Nice to see that there is at least one thing that not even Murdoch will stoop to, although I still suspect that his decision was based rather more on pragmatism than ethics.
Am I too cynical when I expect it will be published anyway?
But anyway, to see Murdoch's own men rebelling in this way was marvellous:
Bill O'Reilly, the host of Fox News', The O'Reilly Factor, said Fox's decision to air the program was "simply indefensible and a low point in American culture".
O'Reilly later vowed to boycott the book, the interview and any companies that paid for advertising slots during the program.
That's somewhat more moral authority than we normally see from anyone at Fox.
"Stopped Clock Syndrome". Assorted New Conservatives in the Harper Government here in Canada are...known to have attacks of this from time to time. The whole income trust/taxation business being one of the more prominent such instances in recent memory.
Huh; I'm kinda disappointed. I *wanted* his confession on public record. Of course he claims it's all hypothetical, and he should know.
I wonder how the contract covers this? Do they still owe him the on-publication money? I don't see that they have *any* chance of recovering any of the money already paid. So this may be best-case for OJ -- which is not what I want.
Too bad M$NBC couldn't have had a similar attack of "conscience" over their docudrama rewriting of history blaming Clinton for 9/11. It's REALLY sad when Faux gets to claim the moral high ground about this kind of thing.
(moan. A brief delay: the cat is whinging at me because it's late and he can smell Chinese food-- specifically ma po do fu -- and I'm not giving it to him.)
As for Fox: Let's just snark them all. God will sort them out.
(between Finger and Thumb, examining each corporate section and going Euuuuuuuuu.....)
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:01 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:12 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:26 am (UTC)My money's on eBay copies turning up real quick now.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:18 am (UTC)But anyway, to see Murdoch's own men rebelling in this way was marvellous:That's somewhat more moral authority than we normally see from anyone at Fox.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-23 10:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 10:40 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 12:04 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 05:41 pm (UTC)I wonder how the contract covers this? Do they still owe him the on-publication money? I don't see that they have *any* chance of recovering any of the money already paid. So this may be best-case for OJ -- which is not what I want.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 09:28 pm (UTC)docudramarewriting of history blaming Clinton for 9/11. It's REALLY sad when Faux gets to claim the moral high ground about this kind of thing.no subject
Date: 2006-11-21 09:40 pm (UTC)As for Fox: Let's just snark them all. God will sort them out.
(between Finger and Thumb, examining each corporate section and going Euuuuuuuuu.....)