Contact Me By Email

Contact Me By Email

Thursday, February 05, 2026

Opinion | What’s Really Driving These Bogus Claims of Voter Fraud - The New York Times

What’s Really Driving These Bogus Claims of Voter Fraud

A photo illustration of a sign that says “Vote Aqui/Here,” with a check mark next to “Aqui.”
Photo Illustration by Tam Stockton for The New York Times

By Stephen Richer

"Mr. Richer is a Republican former elected recorder of Maricopa County, Ariz., where he was responsible for voter registration, early voting and mail-in voting.

This week, President Trump called on his party to nationalize American elections, an unconstitutional move that he said would be justified because of the danger of noncitizens casting ballots. “These people were brought to our country to vote, and they vote illegally,” he said.

No president has so baldly proposed to intervene in state elections, but the charge that noncitizens are illegally casting ballots is sadly commonplace. Elon Musk claims on X, without evidence, that significant numbers of illegal immigrants vote. Rudy Giuliani erroneously alleged that my home state, Arizona, had allowed “probably about 250,000” votes from noncitizens in 2020, despite the fact that Arizona has long required proof of citizenship to vote in state elections.

Election officials usually respond to these allegations by pointing out that there are almost no prosecutions of fraudulent noncitizen voters. Reuters has noted that even the pro-Trump Heritage Foundation’s database of election crimes listed only 24 instances of noncitizens voting in U.S. elections from 2003 to 2023.

While these rebuttals are correct, they are incomplete: Just because something isn’t prosecuted doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. Happily, there is new compelling evidence debunking the false claims. Recently, a number of states have undertaken investigations into noncitizen voting, cross-checking voter rolls with citizenship status, and found it virtually nonexistent.

When confronted with allegations on noncitizens voting in Utah, Lt. Gov. Deidre Henderson, the state’s top election official, initiated a monthslong review of Utah’s approximately 2.1 million registered voters. She and her team found one “confirmed noncitizen.” Just one. And that one noncitizen, while registered, had never voted.

Sign up for the Opinion Today newsletter  Get expert analysis of the news and a guide to the big ideas shaping the world every weekday morning. 

Idaho, a state of one million voters, ran similar tests in 2024, and they found 36 “very likely” registered noncitizens. That may seem like a lot until you view it in light of claims that statewide elections are altered by such anomalies. Some, but not all, of those 36 people have previously voted, the secretary of state, Phil McGrane, said, but “out of the million-plus registered voters we started with, we’re down to 10 thousandths of a percent” of the overall count — not even close to affecting the outcome.

Louisiana’s investigation in 2025 netted some 390 noncitizen registrants, 79 of whom had voted in at least one election over the last several decades (out of 2.9 million registrants). Just a few weeks ago, Montana found 23 possible noncitizen registrants (out of approximately 785,000 people registered). And Georgia, in some ways the model for these investigations, found in its 2024 audit 20 registered noncitizens (out of 8.2 million registrations). In my four years in office in Maricopa County overseeing voter registration, I came across a total of two possible instances of noncitizens voting out of some 2.5 million registered voters.

Some politicians are trying to exploit even these small numbers. In Michigan, the Macomb County clerk, Anthony Forlini, who is running for the top election office in the state, the secretary of state, recently announced to great fanfare that he’d found 15 noncitizens on his county’s voter rolls of over 724,000 registered voters. The incumbent secretary of state, Jocelyn Benson, then tasked her team with investigating the 15 files. It found that three of the people were U.S. citizens, four were previously removed from voter rolls, four were under further investigation and four do seem to be noncitizens.

These investigations affirm what is simply common sense. People largely aren’t willing to risk their status in the United States — the land of economic opportunity — for the ability to cast one more vote out of hundreds of thousands or millions in a state and hundreds of millions in the country.

The investigations also suggest that many politicians and public interest groups, all of which have access to these reports, may not actually care that much about election security. The constant talk of noncitizen voting is more likely about scoring political points and bolstering fund-raising.

Playing politics with the idea of fraudulent voters and stolen elections comes at a real cost to American confidence in our elections. It’s an affront to our democracy and to all those who work to deliver free and fair elections. It’s also an ominous sign for where things may be heading this year.

For President Trump, the myth of noncitizens voting is part of the broader story he’s concocted to avoid accepting that he lost to Joe Biden in 2020. But it also appears to be about this fall’s election. Mr. Trump may well intend to send the F.B.I. to run elections in Fulton County, Ga., or the Department of Homeland Security to seize ballot tabulators from Los Angeles County.

