By John C. Dyer, UK Correspondent
It has been days since I raised the question, how did The NY Post obtain all that information about the complaining victim/witness in the Strauss Kahn criminal case. The Post itself describes the sources as anonymous, unattributed, or close to the prosecution.
A Post spokeswoman, commenting for The Post on a libel suit brought by the victim/witness, said that The Post stands by its story. Neither The Post’s description of its sources nor the spokeswoman’s comment clarify how The Post induced such a potential breach of professional ethics. That how is the question.
In the intervening days Attorney General Eric Holder announced an investigation into allegations News Corp hacked the phones of 911 victims. The emphasis on the allegations pertaining to the 911 victims is understandable. 911 is a major American trauma.
But the source of The Post's allegations concerning Strauss Kahn’s accuser, and indeed, general practices of News Corp, beg investigation. In a recent article, Adweek alleges that The Post and Fox News routinely engage in practices at best described as sleazy.
The alleged sources, anonymous Post reporters, assert that the conduct of The Post and Fox is sleazy but not criminal. But so did Rebekah Brooks and Neil Wallis.
One might argue that they are isolated cases and/or there was a legitimate public purpose in exposing Strauss Kahn’s accuser. But so did the police in the initial Scotland Yard investigation of the News of the World’s phone hacking. Scotland Yard arrested Rebekah Brooks the morning of 17 July. Brooks and Les Hinton, Dow Jones' now former CEO, were not just any old rogue reporters. They both oversaw News of the World and were intimates of Rupert and James Murdoch. What are the chances they do not reflect the organization generally, including in the US and Australia?
In fact, it took years of persistence by The Guardian and the victims to unlock the serious investigation that has turned up so many OMG revelations and rocked Murdoch world this past 10 days. In those cases the trigger for the victims' alarm did not come with a label, “hello, look at me, I’m a crook.” The trigger was the presence in the article of information that could only have come from private or confidential sources not disclosed to have consented to the release.
A cynic might argue that the Adweek article was a plant by Post reporters seeking to head off investigation by disclosing some sleaze to lend credibility to an assertion that The Post and Fox had not engaged in criminal conduct. I don’t know. I don’t know if The Post or Fox actually did engage in criminal conduct. These are all allegations.
Innocent until proven guilty. Etc. But as the adage goes, where there is smoke ....
The smoke requires clearing. Only an independent investigation from a credible agency will do the trick. I nominate the FBI.