Color me a cynical bastard, but really: how much more can you possibly muddy the water in a single editorial piece? Hell, in the first three paragraphs of an editorial piece:

Review & Outlook: News and Its Critics – WSJ.com.

To recap: that News Corp got caught in a major scandal that has caused the shuttering of a newspaper, the resignation and arrest of a director of said paper, the resignation of the CEO of the Wall Street Journal and the resignation of a Scotland Yard chief is evidence of a potential assault on journalism. We’re all in this together.

Also, the fact that Scotland Yard didn’t act on the unethical and illegal actions of our journalist brothers in arms (remember: we’re all in this together) is more troubling than our lack of ethics. Because we cannot help being craven, we need law enforcement to step in.

And oh, yeah: politicians need media coverage, so the media should be given a free pass when they hack the phone of a dead teenager. That part seems obvious. Even more obvious: hacking phones of terrorist attack victims is pretty much equal to a biased editorial slant in the Guardian’s reporting. Wait. Did I say “pretty much?” No. Totally. Equal.

The rest of the article is a lot of blah-blah-blah about how awesome the WSJ is and their CEO is just the tops, despite having resigned over a scandal which has to date only affected British papers. Methinks the next week is going to be full of fun WSJ news….

Via CNET Security News

When this story originally broke, I was under the impression that 911 victims had possibly been hacked maybe a few years *after* the attack. Now the suggestion – reported by the Daily Mail out of the UK – is that no, the hacking attempts began the day of the attack. From the CNET article:

via FBI investigating News Corp. over 9/11 claims | The Digital Home – CNET News.

Until earlier this week, the U.S. had remained out of the scandal in Britain surrounding News Corp. over cell phone hacking. However, the Daily Mail in the U.K. reported on Monday that News Corp.-owned News of the World, a British tabloid, had contacted a private investigator and former New York police officer to try to hack phone data of British victims of the September 11 attacks. The Daily Mail said that the investigator, who was contacted in the wake of the horrific event, refused to do so.

A “Chilling” edict was sent out at Fox News: Lay Off Obama.  And this seems to have come directly from the top, from Rupert Murdoch himself.

Righties are in a snit over this, pointing out in what is probably a fairly accurate instinct that Roop is hoping to keep the Fairness Doctrine dogs at bay.  The Fairness Doctrine is a boogieman of the Right, however silly that might be.  And aw, shucks!  Does that mean Fox News will actually have to start reporting news and stop willfully slandering Barack Obama as a Muslim (clutch the pearls)?