Vanity Fair's New Establishment 2010: The 15 Most Influential Media Figures (PHOTOS)

Vanity Fair has come out with its 2010 New Establishment list, its annual ranking of "the 100 most influential people of the Information Age."

The list is heavy on media figures, as well as heavyweights from the entertainment, technology, and fashion industries.

Below, see Vanity Fair's top 15 most influential media figures. See the full list at VanityFair.com.

1 of 15

Rupert Murdoch

1 of 16

First Slide

Previous Slide

@

The News Corp Chairman comes in at #4 on Vanity Fair's list.

Megyn Kelly Jokingly Roasts Her Mother For Spanking Her As A Child (VIDEO)

Mimi Alford Interview: Meredith Vieira Speaks Out About Explosive JFK Affair Details (VIDEO)

Glenn Beck: Roland Martin A 'Dope,' 'Bad Guy,' 'Clown,' 'Idiot' (VIDEO)

gadgets/slideshows/197113/slide_197113_475913_small.jpg

Sherri Shepherd Chokes Up In Intense Abortion Debate On 'View' (VIDEO)

CBS' 'Person To Person' Returns With George Clooney (VIDEO)

Washington Post Offers Voluntary Buyouts To Newsroom Employees

The News Corp Chairman comes in at #4 on Vanity Fair's list.

comments(143)

Total comments: 143 | Post a Comment

1 of 16

This Choice

Rank #2  |  Average: 4

Disagree Agree

• 
  1
• 
  2
• 
  3
• 
  4
• 
  5
• 
  6
• 
  7
• 
  8
• 
  9
• 
  10

Top 5 Choices

loading...

Top 5 Choices

UserName

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Top User Slides

← Prev|Next →

 | Become a fan

Picked These as the Top 5 Slides in the Slideshow

loading...

Users who voted on this slide

← Prev|Next →

loading...

Comments

[raven119]

02:32 PM on 09/06/2010

Vanity Fair's top 15 most influentia­l media figures? Then why is Huffington listed as No. 42?

[Epiphany2b]

01:15 PM on 09/06/2010

Ralph Lauren, #16
Mickey Drexler of J. Crew #19
Johnny Depp, #20
Tom Hanks, #25
Diane Von Furstenber­g, #40

BARRY DILLER and DIANE VON FURSTENBER­G

[Epiphany2b]

01:04 PM on 09/06/2010

1. MARK ZUCKERBERG -- FACEBOOK
2. STEVE JOBS -- APPLE
3. SERGEY BRIN, LARRY PAGE, and ERIC SCHMIDT -- GOOGLE
4. RUPERT MURDOCH -- NEWS CORPORATIO­N
5. JEFF BEZOS -- AMAZON

etc., (caps theirs) Everyone agree???

[Mishmashthots]

06:39 AM on 09/07/2010

No. I don't see Facebook being higher than Murdoch or Google.

[HHGodd]

06:31 PM on 09/05/2010

Riddle me this? Who do Oprah Winfrey and Barack Obama have in common?

[Tulka2]

04:52 PM on 09/05/2010

I loath the man, but you've got to give it to the King of the Pirates, Murdoch.

[fatback65]

08:31 AM on 09/04/2010

I'm actually a little disappoint­ed in Oprah. With her clout, I would think she would step up to help in the cause against Fox "News". She probably doesn't want to tarnish her brand.

[toocoldout]

09:23 AM on 09/04/2010

Clout can disappear very quickly so you have to be extremely careful how and when you spend it. Further, the country has become so racially polarized in the last 2 years that Oprah stepping up would just feed the right-wing narrative that powerful blacks are taking over. Oprah used her clout at exactly the right moment and in exactly the right way and her timing was exquisite:

http://fre­akonomics.­blogs.nyti­mes.com/20­08/08/06/s­o-much-for­-one-perso­n-one-vote­/

[fatback65]

10:53 AM on 09/04/2010

I respectful­ly disagree. She endorsed one Dem over another Dem. I would hope she would be doing something at least behind the scenes to fight off the repub machine that is spreading falsehoods and dividing the country. Maybe she is.

[Epiphany2b]

12:52 PM on 09/06/2010

Often one can do things more effectivel­y out of the spotlight than with the glare in your eyes, so to speak. Also, to have an impact on the human condition, it isn't always necessary to be active in the political arena. She obviously has chosen to use her influence and abilities elsewhere where she might be able to do more good. As has been said often before, sometime fighting an entity can bring it into sharper focus. It's been suggested that the more one fights FOX the more attention it gets, and perhaps it should be ignored. (Like one ignores cancer?)

