THE WALL STREET JOURNAL. **** Saturday/Sunday, August 17 - 18, 2019 |A
about foul play? With all the people
who’d want him dead?
This whole thing is a big stinkin’,
fumin’ hunk of foul-up. And there’s
still time to get this story. I miss the
tough, crazy beat reporters of yore.
Like me. I got cancer and was on
chemo when I got a tip about a po-
lice-brutality story. I tore the IV out
of my arm and ran to the sound of
the crap!
So Jimmy Breslin it. McAlary it.
Hell, Steve Dunleavy it. There was a
story, too good to check: Dunleavy
gets there early when the Berlin
Wall’s starting to fall, sees the kids
dancing in the streets. He wires
home, says send me a dozen sledge-
hammers. Next day he hands them
out to the kids, they jump on the
wall and start hammering. The pho-
tographs were beautiful! Caught an
existential truth! That’s a reporter!
Work every source and angle, ev-
ery prison guard and cop you
know—you’re supposed to know
them! Pete Hamill would have
known the estranged sister of the
night nurse at the ER. He’d wait at
her house, she’d tell him the EMTs
came in laughing about “Who do
you think killed the guy who sui-cided?” Or maybe she’d say they
were nervous and just plopped him
down and scrammed. But he’d have
gotten the color, the feel. And it
would suggest something.
Where is this Maxwell lady hid-
ing? You believe nobody knows
where she is? You’re an idiot. Go
find Maxwell House! Live on the
stoop! Ask her: Did you flip? Be-
cause I figure she went state’s
evidence on Epstein and he knew.
“Are you in hiding in fear for your
life? Who wants to kill you, Ms.
Maxwell?”
It’s like reporting now takes place
in green rooms. People say it’s all
gossip but it’s not, because gossip is
fun. It’s more like data points for-
malized around some vaporous Offi-
cial View.
It’s like every great media organi-
zation is tied up in this complicated,
soul-crushing, virtue-signalling fear-
fulness, this vast miasma of progres-
sive political theory and ideology
and correctness and “please report
to HR”—and it has nothing to do
with the mission. The mission is to
get the story!
Reporters and editors, they’re not
the fabulous old drunks and girl re-A Tabloid Legend on Jeffrey Epstein’s Death
which they aren’t because
they’ve all got a cable hit.
Anyway we’re talking and I
ask about Epstein. You guys in
Washington really interested in
this story? He says, “First I have
to tell you my Epstein joke: I
was stunned to hear about the
suicide of Jeffrey Epstein. And
so was Jeffrey Epstein!”
I give him a laugh. Good try.
But what are you saying? He
shrugs. It’s a big subject at
Hamptons fundraisers. Other-
wise, eh, not really.
I’m thinking but this is the
story with everything. Wealth,
power, darkness. Princes and
presidents. People with secrets.
Rumors of spying. Even an Eng-
lish aristo moll on the lam.
He’s the most famous pris-
oner in America! They put him
in a jail, where he supposedly
tries to kill himself. So they
move him to a special cell, heavily
guarded 24/7. Don’t worry, he’s safe,
he’s gonna face the music!
Then dawn on a Saturday in high
August. Everyone important is away.
It’s an entire city run by the second
string—novices, kids and pension-
bumpers at the police desk, the
news desk, the hospital. It breaks
like sudden thunder: Epstein is dead,
he committed suicide in his cell!
And then, like, silence. Thunder’s
followed by fog.
Government dummies up, no one
knows nothin’. Finally on Monday
the attorney general has a news con-
ference. He’s very upset! What in-
competence! That jail don’t work
right!
But incompetence proves nothing,
right? If Epstein killed himself, he
chose the time he knew the guards
were asleep. If Epstein was mur-
dered, his killer chose the time he
knew the guards were asleep. In-
competence is completely believable
but insufficient.
The papers are doing their stories
about those strange Americans with
their quirky ways burning up the in-
ternet with their quaint conspira-
cies. But who would not wonderporter miscreants, they’re like—
like normal people! Reporters
aren’t supposed to be normal!
And they’re very tidy because
they’re extremely important!
You get the impression they be-
came reporters to affect the dis-
course. “I’m going into journal-
ism to press for cultural and
political justice.” These—these
deconstructionist intellectuals!
These twinkies with soft hands
from Phillips Exeter Andover
whatever. These mere political
operatives. These people with
grievances, who’ve never had
anything to grieve because their
lives were the red satin lining of
a music box.
If I was in charge I’d say,
“Thank you for your boundless
efforts to secure the greater
progress for the polity. But I
was wondering if, in your spare
moments, you could be troubled
to help us cover the biggest scandal
of your blanking lifetimes?”
