THE NEW YORK POST: TOO BIG TO FAIL?
Really, what was the potential downside for the New York Post when its editors put an entirely innocent Boston Marathon spectator on the paper's front page and implied that he was the marathon bomber?
It turned out that the Post was wrong? So what? The story made you look (and made a lot of other people look), right? Surely it pushed the site's clicks and newsstand sales way, way up. And now that the story has been debunked, it's probably getting a lot of you to hate-read the new Post story acknowledging that the original story was wrong. Soon, I bet Murdoch & Co. will have the cheek to run ads boasting about the uptick in Web readership this week, just to piss us all off.
So we see the benefit for the Post. What was the risk, really? What's the worst that could have happened to the paper in the aftermath of this, and of the previous story misidentifying a Saudi national as the possible bomber?
These guys could sue? So what? Surely Murdoch could keep them tied in up in a very expensive court battle for years and years, using high-powered lawyers like fixer Joel Klein, the former New York City schools chancellor, who's now running the e-learning operation Murdoch hopes will be a cash cow.
Um, maybe one of these falsely accused suspects could have been the target of vigilante violence? Again, so what? The Murdoch press in England hacked the voicemail of a dead teenager and thus misled her parents about the fact that she was dead; Joel Klein and his crew helped get Murdoch out of that relatively unscathed.
Maybe people would stop reading the Post? Nahhh. The paper's brand is too strong, and people buy it for the excitement, not for the accuracy.
Are you really sick of this stuff? Boycott Fox movies. Boycott Fox entertainment shows. Boycott the whole damn enterprise.
But none of us will do that. And so, yes, the Murdoch empire is too big to fail.
Uhm...
ReplyDeleteSome of us, Steve, have stopped having any feckin' thing to do with FOX!
Unless you hold my mother hostage, or put my testicles in a vice, I'd rather watch Wolf on CNN, than have a nano-second's worth of contact with anything even vagueely assossicatd with that Fascistic Australain Plutocrat, Ruppert Murdoch!!!
I wish there was a Hell, so that that evil and stupid MFer could start roasting ASAP!!!
family first's starting point is that families come first. No form of human association can match the profound benefits of being raised in a loving, functional and secure family first. As the fundamental building block of society, family first diminish their capacity to function effectively at our peril.
ReplyDeleteProbably not so dear, Kelly, who's 'probably not so' Divine,
ReplyDeleteI ain't clickin', 'cause I was born in a NY City hospital, and not in a turnip truck, and certainly NOT yesterday - but let me ask you a question:
Does your 'family first' linkee-poo include same-sex families, or, only families as defined by some double-digit IQ mouth-breathing, knuckle-dragging reader of certain portions of the Bible?