logo
Has the Epstein affair strained Trump's cozy relationship with the Murdoch media empire?

Has the Epstein affair strained Trump's cozy relationship with the Murdoch media empire?

The Guardian18 hours ago
In the wake of new revelations regarding the friendship of Donald Trump and disgraced and deceased billionaire financier Jeffrey Epstein, Rupert Murdoch's media empire has both poured gasoline on to the story and come to Trump's loyal defense. Experts say that, much like the broader Maga movement, the Epstein affair is testing Trump and Murdoch's mostly chummy relationship.
To think, only months ago, at Jimmy Carter's funeral, Barack Obama and Donald Trump were laughing together in the pews.
But in Trump's latest attempt to deny and deflect when faced with controversy, he's calling for his first predecessor's prosecution over trying 'to rig the election' against him in 2016. Of course, Fox News, the crown jewel in Murdoch's wallet of media properties, has followed suit: in one of the days following the fallout from Epstein, mentions of Obama's name reportedly drowned out that of the convicted pedophile and suspected spy, by a score of 117 to two.
But there is trouble in paradise. Murdoch's Wall Street Journal (WSJ) broke the story that Trump allegedly penned a seedy birthday message to Epstein in 2003. The president then did what he does best: filed a libel suit for billions in damages.
'The Trump-Murdoch media dynasty has traditionally been a cozy one,' said Margot Susca, an assistant professor of journalism at American University and the author of Hedged: How Private Investment Funds Helped Destroy American Newspapers and Undermine Democracy. 'Murdoch-owned Fox News serves up what amounts to state-owned television for Trump.'
At the outset of his second presidency, Trump named several Fox News personalities to his stable of figures in the administration, namely Pete Hegseth, the secretary of defense who was a weekend host of Fox & Friends and has taken on his role at the Pentagon with the vigor expected of a veteran talking head.
'I'd like to believe the $10bn defamation lawsuit Trump filed against the Wall Street Journal and Rupert Murdoch for its Epstein coverage will serve as a wakeup call that Murdoch is not immune to Trump's press bullying,' she said, referring to the legion of ways Trump has imposed his will against the fifth estate. 'They should have favored press freedom and picked the press's role in democracy over access and cronyism.'
The White House, thus far, has had a direct line to the most influential broadcaster in the country.
Susca admitted that though the WSJ is a 'bright spot' among the 'lapdog coverage' for the president in the list of other Murdoch properties, Fox, the highest-rated news network in America, could easily be holding the government accountable day to day. But on the one hand, as Susca pointed out, Fox has 'barely mentioned' the defamation suit, while on the other, the WSJ 'still has its Epstein story posted'.
Trump, eager to escape the myriad and legitimate questions surrounding his well-documented former friendship with Epstein, has rallied all of his media and congressional troops to distract his associations with a conspiracy theory that he himself has stoked among his Maga disciples for years.
'Clearly, Trump wants to distract from the fact that he had a close and intimate friendship with Epstein, a billionaire pedophile that seemed to have set up a global trafficking ring,' said Edward Ongweso Jr, a senior researcher at Security in Context, an international project of scholars housed at the University of Massachusetts Amherst. 'And he wants to distract from the obvious implication of his about-face here (going from insisting the Epstein files will be released to insisting they never did and were invented by Democrats to take him down): that he's in them.'
Ongweso did note that Trump's continued ability to dodge becoming a casualty of the news cycle is unmatched: 'It is hard to imagine how any of his tactics will work, but then again he has gotten out of almost every single situation that would've doomed anyone else, hasn't he?'
But there's help already on the way for the president.
Mike Johnson, the speaker of the House, issued a convenient end to the congressional session to avoid a vote on the floor for the release of all the Department of Justice files relating to Epstein, while Mike Flynn, former Trump national security adviser (turned QAnon peddler) and former general, has told followers Obama needs to go to jail over the years-old Mueller report of 2019.
Sign up to This Week in Trumpland
A deep dive into the policies, controversies and oddities surrounding the Trump administration
after newsletter promotion
'The entire corrupt investigation was based on a fabricated lie that was part of a COUP by [Obama] to overthrow the United States,' he posted on X, before calling on the FBI and justice department to investigate and arrest the former president. 'EVIL PERSONIFIED!' he said in another post with hundreds of thousands of views. Flynn's endorsement of the Obama conspiracy was a sharp turn away from days of breathlessly begging for the release of the Epstein files.
But while the WSJ, a more independent and centrist publication in comparison with the rest of Murdoch's media empire, cast a stone against the president, Fox News is more than making up for it. Perhaps, that is, to avoid the fates of Paramount and ABC, which paid off Trump in large sums to settle suits that ultimately involved freedom of the press issues. Both networks stood to beat Trump on the facts of the cases, but avoided more litigation in what many have seen as a veritable bribe to a suit-happy and powerful president.
'I think this is more about caution than falling in line, but I can't see how it will last,' Ongweso said, referring to Fox and its coverage of Obama over the more salacious and Maga topic of Epstein. 'He's been able to get Paramount and ABC to settle even though their cases were winnable.'
Last year, Murdoch's Fox decimated CNN on election night, scoring millions more viewers and having their hosts fawning over Trump, a far cry from when the network enraged him by declaring Arizona for Joe Biden in 2020 – ultimately ruling on who won the presidency.
Murdoch himself is rumored not to be a personal fan of Trump, reportedly backing Ron DeSantis, Florida's governor, for the presidency in the lead-up to the 2024 election, before switching sides again. Even his own immediate family has enjoyed cozy relationships with media companies that were firmly in the Democratic orbit.
Still, Ongweso believes WSJ reporters might smell blood in the water for the president and report on him accordingly.
'There has been a trickle of additional Epstein-Trump material, most recently the resurfacing of photos showing Epstein at Trump's 1993 wedding to Martha Maples,' he said. 'There is certainly more that WSJ reporters will uncover and unless there's editorial interference, I can't see how Murdoch's empire can stop itself from uttering his name again.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Asian shares are mixed after Wall Street sets more records for US stocks
Asian shares are mixed after Wall Street sets more records for US stocks