The editors don’t honor old shoe-
leather ways. The owner wants you
out there branding the brand on ca-
ble so the brand is being branded.
And those losers in Washington.
Lemme tell you what they’re think-
ing. They’re thinking New York cares
and L.A. cares butnobody else in
America cares about this pervert
and his fancy friends. They’re think-
ing it’s August, play it out, let the
story sink in the sands of time. Be-
cause it’s a story they don’t like. My
hunch, they have no real confidence
in themselves or the system. They
don’t think they themselves are
gonna find out if Epstein was killed
or committed suicide.
Which if I’m right is a story.
Get me a drink. In the drawer in
the desk over there.
I bet you miss me. And Breslin
and the rest. Because we gave it all
color. Because deep down we re-
spected life, which has color and
facts.
Stories, yarns. The feel of it, the
old romance of it.
Bled right out by the theoreti-
cians. Good luck with the brand.CHAD CROWET
his week we turn the col-
umn over to the late Mike
McAlary (1957-98), tabloid
star and journalistic tough
guy. Here’s Mike:
So I’m talking to this political guy,
holds a significant office which I
won’t tell you because it’s none of
your business. We’re having break-
fast in a high-end midtown hotel.
Gleaming silver buffet, steam rising,
nervous, deferential waiters. He’s
right at home. They have every-
thing—waffles, eggs benedict, golden
hash browns.
Naturally he orders fresh berries
and I have cantaloupe with a little
china cup of cottage cheese. We sort
of laugh, like we’re admitting. We’re
so important, we must maintain our
health for the good of the republic.
Pols used to look like pigs, which
was often an outer representation of
an inner reality. It was all very hon-
est! Now they’re gym rats, on our
dime. “Vote for me, I’m completely
fit!”
My business went to hell when it
started maintaining its health. The
old newsrooms—the whiskey in the
lower-right drawer of the copy desk,
the guy who’d call in sick in a black-
out and the next morning forget,
bump into his substitute, and
scream at his editor: “You’re schem-
ing to replace me!” The sound of the
wires, hysterical with news. The
nerve-jangling bedlam. Now it’s the
dry tap-tap-tap in the gray felt cubi-
cle when anyone’s in the newsroom,
This is the story with
everything. Wealth, power,
darkness. Princes and
presidents with secrets.
DECLARATIONS
By Peggy NoonanOPINION
PUBLISHED SINCE 1889 BY DOW JONES & COMPANY
Rupert Murdoch
Executive Chairman, News Corp
Matt Murray
Editor in ChiefRobert Thomson
Chief Executive Officer, News Corp
William Lewis
Chief Executive Officer and PublisherEDITORIAL AND CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS:
1211 Avenue of the Americas, New York, N.Y., 10036
Telephone 1-800-DOWJONES
DOW JONES MANAGEMENT:
Ramin Beheshti, Chief Technology Officer;
Kamilah Mitchell-Thomas, Chief People Officer;
Edward Roussel, Chief Innovation Officer;
Christina Van Tassell, Chief Financial Officer
OPERATING EXECUTIVES:
Kenneth Breen, Commercial;
Jason P. Conti, General Counsel;
Tracy Corrigan, Chief Strategy Officer;
Frank Filippo, Print Products & Services;
Kristin Heitmann, Chief Commercial Officer;
Nancy McNeill, Corporate Sales;
Thomas San Filippo, Customer Service;
Josh Stinchcomb, Advertising Sales;
Suzi Watford, Chief Marketing Officer;
Jonathan Wright, International
Barron’s Group: Almar Latour, Publisher
Professional Information Business:
Christopher Lloyd, Head;
Ingrid Verschuren, Deputy HeadNeal Lipschutz Karen Miller Pensiero
Deputy Editor in Chief Managing Editor
Jason Anders, Chief News Editor;
Thorold Barker, Europe; Elena Cherney, Coverage
Planning; Andrew Dowell, Asia; Alex Martin,
Writing; Michael W. Miller, Features & Weekend;
Emma Moody, Standards; Shazna Nessa, Visuals;
Matthew Rose, Enterprise; Michael Siconolfi,
Investigations; Louise Story, Strategy and Interim
Product & Technology; Nikki Waller, Live
Journalism; Stephen Wisnefski, Professional News
Gerard Baker, Editor at Large
Paul A. Gigot, Editor of the Editorial Page;
Daniel Henninger, Deputy Editor, Editorial Page
WALL STREET JOURNAL MANAGEMENT:
Joseph B. Vincent, Operations;
Larry L. Hoffman, Production
Hong Kong Authorities Seem to Want an Ugly Sunday
Hong KongT
his will be the 11th weekend of
protests, and the pro-democ-
racy activists want Saturday’s
demonstration to be peaceful and
nonviolent. But Hong Kong police ap-
pear to be setting the stage for chaos
and confrontation. Will it serve as a
pretense for a crackdown?