I don’t think it’s likely he will do so. But I also wouldn’t have predicted that the F.B.I. would take hundreds of boxes of 2020 election materials from Fulton County, as it did last week. And I certainly wouldn’t have predicted that Republicans would attempt to derail the electoral count on Jan. 6, 2021.

Everyone — Democrats and Republicans — should use the new state-level proof that noncitizen voting is virtually nonexistent to push back against the real danger to our democracy: craven politicians using the issue to undermine our free and fair elections.

Source photograph by Desiree Rios/The New York Times.

Stephen Richer is a former elected recorder of Maricopa County, Ariz., where he oversaw voter registration, early voting and mail voting for the fourth largest county in the United States. He is now the chief executive of Republic Affairs and a fellow at the Cato Institute."

Opinion | What’s Really Driving These Bogus Claims of Voter Fraud - The New York Times

White House Offers Shifting Story on Gabbard’s Presence at Georgia Raid - The New York Times

F.D.A. Relaxes Rules on ‘Naturally Derived’ Dyes

"Food makers will now be able to claim that their products have “no artificial colors,” so long as they use dyes that are not petroleum-based.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. speaking with his hands raised from behind a lectern.
“We’re asking people now, ‘Eat real food,’” Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said at the Tennessee State Capitol on Wednesday.George Walker IV/Associated Press

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. on Thursday announced the Food and Drug Administration was relaxing its enforcement of federal food additive regulations, making it easier for manufacturers to claim that they are not using artificial dyes in their products.

The F.D.A. has barred food makers from advertising that products contain “no artificial colors” unless they have no added dyes of any kind. But Mr. Kennedy and F.D.A. officials announced that the agency would no longer enforce that rule, so long as companies were not using petroleum-based dyes.

Mr. Kennedy and Dr. Martin Makary, who runs the F.D.A., said in a joint statement that the change would encourage food makers to use natural dyes instead of artificial dyes for products aimed at consumers who eschew “artificial” ingredients.

“We are making it easier for companies to move away from petroleum-based synthetic colors and adopt safer, naturally derived alternatives.” Mr. Kennedy said in a statement.

The agency also approved beetroot red, a new color option, as well as the expanded use of spirulina extract, an existing color additive derived from a type of algae. Those approvals bring to six the number of natural dyes that the agency has authorized since President Trump and Mr. Kennedy took office.

Mr. Kennedy’s effort to nudge food makers away from petroleum-based dyes is part of his broader effort to remake the American diet. The F.D.A. is considering a petition from Dr. David Kessler, who ran the agency in the 1990s, that has outlined a regulatory path by which the agency can rid the food supply of ultraprocessed foods — another high priority for Mr. Kennedy.

Health advocates have long criticized synthetic food dyes, citing a limited body of research connecting them to behavior problems in children. But the food industry has said any ingredient they use has been shown to be safe, and some experts say some natural food dyes may not be any safer.

Mr. Kennedy also presided over an overhaul of federal dietary guidelines, including a revamp of the food pyramid, which now emphasizes protein over carbohydrates.

The F.D.A.’s announcement comes as Mr. Kennedy travels the nation promoting the new guidelines. On Thursday, he is scheduled to deliver a “fireside chat” at a cattle industry convention in Tennessee — an appearance that dovetails with his call for Americans to eat more proteins like steak, cheese and whole milk while limiting carbohydrates.

“We’re asking people now, ‘Eat real food,’” Mr. Kennedy said Wednesday at the Tennessee State Capitol. “Eat protein.”

Mr. Kennedy made clear when he took office last year that changing the American diet was high on his priority list. He announced what he called a ban on artificial food dyes and said he had “an understanding” with major food manufacturers to remove petroleum-based food colorings from their products by 2026.

But the secretary has been unwilling to use the standard tools of government — regulation and legislation — to achieve that goal. Instead, he has relied on voluntary cooperation from food manufacturers. His peer-pressure approach has produced some results; big food makers including NestlĂ© and Conagra have signed on to the plan, though candy makers, who rely heavily on artificial dyes, have resisted his entreaties.

Sheryl Gay Stolberg covers health policy for The Times from Washington. A former congressional and White House correspondent, she focuses on the intersection of health policy and politics."

White House Offers Shifting Story on Gabbard’s Presence at Georgia Raid - The New York Times

White House Offers Shifting Story on Gabbard’s Presence at Georgia Raid - The New York Times

White House Offers Shifting Story on Gabbard’s Presence at Georgia Raid

"President Trump said Thursday that Attorney General Pam Bondi had directed Tulsi Gabbard to be present for an operation at an election center. It was the administration’s fourth explanation for her presence.

