Investigate Murdoch’s News Corp.? Nah.

<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/worldeconomicforum/3191028700/">World Economic Forum</a>/Flickr

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


On Wednesday, the nonprofit watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) upped the ante in the ongoing furor over Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp. and the widening British phone-hacking scandal. Democratic members of Congress, including West Virginia Sen. Jay Rockefeller, have called on various federal agencies to investigate allegations that reporters working for News Corp.’s News of the World may have hacked the voicemail of 9/11 victims and also attempted to bribe a New York City police officer for their phone records. But CREW has suggested that Congress itself should take up the cause and launch hearings on the brewing scandal. CREW’s executive director Melanie Sloan said in a statement:

While it is encouraging that Sen. Rockefeller shares CREW’s concern about whether American 9/11 victims had their voicemails hacked, there is no need to cede all investigative authority to the executive branch. Just as the British Parliament has held hearings and heard the testimony of witnesses, Congress has the ability to subpoena News Corp. employees and require them to explain themselves. The idea that News Corp. may have sought to exploit the victims of one of the darkest days in US history for financial gain is grotesque. Even in these hyper-partisan days, Congress should be able to put the privacy of terrorist victims and their families above politics. Mr. Murdoch and his acolytes must be held accountable here as well as in Great Britain.

So far, though, Republicans who control the House don’t seem to be in a big hurry to answer the call. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, which has wide-ranging investigative jurisdiction, did not respond to a request for comment. And even the Senate Democrats haven’t yet responded to CREW’s request. But it’s still early, and they may be waiting to see if the Justice Department will act.

Everyone from former New York Attorney General Eliot Spitzer to Sen. Frank Lautenberg (D-N.J.) has suggested that News Corp. could possibly be prosecuted for violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bans American companies from engaging in bribery abroad. News Corp. is incorporated in Delaware and is listed on the NASDAQ, meaning that the US would have jurisdiction to investigate the bribery and hacking charges raised in Great Britain. The Justice Department has increasingly used the FCPA in recent years, stepping up investigations and prosecutions of companies from Siemens to Alcatel-Lucent to Johnson & Johnson. So News Corp. could be fair game, at least from a legal standpoint.

But it’s a dicey move for the Justice Department to go after a news-gathering organization. Aside from the various free-speech issues involved, prosecuting News Corp., the owner of Fox News and the Wall Street Journal, would be politically perilous for the Obama administration. It may be that the facts in this case are outrageous enough that even the most partisan tea partier could forgive the administration for going after its favorite news source. But the administration does risk the perception that it’s using the British scandal as an excuse for going after a news-media nemesis.

The Justice Department and Congress aren’t the only entities under pressure to take action against News Corp. in light of the tabloid scandal. Earlier this week on an ABC panel discussion, media mogul Steven Brill said:

News Corp has a lot of FCC licenses. There’s still a clause in the federal communications law that requires that you have to be of good character to have such a license…

So here I am reasonably certain that someone, maybe someone from the political left or whoever, is going to make a big deal of whether [News Corp. is] fit to have their FCC licenses under the current management.

Fox haters, though, shouldn’t hold their breath waiting for the FCC to act. Art Brodsky, the communications director for Public Knowledge, a public-interest group that focuses on technology, says, “Unless something pops up that is relevant to US law, there isn’t any basis for [the FCC] taking action over here.” He notes that the FCC has only revoked a broadcast license once in its entire history, a process that took about a decade. “The FCC does not yank licenses.”

Indeed, FCC Chairman Julius Genachowski said as much during a news conference this week. “There is obviously a process going on in the UK, and that is not a process we expect to get involved in or interfere with,” he said.

UPDATE: The AP reports that the FBI has opened an investigation into allegations that News Corp. tried to hack into the phones of Sept. 11 victims.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate