後座上，讓別人來掌舵。

I don’t know Mr. Bloomberg or Mr. Murdoch personally, but I have covered them enough to know that they share a few hobbies. They both enjoy gossip, are inveterate news hounds and love to involve themselves in all aspects of the production of the news. They also like to wield broad influence on how that news unfolds.

我和布隆伯格和默多克沒有私交，但我報道過他們的很多事情，知道他們有一些共同的愛好。他們都喜歡八卦，有敏銳的新聞嗅覺，喜歡插手新聞產生流程的方方面面。他們也喜歡對新聞事件發展的走向施加廣泛影響。

True, Mr. Bloomberg was educated as an engineer and is the ultimate rationalist whereas Mr. Murdoch came up in the bare-knuckled world of tabloids and relies on his gut. But neither seems particularly interested in money in the way that only the fabulously rich can be uninterested in money, and they both love winning.

誠然，布隆伯格接受的是工程師教育，終究是個理性主義者，而默多克是從毫無底線的小報圈發跡的，憑藉的是自己的直覺。但兩人似乎對錢都不是特別感興趣，這是指鉅富對錢的那種不感興趣；此外，他們都熱衷於取勝。

Beyond business and politics — which are, after all, about winning — neither appears animated by much else.

除了商業和政治——畢竟這兩個領域的重點就在於取勝——這兩人對其他很多東西似乎都沒多大興趣。

As business reporters, we tend to overanalyze the titans among us, because, well, they aren’t like us.

作爲商業記者，我們往往會對大亨過度分析，因爲他們與我們不同。

Watching Mr. Murdoch, who controls and owns big chunks of a movie studio, a cable news channel and newspaper and television properties all over the world, and Mr. Bloomberg, who owns a worldwide terminal and data business, along with various media assets, it’s easy to guess that the empire-building is all part of one, huge unified plan.

看看默多克，他控制一家電影製片廠並擁有其中大量股份，擁有一家有線電視新聞頻道，以及全球各地的很多報紙和電視資產；再看看布隆伯格，他擁有一個世界性的終端和數據業務，以及各種媒體資產，你很容易覺得，媒體帝國是根據一個巨大而統一的規劃建立起來的。

But in some respects, they remind me of other newspaper owners in various sized towns that I have covered — men with an immense appetite for power who want nothing so much as to be in the middle of things. Mr. Bloomberg and Mr. Murdoch just have many more zeros behind their net worth, and global empires to match.

但是在某些方面，這兩人讓我想起了我曾經報道過的其他一些報業老闆，所在的城市有大有小。他們對於權力都有着非常強烈的慾望，最熱衷的事情就是置身於熱點事件之中。只不過布隆伯格和默多克的身家是他們的成千上萬倍，而且還擁有與這種權力慾相匹配的全球性帝國。

To project might, few things are as effective as owning big, throbbing media properties. Since returning to his company, Mr. Bloomberg, 72, has dedicated a large amount of money to remaking his media operations, including a reorganized website unveiled last week. By all reports, he has spent time tinkering with even the most minute aspects of the redesign, despite that being a tiny part of his company.

要想施加影響力，幾乎沒有什麼方法比擁有規模巨大且生機勃勃的媒體資產更加有效了。自從重返公司以來，72歲的布隆伯格就開始大把花錢來改造自己的媒體業務，上週推出的新版網站就是一個例子。據多方透露，就連這次改版中最微不足道的方面，他也花費了大量時間擺弄，儘管網站只是公司業務的一小部分。

Mr. Murdoch vastly overpaid for The Journal, and continues to support the money-losing New York Post. When News Corporation split two years ago, he protected his beloved newspaper assets in a well-funded new company. He is, by all accounts, highly involved with his papers and finds no detail too small to merit his interests.

默多克對《華爾街日報》的收購買貴了很多，而且他還在繼續支持賠錢的《紐約郵報》(New York Post)。兩年前新聞集團分拆時，他用一家資金雄厚的新公司來保護自己心愛的報業資產。大家都說，他對旗下的報紙有非常高的參與度，事無鉅細都有興趣過問。

These are extremely successful businessmen who spend many hours on noneconomic parts of their businesses. They do so for two reasons: because they can, and because it is fun.