A women in a winter coat and baseball cap is viewed through a warehouse door.
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard at the Fulton County elections office in Atlanta last week.Nicole Craine for The New York Times

By Erica L. Green

Erica L. Green is a White House correspondent. She reported from Washington.

President Trump said on Thursday that Attorney General Pam Bondi wanted Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, to oversee the F.B.I. seizure and search of voter rolls in Georgia — the fourth time this week the administration has shifted its story on Ms. Gabbard’s extraordinary involvement in a law enforcement operation.

Ms. Gabbard’s involvement in the Georgia raid has drawn scrutiny given that her role overseeing the nation’s intelligence agencies does not include on-site involvement in criminal investigative work, and because the results of Georgia’s 2020 election have been the cornerstone of Mr. Trump’s claims that the election was rigged against him.

During remarks at the National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday, Mr. Trump said Ms. Gabbard went to Georgia at the direction of Ms. Bondi.

“She took a lot of heat two days ago because she went in — at Pam’s insistence — she went in and she looked at votes that want to be checked out,” Mr. Trump said of Ms. Gabbard. “Why is she doing it, right Pam, why is she doing it? Because Pam wanted her to do it. And you know why? Because she’s smart.”

Mr. Trump’s explanation for Ms. Gabbard’s involvement in the Georgia raid was different from his remarks on Wednesday, when he was pressed on Ms. Gabbard’s involvement in the raid during an interview with the NBC Nightly News anchor Tom Llamas.

“Why is Tulsi Gabbard there?” Mr. Llamas asked the president.

“I don’t know, but you know, uh, a lot of the cheating comes from — it’s international cheating,” Mr. Trump said. “You have people, they say, from China trying to — let me ask you, do you think China tries to influence our election?”

U.S. officials with knowledge of the Georgia operation told The New York Times this week that Mr. Trump personally ordered Ms. Gabbard to go to Atlanta for the search, and coordinated her actions with Andrew Bailey, one of two deputy F.B.I. directors.

Ms. Gabbard oversaw the F.B.I.’s search of an election center in Fulton County, Ga., during which agents seized truckloads of ballots cast in 2020. During the search, Ms. Gabbard used her cellphone to call Mr. Trump, and he addressed F.B.I. agents who had taken part on speakerphone, asking them questions and praising and thanking them for their work.

On Tuesday, when Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, was asked why Ms. Gabbard was involved in a domestic law enforcement operation, she said the president had tasked Ms. Gabbard with election security as part of her duties.

“Tulsi Gabbard has been tapped by the president of the United States to oversee the sanctity and the security of our American elections,” Ms. Leavitt said, adding that the charge was “a coordinated whole of government effort.”

But on Sunday, Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a television interview that he did not know why Ms. Gabbard was present at the raid, though he indicated that it was not unusual given her role as the nation’s top intelligence official.

“I don’t know why the director was there,” Mr. Blanche said. “She is not part of the grand jury investigation, but she is for sure a key part of our efforts at election integrity and making sure we have free and fair elections. She’s an expert in that space, and it’s a big part of what she and her team look at every day.”

Erica L. Green is a White House correspondent for The Times, covering President Trump and his administration."

White House Offers Shifting Story on Gabbard’s Presence at Georgia Raid - The New York Times

Trump Live Updates: President Strips Job Protections From Federal Workers and Latest on Immigration - The New York Times

Trump Administration Live Updates: President Strips Job Protections From 50,000 Federal Workers

The Capitol on Thursday.Eric Lee for The New York Times

"What We’re Covering Today

  • Federal Workers: The Trump administration finalized a new policy on Thursday giving the president the power to fire or discipline as many as 50,000 career federal employees, significantly expanding his ability to remake the federal work force. Until now, the president had the power to hire and fire about 4,000 political appointees at will. Read more ›

  • Immigration Crackdown: Senate Democrats say that they will put forth legislation to codify their conditions for continuing to fund the Department of Homeland Security, which include new restrictions on federal immigration agents. Read more ›

  • Diplomacy: Negotiators from Russia, Ukraine and the United States concluded their second round of peace talks in Abu Dhabi after about three hours, with little to show for them beyond a promise to exchange 314 prisoners of war. The United States and Iran are expected to meet for negotiations in Oman on Friday. President Trump has threatened military strikes if Iran does not accept U.S. demands."