Hong Kong’s Basic Law guaran-
tees “freedom of association, of as-
sembly, of procession, and of dem-
onstration,” but those rights aren’t
absolute. Among other limitations,
authorities can restrict assemblies
deemed to jeopardize public order.
Organizers must provide the gov-
ernment advance notice of any pro-
test, and the police can impose con-
ditions or refuse to allow it to
proceed.
The police on Thursday ap-
proved a Sunday protest at Victoria
Park. But they denied a permit for
a 2.3-mile march to Chater Road in
Hong Kong’s Central district. An
appeals panel, whose members are
appointed by the Beijing-backed
chief executive, upheld the denial
Friday night—a decision that puts
all who participate in Sunday’s pro-
test at greater risk of arrest and
police violence.
The problem is that Victoria Park
can accommodate only 100,000 or so
people, according to police esti-
mates. But the Civil Human Rights
Front, which is organizing the dem-
onstration, anticipates a far larger
turnout. When the front organized a
June 9 protest, more than one mil-
lion participated, and a follow-up
march a week later drew more than
two million.
Protesters who spill outside Vic-
toria Park will cross a legal gulf. At
the very least, they’d be vulnerable
to charges of unauthorized assem-
bly. If three or more engage in “dis-
orderly, intimidating, insulting or
provocative” conduct that inspires
reasonable fear, they can be charged
with unlawful assembly. Penalties
for both offenses range from fines to
five years in prison. And if protest-
ers escalate an unlawful assembly by
threatening or committing violence
or property damage, they could face
10 years behind bars for rioting.
Property damage under the law
can be as minimal as ripping up a
poster. For moving traffic barriers,
some protesters have been accused
of “threatening personal injury”
against the police. And a participant
could be accused of “violence” for
batting away a cop’s hand while be-
ing pepper-sprayed, says Randy
Shek, a barrister who has repre-
sented more than 50 protesters.
Moreover, participants don’t person-
ally have to commit vandalism, vio-
lence or a threat to be charged with
rioting; it’s enough if they supported
or encouraged the riot.
Since early June, the police have
arrested more than 700 people in
connection with the demonstrations.The authorities have taken an in-
creasingly broad view of what con-
stitutes participation in an unlawful
assembly or riot, says Chris Ng, an-
other lawyer representing protest-
ers. A few days ago in the Tin Shui
Wai district, officers arrested sev-
eral people wearing plain clothes—not the black outfits, hard hats and
masks that are the de facto protest
uniform—including a 15-year-old
girl. Most were out on bail within a
few hours, and a conviction would
be difficult to secure, but there’s lit-
tle accountability when police make
unjustified arrests, Mr. Ng said. He
explained that the police “have
largely increased the risk of attend-ing a march or a public assembly,
even if you are a bystander.” That
creates a “chilling effect on normal
citizens and protesters.”
The police have refused to autho-
rize other protests this summer. But
Sunday’s demonstration may prove
a turning point. The government has
failed to meet any of the protesters’
demands, so some have resorted to
disorderly conduct and vandalism of
official property. On Tuesday, as
protesters occupied and shut down
the Hong Kong International Air-
port, some crossed another bound-
ary when they violently detained
two men they suspected of being
government infiltrators. Protesters
have since apologized, but the inci-
dent damaged the movement’s
peaceful reputation. Sunday’s pro-
test is an attempt to restore it.
“By emphasizing peacefulness and
nonviolence, we hope that the focus
can be back on our legitimate 5 de-
mands, [and] that all the people in-
cluding elderly, disabled, even chil-
dren can join us,” Bonnie LeungWing-man of the Civil Human Rights
Front, told me in a WhatsApp mes-
sage. “With large turnout, we can
show to the world that this campaign
is still supported by many Hong-
kongers and will impose pressure to
HK government and Beijing.”
But police have now made it im-
possible to hold an assembly that is
both large and authorized. They may
be seeking to deprive the protest
movement of momentum by height-
ening the legal risk and intimidating
Hong Kongers into staying home. Or
perhaps their intent is to use the
lack of a permit as an excuse for
mass arrests or police violence.