The Independent

time4 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Asian shares are mixed after Wall Street sets more records for US stocks

Stock markets in Asia were mixed on Monday after U.S. stocks rose to more records as they closed out another winning week. U.S. futures and oil prices were higher ahead of trade talks in Stockholm between U.S. and Chinese officials. European futures rose after the European Union forged a deal with the Trump administration calling for 15% tariffs on most exports to the U.S. The agreement announced after President Donald Trump and European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen met briefly at Trump's Turnberry golf course in Scotland staves off far higher import duties on both sides that might have sent shock waves through economies around the globe. Tokyo's Nikkei 225 index lost 1% to 41,056.81 after doubts surfaced over what exactly the trade truce between Japan and U.S. President Donald Trump, especially the $550 billion pledge of investment in the U.S. by Japan, will entail. Terms of the deal are still being negotiated and nothing has been formalized in writing, said an official, who insisted on anonymity to detail the terms of the talks. The official suggested the goal was for a $550 billion fund to make investments at Trump's direction. Hong Kong's Hang Seng index gained 0.4% to 25,490.45 while the Shanghai Composite index lost 0.2% to 3,587.25. Taiwan's Taiex rose 0.3%. CK Hutchison, a Hong Kong conglomerate that's selling ports at the Panama Canal, said it may seek a Chinese investor to join a consortium of buyers in a move that might please Beijing but could also bring more U.S. scrutiny to a geopolitically fraught deal. CK Hutchison's shares fell 0.6% on Monday in Hong Kong. Elsewhere in Asia, South Korea's Kospi was little changed at 3,195.49, while Australia's S&P/ASX 200 rose 0.3% to 8,688.40. India's Sensex slipped 0.1%. Markets in Thailand were closed for a holiday. On Friday, the S&P 500 rose 0.4% to 6,388.64, setting an all-time for the fifth time in a week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 0.5% to 44,901.92, while the Nasdaq composite added 0.2%, closing at 21,108.32 to top its own record. Deckers, the company behind Ugg boots and Hoka shoes, jumped 11.3% after reporting stronger profit and revenue for the spring than analysts expected. Its growth was particularly strong outside the United States, where revenue soared nearly 50%. But Intell fell 8.5% after reporting a loss for the latest quarter, when analysts were looking for a profit. The struggling chipmaker also said it would cut thousands of jobs and eliminate other expenses as it tries to turn around its fortunes. Intel, which helped launch Silicon Valley as the U.S. technology hub, has fallen behind rivals like Nvidia and Advanced Micro Devices while demand for artificial intelligence chips soars. Companies are under pressure to deliver solid growth in profits to justify big gains for their stock prices, which have rallied to record after record in recent weeks. Wall Street has zoomed higher on hopes that President Donald Trump will reach trade deals with other countries that will lower his stiff proposed tariffs, along with the risk that they could cause a recession and drive up inflation. Trump has recently announced deals with Japan and the Philippines, and the next big deadline is looming on Friday, Aug. 1. Apart from trade talks, this week will also feature a meeting by the Federal Reserve on interest rates. Trump again on Thursday lobbied the Fed to cut rates, which he has implied could save the U.S. government money on its debt repayments. Fed Chair Jerome Powell has said he is waiting for more data about how Trump's tariffs affect the economy and inflation before making a move. The widespread expectation on Wall Street is that the Fed will wait until September to resume cutting interest rates. In other dealings early Monday, U.S. benchmark crude oil gained 24 cents to $65.40 per barrel. Brent crude, the international standard, also added 24 cents to $67.90 per barrel. The dollar rose to 147.72 Japanese yen from 147.71 yen. The euro slipped to $1.1755 from $1.1758.