Trump Live Updates: President Strips Job Protections From Federal Workers and Latest on Immigration - The New York Times

Lawrence: Trump says no one feels worse about Minneapolis killings than the killers

Wednesday, February 04, 2026

The Generation That Wasn't Allowed to Cry, Psychology of Baby Boomers

'Campaign to deter and depress the vote': Fmr. judge on Trump's call to nationalize elections

Miami’s Haitian Community Braces for Deportations

 

Miami’s Haitian Community Braces for Deportations

“Miami’s Haitian community, particularly in Little Haiti, is facing uncertainty due to the Trump Administration’s plan to end Temporary Protected Status (T.P.S.) for Haitians. This status, granted after the 2010 earthquake, allows Haitians to work legally in the U.S. but does not provide a path to citizenship. With Haiti facing a severe humanitarian crisis, including gang violence, political instability, and widespread food insecurity, the potential deportation of 330,000 Haitians poses a significant risk to their safety and well-being.

The Trump Administration’s plan to end Temporary Protected Status for immigrants from Haiti puts hundreds of thousands at risk of returning to a country in crisis.

An interior of a barbershop in which an American flag and a Haitian flag hang on the walls.

Miami’s Little Haiti neighborhood has been shaped by waves of immigrants fleeing natural disasters and gang violence.Photograph by Joe Raedle / Getty

The first documented arrival of Haitian refugees in South Florida dates to 1972, when a wooden sailboat, the Saint Sauveur, ran aground off of Pompano Beach, carrying sixty‑five asylum seekers fleeing the ruthless dictatorship of Jean-Claude Duvalier. Many Haitian families gravitated to Lemon City, one of the oldest settlements in Miami, developed in the late eighteen-hundreds and, at the time, largely populated by lemon-grove workers from the Bahamas. As more Haitians arrived in the area in the nineteen-seventies and eighties, they opened businesses, churches, markets, and cultural centers. Viter Juste, a businessman and activist who’s often called the father of Miami’s Haitian community, coined the name of the neighborhood in the early nineteen-eighties, and it stuck.

Today in Little Haiti, a seven‑foot bronze statue of Toussaint Louverture, one of the leaders of the Haitian Revolution, stands in a small plaza known as the City of Miami Freedom Garden. The plaza sits across from a gas station and bakery, surrounded by rows of modest homes, some purchased decades ago by newly arrived Haitian immigrants, before gentrification began to reshape the neighborhood. Since the statue’s installation, in 2005, three years after I moved to Miami, and a little more than a year after the bicentennial of Haitian independence, the spot has become a neighborhood gathering place. On January 1st, Haitian Independence Day, people stop by to take photos while area churches and neighbors share bowls of soup joumou, “freedom soup,” eaten to commemorate that day. Some afternoons, elders sit on the green benches surrounding the statue to talk or look out at the neighborhood, as they might once have done from their front porches back in Haiti. Occasionally, a group of tourists passes by, led by a tour guide dressed in a traditional blue denim karabela shirt and a straw hat, pausing to look up at the Haitian and American flags perched on tall flagstaffs, before reading the English translation of Louverture’s most famous declaration, at the statue’s base: “By overthrowing me, you have cut down the trunk of the liberty tree of the Blacks in Saint Domingue. It will grow again from its roots for they are numerous and they run deep into the ground.”

On January 12th, at the foot of the statue, a group of elected officials and community members gathered to commemorate the 7.0-magnitude earthquake that struck Haiti in 2010, killing more than two hundred thousand people and displaced 1.5 million. The event has been held annually for the past fifteen years, but this year there was an extra layer of sombreness to the proceedings, which the overcast skies seemed to reflect. On February 3rd, the Trump Administration is set to terminate Temporary Protected Status (T.P.S.) for Haitians in the United States, placing some three hundred and thirty thousand men, women, and children at risk of deportation. T.P.S., granted to certain immigrant populations when the conditions in their home country make safe return impossible, does not provide a path to citizenship, but gives recipients the crucial ability to work legally in the U.S. and, in many states, to obtain a driver’s license. After the 2010 earthquake, Haitian community leaders successfully appealed to the Obama Administration for T.P.S., and it has been extended ever since. Under Donald Trump, though, several countries with T.P.S. status, including Venezuela and Somalia, have recently had their designations terminated, and Haiti’s status is in limbo, as a pivotal lawsuit before the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., challenges the Trump Administration’s decision to revoke it. During hearings in early January, the presiding judge, Ana C. Reyes, questioned the government’s assertion that it would be safe to return to Haiti, pointing to the fact that the F.A.A. has restricted civilian flights over the capital of Port-au-Prince, and the State Department has warned against travel to Haiti. Reyes’s ruling is expected on February 2nd, one day before the T.P.S. designation for Haitians is set to expire.