他們是非常成功的商人，把大量時間花在公司不賺錢的方面。這有兩個原因：一是因爲他們可以這麼做，二是因爲這麼做是種消遣。

Even those of us who aren’t billionaires could tell you as much — creating media content is a diverting activity that rarely resembles actual work.

即使一個人不是億萬富翁，他也會告訴你：創造媒體內容是種消遣，和真正的工作大不相同。

At 83, Mr. Murdoch has seen a few presidential elections come and go, and, through Fox News and The Journal, has had a hand in influencing most of them. But that won’t be true forever, which may explain his antipathy at the prospect of Mr. Romney’s taking another shot at the White House. (And it’s not just the Republicans: On Sunday, he tweeted: “Guess what! Joe Biden actively preparing to run against Hillary. Maybe others like Kerry.”) An Australian by birth who became an American citizen, he recently said in an email to my colleagues Amy Chozick and Michael Barbaro that he made no apologies for his interest in United States politics.

現已83歲的默多克已經見證過多次總統競選，並通過Fox新聞和《華爾街日報》對大多數的選舉施加過影響。但是，情況不會永遠如此，這也許可以解釋他爲什麼反感羅姆尼再次參選。（而且也不只是針對共和黨：上週日，他在Twitter上寫道：“你猜怎麼着？喬·拜登[Joe Biden]積極準備和希拉里競爭。或許其他人喜歡克里。”）默多克出生於澳大利亞，後來成爲美國公民。最近在一封電子郵件中，他對我的同事艾米·柯西克(Amy Chozick)和邁克爾·巴巴羅(Michael Barbaro)說，他不覺得自己對美國政治感興趣有什麼不妥。

“I am deeply interested in the future of our country, and I enjoy meeting with potential candidates of both parties,” he wrote to them, responding to an inquiry about his political activity. “I am keen to hear their views, whether it’s on tax reform, immigration or defense and foreign policy.”

“我對我們國家的未來非常感興趣，我喜歡與兩黨的潛在候選人會面，”在被問到他的政治活動時，默多克在答覆的電郵中表示。“我很希望瞭解他們的看法，無論是在稅制改革、移民，還是防務和外交政策方面。”

And they will be pretty keen to hear his. Other presidential hopefuls will be stopping by to see Mr. Bloomberg, who is seen as a centrist and is among those perennially mentioned as a possible candidate.

他們也會非常希望聽聽他的看法。其他總統候選人則將去拜會布隆伯格。布隆伯格被視爲中間派，在談到可能的候選人時，常常有人提及他的名字。

Executives at Bloomberg say that all of the investments in media are about driving traffic to the terminal business, but I don’t buy it. The company did not hire Mark Halperin and John Heilemann, longtime political reporters, at a reported cost of $1 million each to operate in the confines of some financial terminal. It is a classic influence play, a way to gain stature and currency.

彭博的高管說，所有的媒體投資都是爲了提升終端業務上的流量，但我不相信這個說法。該公司聘請資深政治記者馬克·霍爾珀林(Mark Halperin)和約翰·海爾曼(John Heilemann)，絕不是爲了報道一些只在金融終端上展示的內容。據報道彭博給他們每人開出的年薪是100萬美元。這是一種運用影響力的經典方式，一種獲得地位和認可的方式。

And while everyone around Mr. Murdoch — family, investors and senior executives — was against buying The Journal at the precise moment that newspapers seemed most embattled, he went ahead and did it anyway. Because he wanted to, and because he could.

雖然默多克周圍的每一個人——家人、投資者、高管——都反對他在《華爾街日報》陷入最大困境的關頭收購它，但默多克一意孤行，買下了該報。因爲他想買，也買得起。

In “Citizen Kane,” Charles Foster Kane is notified by his adviser and legal guardian Walter Parks Thatcher that he is losing a great deal of money on his newspapers. “You’re right, Mr. Thatcher,” he responds. “I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars next year. You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I’ll have to close this place in ... 60 years.”

在電影《公民凱恩》(Citizen Kane)中，查爾斯·福斯特·凱恩(Charles Foster Kane)的顧問和法定監護人沃爾特·帕克斯·撒切爾(Walter Parks Thatcher)告訴他，他的報紙正在大幅虧損。“你說得對，撒切爾，”他回答說。“去年我確實虧了100萬美元。我預計今年也會虧100萬，明年還會虧100萬。你知道嗎，撒切爾，按照每年虧100萬的速度計算，我不得不關掉它的時候……是60年後。”