Photos reveal Chile's pursuit of Venezuelan crime syndicate branded a terror threat by Trump
Photos reveal Chile's pursuit of Venezuelan crime syndicate branded a terror threat by Trump

The Independent

time33 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Photos reveal Chile's pursuit of Venezuelan crime syndicate branded a terror threat by Trump

From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging. At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story. The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it. Your support makes all the difference.

It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland
It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland

The National

timean hour ago

  • The National

It's hard to see new left party cutting through in Scotland

The first thing to say is that if it is able to break out of the factions and abbreviations which abound in the terrain to the left of Labour – and with 300,000 claimed sign-ups and a poll rating of 10% it just might – then it marks a very big change in socialist thinking. For more than a century, socialists who wanted to change capitalism have rubbed along in the Labour Party with those who just wanted a bit more from it. Now large sections of the Labour left look set to give up the ghost. For me, that ship sailed long ago. It's more than two decades since I became convinced that using the powers that Scotland would get with political independence offered a much better prospect of changing the world than trying to reform a British state run by people still steeped in the mindset of empire. READ MORE: Man arrested for 'carrying a placard calling Donald Trump an offensive word' Nonetheless it's an important debate. The political character of England should matter greatly to Scotland and this new party might even play a role here. In one sense the Labour left has nowhere to go. Those now in control of the party have made it perfectly clear radical views are no longer welcome within it. They have been demonised and purged. Labour is manifesting every bit as much intolerance and authoritarianism in its internal structures as it does in government. But how did it come to this? A short time ago the Labour left had more power than at any point in the party's history. Corbyn was leader and commanded the considerable resources provided to the parliamentary opposition by the state. The left controlled the conference and the NEC. And the mobilisation of the grassroots through Momentum was impressive in its day. Yet within a few short years it had all evaporated. Corbyn and others left or were expelled, policy was abandoned wholesale, and the Labour conference would sing the national anthem with no visible dissent. It has been a remarkable transition both in speed and scale. In part this is because the Corbyn project failed abjectly (Image: Getty) in its own terms. Jeremy became leader by accident. And he wasn't very good at it. I watched for years in the House of Commons the breathtaking disloyalty of the right-wing Labour parliamentarians towards the Corbyn front bench. It was embarrassing. Never have I seen such hostility and hate between political parties, never mind within one. But no-one got suspended, or expelled or deselected. They were ignored, left alone to operate as a party within a party. Despite his strength in the wider party organisation, Corbyn never moved against his enemy within. Too naïve, or too nice. Either way, a fatal mistake. Corbyn also never got out of his silo, unwilling or incapable of moving beyond his natural support. He should have developed a narrative about Brexit or constitutional reform that would have galvanised a wider alliance which the left could lead. He didn't. Once defeated, his opponents lost no time in eradicating any possible legacy. These right-wing parliamentarians had been busy making plans. There were organised by a ruthless and clever Irishman called Morgan McSweeney under the banner Labour Together. McSweeney built a strategy for power inspired by Odysseus. Seeing the popularity of left policies in the party, and among the electorate, he argued for 'Corbynism without Corbyn'. But he needed someone to front it who couldn't immediately be outed as a right-wing hack. Step forward the hapless Keir Starmer. You'll cringe to look now at the ten-point platform McSweeney drew up for Starmer's leadership bid. Common ownership, higher income tax on top earners, improving welfare, and more. It worked at the time. Those Labour members who hadn't left after their leader fell lapped it up. Once in position, McSweeney and his acolytes didn't show any hesitation that might have come from wanting to be nice or fair. At breakneck speed and with ruthless efficiency they brushed aside anyone in their way, including many on the soft left, which they saw as a gateway for extremists. They won through deceit, but at the price of the party itself. Which is why we've got a new one. So, what does this mean for us? We've just got used to Scotland being a plurality in which six parties compete. Are we now to have seven? It's hard to see. Certainly, there's plenty of discontent within Labour ranks, but not nearly as much as in places like London. Besides, there's already plenty of options where the disenchanted could escape to. And across it all lies the independence question. Not really something you can avoid. Is it plausible, or possible, for a new party to say we're really radical and want a complete overhaul of the system, but we are agnostic on whether Scotland should be an independent country or remain in the UK? Especially when they would, by definition, be living proof of the failure of the latter option.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store