According to the U.N., Haiti is facing one of the worst humanitarian crises in the world. Since the assassination of President Jovenel MoĂŻse, in 2021, armed groups have assumed control of large portions of the capital and surrounding areas, terrorizing civilians and causing 1.4 million people, including seven hundred and forty-one thousand children, to be displaced. Friends and family members of mine have moved from neighborhood to neighborhood to escape the violence. Some have had to abandon their homes, with all of their belongings still inside, only to find out later that those houses were burned to the ground. Displaced families often spend weeks, sometimes months, in makeshift dwellings, including public squares and deserted government buildings, while children lose months or even years of education as schools close or become inaccessible owing to gang activity. Sexual violence against women and girls has been on the rise as a tool of control by gangs. Five million and seven hundred thousand Haitians, close to half the population, are now facing high levels of food insecurity. Since MoĂŻse’s assassination, Haiti has had no elected officials. The country’s interim governing body, the Transitional Presidential Council, has been mired in infighting and corruption allegations, and though its mandate ends on February 7th it has yet to reach consensus on who will lead the country or what form the next government will take.

One of the speakers at the earthquake vigil was Marleine Bastien, a Miami-Dade County commissioner and the founder of the nonprofit Family Action Network Movement, which organized the event. A sixty-six-year-old longtime activist, dressed in black, she clutched the microphone with both hands as she described the dire state of Haiti today. “This is a country at war,” she said. Bastien often reminds audiences that her own story is shaped by immigration. She grew up in a small town in the north of Haiti, in a family that practiced the Bahá’Ă­ faith, and as a teen-ager she spent her summers volunteering at a hospital near her home town, caring for malnourished babies. In 1981, her father, who had migrated to South Florida years earlier, encouraged her to seek political asylum in the U.S. after she denounced the dictatorship in a radio interview. When she arrived in Miami, at the age of twenty-two, she enrolled at Miami‑Dade Community College, then earned a master’s degree in social work at Florida International University. For more than a decade, she served as a medical social worker, supporting children with sickle-cell anemia, cancer, H.I.V., and AIDS, and she was one of many members of Miami’s Haitian community who were instrumental in securing T.P.S. after the earthquake. Now, lobbying Congress and speaking out in the media, she warns of the consequences of revoking T.P.S. status for Haitians. To deport them, she said, would be to “send them to a place where some will lose their lives.”

At 4:53 P.M., the same moment the earth in Haiti began to shake for an interminable thirty-five seconds in 2010, people bowed their heads to observe a moment of silence. Afterward, we marched to the nearby Caribbean Marketplace, a bright open hall designed by Charles Harrison Pawley, an architect born in Haiti to American parents, to resemble the famed Victorian-style Iron Market, in Port-au-Prince. During the procession, the sky opened and it started to rain, lightly at first, then in steady sheets. In years past, the vigil has attracted a crowd that fills the whole street. This year, attendance was the lowest I had seen. The rain didn’t help, but neither did Trump’s brutal immigration crackdown, which has left many in the community in a constant state of anxiety. Just a few days earlier, as part of a large-scale ICE operation in Minneapolis, an agent had fatally shot Renee Good, a thirty‑seven‑year‑old American citizen, in her car. As Bastien told me later, “People are, of course, afraid that what’s happening in Minneapolis can easily happen here.”

A group of people marching in the street.

The Miami-Dade commissioner Marleine Bastien, at left, marches toward the Caribbean Marketplace with her fellow-commissioner Kionne L. McGhee, the North Miami councilwoman Mary Estimé-Irvin, and the Miami-Dade mayor, Daniella Levine Cava.Photograph by Carl Juste / Miami Herald / Zuma / Reuters

In the past, members of the Haitian community have felt betrayed by American politicians on both sides of the aisle. A decade ago, during Trump’s first Presidential campaign, he held a town-hall-style meeting with Haitian American allies during which he said, “I will be your champion.” Many of the MAGA-friendly Haitians who hosted Trump were angry about Bill and Hillary Clinton’s long history of fraught involvement in Haiti, including the former President’s role in failed post-earthquake recovery efforts, and the former Secretary of State’s support for the controversial musician turned politician Michel Martelly. In October of 2020, Joe Biden took his turn visiting Little Haiti during his bid to unseat Trump, promising that, if elected, he would make sure that the Haitian community had “an even shot.” As President, Biden extended Temporary Protected Status for Haiti throughout his term, in response to worsening conditions in the country, including an earthquake in the southern peninsula, in August 2021. In early 2023, the Administration introduced a humanitarian-parole program intended to reduce the number of people attempting dangerous migration routes to the United States. The C.H.N.V., or “pwogram Biden,” as it’s known among Haitians, allowed up to thirty thousand people from Cuba, Haiti, Nicaragua, and Venezuela to enter the United States each month and remain for two years, provided that they passed security checks and had a U.S.‑based financial sponsor. The program ended in March, 2025, and under the Trump White House’s current policy all five hundred thousand beneficiaries could be subject to deportation unless they have secured another form of legal protection, such as asylum or T.P.S., both of which have become increasingly beyond reach.

