Veteran journalist Tina Brown claimed in a new Substack article that "old crocodile" Rupert Murdoch was very much looking forward to taking on Donald Trump over The Wall Street Journal's report on the president's relationship with sex-trafficker Jeffrey Epstein.
Trump filed a $10 billion libel suit against Murdoch, Dow Jones, News Corp, and its CEO, Robert Thomson, plus two Journal reporters for causing "overwhelming" damage to the president's finances and reputation. The suit came shortly after the Journal published a report suggesting that Trump and Epstein were closer friends than the president has admitted to. The proof included a bawdy birthday card of a naked woman that Trump allegedly drew on while wishing Epstein that "every day be another wonderful secret."
Brown called it a "rich irony" that Murdoch, whose Fox News has faced criticism for helping boost Trump into power, was now the object of Trump's slings and arrows.
"Even at a grumpy 94, Murdoch is still a tabloid man to his core," Brown wrote. "Nothing gets his juices going more than a sex scandal that beats the competition. The old-fashioned populist thrill of embarrassing those in power (and leveraging their fears) has been the six-decade blood sport of Murdoch's cash-cow newspaper empire."
And yet, Brown lamented, defending the all-important freedom of the press must not be entrusted to Murdoch or any other billionaire-funded outlets for fear they could turn their backs on the First Amendment if it suited them financially.
Murdoch may look as if he's standing up to Trump's assault on freedom of the press, but that's only because the Murdoch family got what they needed out of Trump during his first term, with the no-snags sale of 21st Century Fox to Disney in 2017. The deal netted the Murdoch children a cool $2 billion apiece, according to Brown.
While the "blood sport" may be entertaining to watch from the sidelines, Brown warned that only "direct-to-subscriber platforms" like Substack provide "safe harbor" for true freedom of speech. Still, without great financial backing, it may be near impossible for independent journalists to "do battle in lawfare or conduct complex investigations of corporate or government corruption without institutional backing."