more cat pictures

Mr. Keith Rupert Murdoch
Fox News Channel
1211 Avenue of the Americas
New York, NY 10036

Dear Mr. Murdoch:

First, my apologies for invoking your sacred and yet profane full name for the purposes of this Open Letter.

In any event, I would like to address @ this time the interconnexion between what you would regard as "fair and balanced" journalism and these remarks as appeared in the founding editorial of your Britannic "red top" Sunday franchise, by name and stylee of News of the World, on 1 October 1843:

Our motto is truth. Our practice is the fearless advocacy of the truth.

Which you may regard as fine and well for a motto ... but in actual practice, regardless of where News Corporation hangs out its editorial or entertainment shingles throughout the known world, well-documented evidence reveals that your "fearless advocacy of the truth" is nothing but a farce.

As in countless press-council investigations of your newspapers in Australia and Great Britain for such issues as Invasion of Privacy, Pandering to Latent Prejudices, Sensationalism, Racism, Bigotry, Appeals to Xenophobic Nationalism, Naming of Children Involved in Notorious Criminal Cases, Misrepresentation, Use of Fraud or Trick in Procuring the News, Unnecessary Sexual Titillation (as in Page Three) and Causing Mental or Emotional Harm, among other issues.

As in showing reckless and utter disregard for Truth to the point where your gazettas in Great Britain especially have had to publish apologies and pay out substantial cash compensation when it emerged that celebrity reportage was false, misleading or inaccurate, or otherwise showed reckless and utter contempt or disregard for truth.

As in offering substantial sums of money for big-big stories without checking on the credibility of sources beforehand; there's always the likelihood that someone sending your news organisations news tips motivated by promise of big-big money may really be some class of an alcoholic, a drug addict, a sex fiend or maniac, a chronic and habitual debtor, a psychopathic or otherwise habitual liar and/or boaster, a known and notorious criminal on the run from John Law or otherwise wanting to settle an old score in the worst way possible.

As in fabricating or staging news stories out of whole cloth if and when considered necessary, and with reckless and utter disregard all the while for journalistic ethics, propriety and integrity--especially when such faking or manipulation of the news is overdone to the point of sensationalised or otherwise attracting unnecessary attention, let alone justified as one with "winning of hearts and minds."

As in failing to recognise the inherent consequences of your numerous "campaigns" backfiring upon you and your journalistic products (as witness several instances where your "For Sarah Campaign" in the News of the World led to vigilante marches against named pedophilia suspects as turned out to be harmless and blameless all along, or otherwise shared the same name to the point of confusion ensuing--I believe there was @ least one suicide ensuing).

As in failing to justify the unhealthy and unnecessary use of soft-core pornography in the Page Three stylee from time to time on Fox News Channel save for the sake of distractionary titillation on the part of an audience tending mostly to the poor, undereducated or homeschooled, lower-working-class (and unlikely to see much real job/career advancement opportunities) and marginalised of Society.

As in excusing the maintenance and perpetuation of xenophobic, nativist, narcisstic, racist, anti-Semitic, homophobic and suchlike other tendencies and feelings, exploiting such among the same vulnerable audiences I just made note of, and expecting them to accept such as "healthy, nutritious and patriotic" all @ once, not to mention being necessary to the defence of American soverignty and soverign identity, as well as that of free-market capitalism with American characteristics.

As in showing nothing short of contempt for an audience who you regard as easily willing to accept what your media outlets regard as Truth without question or reservation, any challenges to such reportage to be looked upon as nothing less than "betrayal" as could harm "our antient and pecuilar soverignty and soverign identity."

In any case:

What exactly will it take to see the errors of your ways in perverting the integrity and credibility of the Fourth Estate?

How many lawsuits charging Invasion of Privacy, Undue Emotional Harm and Distress, Defamation, Libel or Related Conspiracies, to take some plum examples as could cause your organisations serious trouble in the right circumstances?

How many investigations into the likelihood of Racketeering or otherwise being in the pay of weird and unwholesome elements, including hostile foreign regimes secretly holding substantial financial interests in News Corporation or its affiliates for the sake of peddling influence?

How many suicides, emotional breakdowns or alcoholic jags from the targeted?

How many court actions not unlike that which bankrupted Confidential magazine in 1957, notwithstanding their claiming that they "Tell the Facts and Name the Names"?

How many instances where it's been discovered that you're using subliminal messages for fraudulent or otherwise deceptive purposes?

What exactly will it take to realise Facts?

But don't come crying to me, or otherwise pontificate on what Nietzsche said about "that which does not kill us makes us stronger," let alone that Mickey Mouse about "the ends justifying the means," corrupt, weird and unwholesome though they be. You alone brought on your own problem.

And Another Thing:

Have you considered the possibility of your being an alcoholic, drug addict, sex maniac or even emotionally disturbed? Get some counselling.

more cat pictures

*************

MEMO TO READERS: As per usual with these Open Letters, you are strongly urged to share these with your friends and e-mail circles, the better to ensure some serious pressure is applied and public outrage so maximised.

However, please avoid the use of "spam" in so doing; "spam" only makes these efforts ineffective.