In the Marketplace, we sipped ginger tea and ate Haitian patties and warm bouyon, a hearty stew provided by the vigil organizers, as Tessa Petit, the executive director of the Florida Immigrant Coalition, addressed the crowd. Born and raised in Haiti, Petit lost her mother in the 2010 earthquake. She spoke of the Haitian American community’s ongoing grief, now compounded by fear of deportations, but she also stressed the wider economic consequences of ending T.P.S. “We deserve to be recognized for what we have contributed and continue to contribute to this nation,” she said, adding that a hundred and thirteen thousand Haitian T.P.S. holders are members of Florida’s labor force, contributing an estimated $1.3 billion in state and local taxes. Elsewhere in the country, she said, Haitians “have revived towns that were dying.” She was referring to places such as Springfield, Ohio, where Haitian immigrants have helped reverse decades of population loss and fill essential jobs in manufacturing and food processing, even as Donald Trump and Vice-President J. D. Vance spread the lie that they were “eating the dogs.” Many advocates I spoke with hope that evidence of Haitians’ contributions might appeal to the Trump Administration where pleas for compassion have failed. A recent letter to Trump from the San Diego-based immigration-rights organization Haitian Bridge Alliance and the A.F.L.-C.I.O. argues that Haitian T.P.S. holders contribute 5.9 billion dollars to the U.S. economy and that it is “counter-productive” to decimate a “legal, tax-paying workforce that is already filling critical gaps in the U.S. labor market.”

Many T.P.S. recipients are reluctant to speak publicly for fear of attracting ICE’s attention, but at the vigil a few chose to share their stories. One of them was Corinne, a stylish twenty-five-year-old with a cloud of voluminous curls. She was nine when she arrived in the U.S. with her mother and her one-year-old sister, after the 2010 earthquake. They entered on visas and soon became beneficiaries of T.P.S. After graduating from high school, she enrolled at a local private university, paying out of pocket because, as a T.P.S. holder, she was ineligible for financial aid. During her first year of college, her mother fell ill with a chronic pulmonary illness and could no longer work, so Corinne took a job in a retail store to support her family. She dreamed of pursuing a Ph.D. in psychology, and she earned a 4.0 G.P.A., but she eventually had to withdraw from school. In her retail job, she began as a seasonal worker in the shipping department but was eventually promoted to business manager. She now oversees a hundred and twenty employees, and she remains the sole provider for her mother and her sister, who is now seventeen and applying to college. Corinne fears being sent back to Haiti, a country she has not seen since she was nine. “But I also keep thinking about my sister,” she told me later. “What’s going to happen to her and her future if she has to go back with us?” At the vigil, she said, “We are not a status. We are human beings.”

Alongside the federal immigration crackdown, Florida has launched its own state-run immigration-enforcement program, Operation Tidal Wave, with some of the most punitive measures in the country. In recent legislative sessions, state lawmakers have introduced bills that would bar undocumented immigrants from opening bank accounts and restrict the money-transfer services that many immigrants use to send remittances back to their home countries. These proposed measures come on top of existing laws that restrict driver’s licenses and expand local law enforcement’s authority to turn people over to ICE. Since late 2025, under new agreements with the Department of Homeland Security, Florida has deputized more than eighteen hundred state troopers to perform federal-immigration functions. The state has also expanded its detention infrastructure, opening a “deportation depot” in Baker County, and the Everglades complex known as Alligator Alcatraz, where advocates report that detainees are held in extreme heat in overcrowded and unsanitary dorms with inadequate medical care and little or no access to legal representation.

The day after the vigil, at the Sant La Haitian Neighborhood Center, in North Miami, I met a couple in their forties who arrived in the U.S. in 2022, with their four children, now five, fourteen, nineteen, and twenty. They had walked to the U.S. border after travelling from Brazil through Colombia and crossing the perilous DariĂ©n Gap. Three years ago, their youngest child, a boy, was born in Miami with Down syndrome and gastroschisis, a rare condition in which a baby’s intestines, and sometimes other organs, develop outside the body, requiring specialized medical care. They worry that he would not survive if they were forced to return with him to Haiti, and like many “mixed‑status” families they’ve grappled with the wrenching dilemma of whether their child would be better off remaining in the U.S. without them. But they have decided that they could never leave the boy behind.

