Wednesday, July 13, 2011


Eliot Spitzer thinks Rupert Murdoch should be investigated in America, and I agree with DougJ's assessment of the likely consequences of that:

Prosecuting News Corp. and stripping it of its tv licenses would be a bold move indeed. And without evidence of something juicy having taken place stateside, it would be very treacherous politically. The media would rally around its sister corporation, the entire right-wing echo chamber would go nuts, there would frankly probably be some kind of domestic terrorism (which the media would insist was unrelated to the fact that Fox hosts were encouraging it).

But I suspect Doug is wrong about this:

But if there’s evidence that News Corp. hacked the phones of 9/11 victims, then all bets are off.

Nahhh. Remember the Zadroga bill? The bill, providing billions of dollars for the medical care of 9/11 first responders, nearly died in Congress, and only survived because a comedian fought to save it. Even then, when it passed, it passed in a significantly scaled-down form, and a wingnut congressman added a final insult by requiring sick first responders to pass a terrorism background check in order to avail themselves of the funding. So we don't really care all that much about victims of 9/11.

Now, if it were proved that Murdoch and his minions illegally got on the wrong side of some Nancy Grace case -- which is essentially what happened in the U.K. to break this open -- then he's in trouble. But 9/11 victims? No biggie.

No comments: