[smc]

Originally Posted by Enoch Root

I thought we might have a couple posts worth of real discussion. What think you all about the recent debacle with Rupert Murdoch and that of Dominique Strauss-Kahn, former chief of the IMF?

I think the DSK issue and Murdoch issues are not really discussable in the same breath. I will touch on the Murdoch hacking scandle, however. I want to make clear that my views have absolutely nothing to do with Murdoch's political positions or the political positions espoused by his primary media outlets, especially Fox News Channel in the United States.

What is so interesting about the hacking scandal is what it tells us about how class society works. While all capitalist countries are class societies economically, England is a very class-oriented society on the cultural level, far more so than the United States. Newspapers such as The Guardian and even Murdoch's own Times of London have long been the outlets turned to by the upper crust of British society. They are also celebrated for their high ethical standards and attention to detail and truth. They also enjoy the lowest circulation figures among British newspapers.

The tabloids -- The Sun, News of the World, and many others -- have long been the popular newspapers. Why is that? Part of it is the simple fact that they seek the lowest common denominator in their coverage. But a big part of it is the way they cover the powerful, the wealthier, the more privileged, be it a celebrity, a politican, or a member of the British royal family. By printing anything and everything about these people, they appeal to the oppressed class's desire to bring their oppressors down. And those with more wealth, power, and privilege are the oppressors in this simple calculus (even if at the individual level it is not the case, on a class basis it is true).

Now the tabloids have revealed that while seeming to speak for this desire of the "little people," they are actually in bed with the "enemy." Their editors and reporters rub shoulders with the rich and powerful, be it in private or in very public venues. Rebekah Brooks lives in a massive country estate, which everyone probably knew but nobody really saw until the scandal broke and it was shown on television every day in Britain. She who would pretend to speak for the powerless had become one of the powerful. Murdoch, always behind the scenes and always wealthy and powerful, is reaping what he and his minions have sown.

Edward Wasserman, a professor of media ethics at Washington and Lee University, has put it very well. These reporters were kind of the instruments of the underdog in soeity, pulling down the rich and powerful. Suddenly, now it turns out that these people were doing the bullying."

I believe that the full ramifications of this scandal have yet to be revealed. The British government may fall. Murdoch may divest himself of his newspapers, and probably be pushed out of the executive offices of News Corp. Fox News Channel here in the United States may have to be sold, too, perhaps to a buyer group that includes Roger Ailes (thus ensuring that nothing will change in how FNC functions). But in the end, this may be the thing that cracks the walls of the echo chamber.