Attorneys at the Haitian Lawyers Association, a Miami-based nonprofit, have created a dedicated task force to help those at risk of deportation. They have organized free law clinics and offered pro-bono counsel, while also helping clients prepare for possible deportation by organizing powers of attorney, wills, trusts, and guardianship documents for their children and elderly parents. The attorneys consult with counterparts in Haiti, as well as in Canada, where many Haitians have fled, sometimes by walking long distances in freezing temperatures and crossing the northern border on foot.

Vance recently said that ICE agents could begin going door to door in the coming months, exacerbating fears. The husband I met at Sant La told me, “We jump every time there’s a knock.” Josette JosuĂ©, the center’s director of community health, told me, “Some of the people we serve are so afraid, they don’t even answer phone calls. They won’t open the door if you visit. They’re afraid to go to church or the supermarket. They barricade themselves inside.” One fifteen-year-old girl, whose family fled Haiti after being caught in the middle of a battle between two gangs, told her mother, who then told JosuĂ© that she would rather die than return. Florida school districts have seen dwindling enrollment since 2024, owing, in part, to immigrants leaving the state or fearing being detained by ICE.

Bastien, the H.L.A. lawyers, and others told me that, even if the federal court in D.C. issues an injunction blocking the termination of T.P.S., and even if the program is extended, the community will experience only a temporary sense of relief. The Trump Administration is likely to appeal the decision, reviving the threat of deportation. The only durable solution is a pathway to permanent residency for those who have spent years working, raising families, and paying taxes in the United States. Guibert St. Fort, the program coördinator at Sant La, told me that the people who walk into the center every day somehow hold out hope. “Their faith has been tested again and again,” St. Fort said. “They feel that, if God wanted me to die, he would have let me die where I came from or somewhere along the way.” The couple I met proudly showed me photos of their children—sitting beside a Christmas tree in matching holiday‑themed pajamas, wearing their school uniforms. Their two eldest daughters would like to go to college; one wants to become a nurse. “We have gone through so much,” the wife said. “Like all parents, we hope our children accomplish all that we’ve sacrificed for. We hope their dreams will come true.” ♦

How the Murdoch Family Built an Empire—and Remade the News

 

How the Murdoch Family Built an Empire—and Remade the News

The Murdoch family built a media empire through a combination of profit and power, with Rupert Murdoch at the helm. Starting in Australia, Murdoch expanded globally, acquiring newspapers and radio stations, and becoming known for his focus on crime, gossip, and sensationalism. His influence extended to the UK, where he acquired the News of the World, the Sun, and the Times of London, shaping public opinion and challenging democratic norms.

Today, the name represents a story of profit and power unlike any other. But tracing the genealogy of Murdoch sleaze requires a long memory.

Drawing of Rupert Murdoch on the NY Post.

Rupert Murdoch is now ninety-four and worth twenty-three billion dollars, but none of his children will end up owning what he spent seven decades building. His son Lachlan has become the custodian of a journalistic enterprise’s sordid remains.Illustration by Barry Blitt

St. Bride’s, situated in an alley just off Fleet Street, is known as the journalists’ church. Having weathered not a few disasters—the Great Fire of London, in 1666, the Luftwaffe in 1940—it now advertises itself as “A Space for Silence,” offering an hour of contemplation each weekday afternoon, yards from the world’s most famous newspaper street. On a recent rain-soaked day, I arrived to find only one umbrella in the porch bucket and a church filled with lit candles and the chill of old sermons. In the left aisle was a book of remembrance honoring media workers who died in the line of duty, titled “Truth at All Costs.” Just behind it, wooden pews displayed commemorative plaques. “Sir Keith Murdoch,” one read. “A great journalist.”

Murdoch, the son of a Scottish clergyman, was, for a while, a managing editor of the United Cable Service, an Australian overseas news agency. Based in London in 1915, he was posted to Turkey to cover that front of the World War. On September 23rd, he wrote to the Australian Prime Minister, Andrew Fisher, fearfully anticipating a winter offensive and the imminent slaughter of thousands of young men. Murdoch’s detailed report—later known as the Gallipoli Letter—exposed the way incompetent British officers were herding Australasian soldiers to their deaths. “I shall talk as if you were by my side,” he typed on the first page, marked “Personal.” He described visiting positions in Suvla Bay, wandering for miles through trenches, interviewing whatever leaders and officers he could. Many young men, he reported, were sent to the front lines without water, and were dying of thirst. Others were treated just as cavalierly. “To fling them, without even the element of surprise, against such trenches as the Turks make, was murder,” he wrote. Of the British officers leading the campaign: “The conceit and self-complacency of the red-feather men are equalled only by their incapacity. . . . Appointments to the general staff are made from motives of friendship and social influence. Australians now loathe and detest any Englishman wearing red.” Toward the letter’s end, one can feel a particular passion for clarity: “This is not a wild statement. It is truth.” Later, from London’s Arundel Hotel, Murdoch forwarded his letter to the British Prime Minister, H. H. Asquith. “If it adds one iota to your information,” he wrote in an accompanying note, “or presents the Australian point of view, it will be of service in this most critical moment.”