[Siebenstein]

01:26 AM on 09/04/2010

America should be laughed out of the world community for voting a svvine like Murdoch into a top influentia­l place. Simply disgusting and shows the lowest standard of IQ possible.

[behavingbadly]

08:06 AM on 09/04/2010

Easy, big guy. Vanity Fair did the voting, not America. Besides, electing Bush already got us laughed out years ago.

[Epiphany2b]

12:56 PM on 09/06/2010

I would say evidence of the lowest standard of IQ possible is the fact that Murdoch manages to be influentia­l, not the fact that it's recognized that he is influentia­l. Pretending it's not so isn't going to change it at all. The reason that he is so influentia­l, I would guess, is not only FOX network but the many newspapers he owns that spew the same rhetoric.

[marylandtravelinman]

12:34 AM on 09/04/2010

So the only picture of Jon Stewart they could find is one in a t-shirt?

[behavingbadly]

08:06 AM on 09/04/2010

I think he looks hot.

[fatback65]

08:32 AM on 09/04/2010

I like Stewart, but he is not hot. Hold on. I'm a dude and shouldn't be discussing this. Bye.

[toocoldout]

09:35 AM on 09/03/2010

Based on who is in the white house, I'd say Oprah is/was the most influentia­l, however based on which party will win in the November elections, I'd say Rupert Murdoch is the most influentia­l.

[marylandtravelinman]

12:35 AM on 09/04/2010

Delusional­...on all counts.

[toocoldout]

09:18 AM on 09/04/2010

Not really:

http://fre­akonomics.­blogs.nyti­mes.com/20­08/08/06/s­o-much-for­-one-perso­n-one-vote­/

[SJML]

06:59 PM on 09/02/2010

I'm confused it's says top 15 but they are not the top 15 per Vanity Fair - maybe HP's top 15?

[cnick]

02:54 PM on 09/03/2010

I think they selected it in a random way that would include Ms. Huffington

[Epiphany2b]

01:00 PM on 09/06/2010

And not even sequential­, which is confusing. Gotta check this out.

[ObamAtomic]

06:08 PM on 09/02/2010

Rupert Murdoch- Propagandi­st for the wingnuts
John Malone-TCI Cable Mafia
Jeff Bewkes-Old Timer Cable operator
Bob Iger-No mustache operator
Brian Roberts-In­ternet slow operator
Bill Keller-No comments
Robert Thomson-Ir­relevant numbers and %
Dan Doctoroff-­Who?
Jon Stewart-Ex­posing them(R) one at a time
George Bodenheime­r-a lot of non senseless coverage of sports
Richard Plepler, Sue Naegle, and Michael Lombardo-H­BO failed long ago
Oprah Winfrey-Pa­lin friend,LOL
Steve Burke-Cabl­e FOX,fair and fair,NO

[BlueRoseofTexas]

04:21 PM on 09/02/2010

People can't face reality as painful as it might be. Rupert Murdoch's ability to influence the pubic is enormous. I think we hope this isn't true, but we have to face it and figure out how to unseat him. Ignoring him and his vast propaganda machine hasn't worked so well so far.

[Chip W]

11:21 PM on 09/02/2010

I agree. I think Fox has lots more influence than they're given credit for.

[marylandtravelinman]

12:40 AM on 09/04/2010

I think they are given a lot of credit. The question is, what to do. CNN is chasing the same tabloid style and no one watches. MSNCB hires very smart well spoken talent but no one cares. Fat, poor, dumb middle 'mericans want to hear their opinions mirrored on TV and will continue to flock to it. The only hope it the death of broadcast TV. No one under 30 watches TV.

[Mishmashthots]

06:43 AM on 09/07/2010

Murdoch controls more than just Fox.

[sturat]

03:50 PM on 09/02/2010

vanity fair has great advertisem­ents......­...

[steve11407]

12:02 PM on 09/02/2010

Must be a joke.

[Michael Rumbach]

11:38 AM on 09/02/2010

Obviously the average person doesn't understand the difference between a media influence and a pop culture influence.

[behavingbadly]

08:07 AM on 09/04/2010

Or a blueberry scone. Yum.

[Mishmashthots]

06:44 AM on 09/07/2010

Agreed.