As a hypothetical example of how Murdoch may have possibly meddled, the host of the progressive talk show (that airs on KKGN from 6 to 9 P. M. in the Pacific Time Zone, each weekday evening) postulated a hypothetical example of how such imaginary meddling might have worked, suppose (hypothetically) that Rupert Murdoch's aggressive style of journalism fact finding divulged that a guy in America's legislature (we'll call him "Knute") was simultaneously having an extra-marital affair while urging that a fellow southerner in the White House should be impeached for defending a woman's honor by telling a fib under oath. (The WLJ legal advisors insist on such convoluted cautionary wording and we trust their judgment.)
Additionally, the talk show host urged listeners to imagine what would happen if Rupert Murdoch were to use that knowledge as a bargaining chip in discussion with "Knute" about granting some legal dispensations to the Murdock empire so that they could establish a new beachhead in America for Murdoch's brand of aggressively and selectively dishing the dirt out on politicians who opposed his efforts?
[Wouldn't all this sound so much more palatable if the voice of Rod Serling could be used to supply the vocal track?]
If Rupert Murdoch were to use political blackmail to achieve his goals, wouldn't some Paul Wellstoneish fellow do the "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" routine in opposition? What ever happened to Senator Wellstone?
Does that radio guy think that decency and honesty in politics and fair and balanced journalism have done a variation of the "no survivors" results at the Battle of the Little Big Horn? He might be right, eh?
Murdoch came to America, got some legislative breaks, and started Fox News. Does that mean that Paddy Chayefsky was spot-on with a prescient script all that long ago or are there merely some superfluous basic plot similarities?
Would Vincent Canby call the summer of 2011 "brilliantly, surprisingly funny," as he did "Network"?
BTW if Fox News blatantly ignores the various stories involving Rupert Murdoch, does that mean that they should change their motto to: "the best Biased and Slanted opinions that Rupert's money can buy"?
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).