Rupert Murdoch’s news empire knowingly lied. Can we just pause to take in how extraordinary that is?

theguardian.com:

There are always plenty of grounds for cynicism about the state of the news media, but in the last week we seem to have arrived at a new set of low expectations.

Fox News, having settled its defamation case with Dominion in the US and with Lachlan Murdoch withdrawing proceedings against Crikey in Australia, the Murdoch news empire has effectively admitted what was already clear: that it knowingly broadcast untrue information.

Make no mistake, this is new. It is directly contrary to the purposes of journalism, and indeed News Corp Australia’s own code of conduct, which states “Publications should take reasonable steps to ensure reports are accurate and not misleading.”

We have sadly grown used to news reporting that lacks context, that mixes opinion and fact and by doing so distorts, and that makes egregious and careless errors. These faults are not unique to News Corp and Fox News. If only.

But for a mainstream, professional news organisation to lie, and effectively admit to having done so – that is new, and we should stop and think about the implications.

Nor was this a trivial lie. It was politically charged, and dangerous – concerning allegations the US election had been rigged.

What is the difference between what Fox Media did, and the politically motivated websites and social media channels that exist only to peddle misinformation?

Yet in the wake of these events, the commentary has been preoccupied, not with the chasm opened in the landscape of journalism, but instead on what it means for Fox News as a business (consensus: not much).

That alongside the admittedly titillating details of Rupert Murdoch’s declining wits and the succession to his reign, including the theory that his children, Elizabeth and James, might be