“Preventing people from partici-
pating in a peaceful march will only
make Hong Kong people more an-
gry,” Mr. Ng said. “Those protesters
will still take to the streets to do
what they do. They are depriving
Hong Kong people’s right for peace-
ful demonstration.”Ms. Melchior is an editorial page
writer at the Journal.By Jillian Kay Melchior
Police make it impossible
to hold a protest that is
both lawful and large. Is it
a pretext for a crackdown?Yes, ViacomCBS Can Be a Streaming Survivor
Who says capital-
ism is efficient? It
took more than
three years for
Shari Redstone to
consummate this
week’s merger of
the entertainment
giants CBS and Via-
com, though she is
the controlling
shareholder of both
companies. The deal still probably
wouldn’t have happened if not for a
set of 2018 New Yorker articles por-
traying CBS’s then-CEO as a serial
masher. Nowhere in the efficient-
markets hypothesis does it predict
that sex scandals will arrive on de-mand to speed the allocation of as-
sets to their most productive use.
Now that the deal is finally done,
the Journal and many others talk of
a further takeover by Amazon, a
prospect discussed by this column
last year. The Hollywood news site
Indiewire says that all along “rumor
on the inside—and, frankly, the
hope—was that Amazon would come
in and swoop up the company to ac-
quire its depth of content that ap-
peals to Middle America and get
that demographic to finally sign up
for Prime.”
To many the question is not “if”
but “when,” since ViacomCBS (as
the company now is called) is a min-
now next to whales such as Disney,
AT&T and Comcast.
And yet this view may overlook a
few things. ViacomCBS is dwarfed
by these companies only because
they are involved in so many tan-
gential and conflicted businesses. As
CEO-designate Robert Bakish
pointed out in announcing the deal,
the new ViacomCBS will actually be
one of the largest producers of con-
tent—second only to Netflix—at a
time when content is hugely in de-
mand. With $13 billion committed
this year, the company has an aston-
ishing 750 shows greenlighted or in
production.
Yes, Mr. Bakish also emphasized
that some of these shows will end
up on its own subscription stream-
ing services such as CBS’s All-Ac-
cess and Showtime, as if the com-
pany somehow is eager to join the
bonfire that subscription streaming
is about to become with the advent
of new players such as Apple and
Disney.Mark me as skeptical. Why dou-
ble down on a market crowded with
giant rivals who feel strategically
compelled to lose money? Even
more so when consumers will soon
wake up and find they are in the
driver’s seat, with every incentive to
pick up and drop services from
month to month?Especially when the obvious op-
portunity for a company with Via-
comCBS’s storytelling assets—which
include everything from “Star Trek”
and “Mission Impossible” to “The
Brady Bunch,” “Hogan’s Heroes,”
“South Park” and “CSI” —is selling
content to these same competitors.
The biggest buyer out there, Netflix,
happens to be weak exactly where
ViacomCBS will be strong, in owner-
ship of long-established, deeply
rooted franchises.
Even while the deal was still ges-
tating last year, this column said the
safest position in the digital melee
to come likely belongs to those who
ownandcancreategreatshows.
Wall Street analyst Rich Greenfield
calls this the “arms dealer” model,
selling guns and ammunition to all
sides.
Nor is it obvious that Ms. Red-
stone, having waited decades to get
control of the empire created by her
father, Sumner Redstone, wouldeven welcome an Amazon buyout.
And yet Amazon must be thinking
about it. Jeff Bezos’ company spent
more money in the past six months
than even Netflix on promoting its
streaming offerings. It’s investing
giant sums to develop a “Lord of the
Rings” series and a series based on
the “Wheel of Time” novels by Rob-
ert Jordan.
If there was any doubt, not even
a swarm of new competitors or its
own management snafus (occa-
sioned by Hollywood’s crackdown
on male boorishness) seems to dis-
courage its foray into video as a
sweetener for Amazon Prime sub-
scribers. Arms dealer is not an ade-
quate metaphor. The retail giant is
not just a combatant but also a ma-
jor partner of its streaming rivals. It
buys their content. It distributes
their apps, devices and subscrip-
tions on its site. It even runs their
back offices through its giant web-
hosting business.
Which brings us to the Netflix co-
nundrum. In theory, nobody is bet-
ter positioned in the streaming mar-
ketplace, with a bigger subscriber
base or more powerful brand. And
yet its narrow business model leaves
it entirely reliant on rolling out hit
shows for fickle customers who will
soon find it all too tempting to
come and go on a monthly basis.
Yes, the capital markets were un-
characteristically slow in working
out the personal and political im-
pediments to Ms. Redstone’s deal.
And yet a punter might still be for-
given for finding the upside case
easier to make for ViacomCBS than
for Netflix from today’s vantage
point.BUSINESS
WORLD
By Holman W.
Jenkins, Jr.The newly merged
company looks small
to competitors but is
big in what matters now.