Murdoch remained in London to learn what he could about popular journalism from Lord Northcliffe, “the greatest figure who ever strode down Fleet Street,” in the words of his great rival Lord Beaverbrook. Northcliffe owned the Daily Mirror and the Daily Mail and, by 1915, was the chief proprietor of the Times of London. “God made people read,” he famously said, “so that I can fill their brains with facts, facts, facts—and later tell them whom to love, whom to hate, and what to think.” He believed in profit rather than in public service, and the mixture he sold was both heady and popular: crime, sex, money, health tips. An enthusiastic humiliator of underlings, Northcliffe expected office boys to stand when he entered the room. Signing his correspondence “Lord Vigour and Venom,” he spied on senior staff and had their telephones tapped. “He used his newspapers as instruments of political power and political blackmail,” Hugh Cudlipp, a Welsh newspaperman of a later generation, wrote. Murdoch valued the monomaniacal Northcliffe as a friend, but worried, he said, about his habit of making employees feel like “the puppets of his will.” Yet, when Murdoch returned to Australia to revamp the Melbourne Herald, he promptly earned the sobriquet Lord Southcliffe.

Crime and gossip were Murdoch’s mĂ©tier. By buying up newspapers and radio stations, he assembled Australia’s first media conglomerate. His son Rupert, born in 1931, grew up enchanted by the clatter of typewriters in the Heraldnewsroom, internalizing the electricity of the place. A senior master at Rupert’s school, Geelong Grammar, later remarked that he had never met a teen-ager so adept at manipulating others. Rupert wanted to join the Herald right after graduation, but his father insisted that he go to Oxford. After a rebellious spell as “Red Rupe,” he is said to have accompanied his father on a trip to America, during which the Murdochs briefly met with Harry Truman at the White House. Sir Keith began to form a better opinion of his son. “I think he’s got it,” he told his wife, Elisabeth. Before the verdict could be tested, he died of a heart attack, at the age of sixty-seven. Ever since, Rupert has spoken sentimentally of his father’s journalistic integrity, believing he was following his example in resisting both the prejudices of the establishment and the diktats of the liberal Ă©lite.

Rupert’s father had launched his son in England. Charles Fenby, the editor of the Birmingham Gazette, later recalled giving Rupert a vacation job after representations were made to Pat Gibson, the chairman of the company that owned the newspaper. “I took him in, befriended him and showed him all I could,” Fenby reported. “And what did he do? He wrote a filthy letter to Pat afterwards saying I should be fired.” On Fleet Street, Murdoch proved swiftly educable in the things that mattered to him. He was watching reality being manufactured, his mind never in repose, forever molding life to journalistic ends, or to business ends—the two seemed the same to him. Although he wasn’t a dab hand at typefaces, or, indeed, at journalistic ethics, he proved a natural showman-executive under Lord Beaverbrook’s wing at the Daily Express, learning to package and sell scandal and titillation to millions. The idea that one should not merely reflect reality but create it had become Beaverbrook’s formula. Evelyn Waugh’s novel “Scoop” depicts Beaverbrook as Lord Copper, the chief of the Megalopolitan Newspaper Corporation, a man who drinks whisky-and-soda and loves nothing so much as “a very promising little war.”

Woman in the office of her divorce lawyer who is a dog.

“I can’t promise you’ll get the house or the car, but I can assure you you’ll get the dog.”

Cartoon by Jeremy Nguyen

Back in Australia, Murdoch expanded the family’s regional holdings and then invaded the world with father-besting Ă©lan. Even in the early days, newsroom staff complained of “Rupertorial interruptions.”

Today, the Murdoch empire represents a story of profit and power unlike any other—a tale of confected chaos and alternative facts, of state-sanctioned messaging under Donald Trump and daily challenges to democratic precepts. Recent books have identified the target and attempted close examination, but tracing the genealogy of Murdoch sleaze requires a long memory. By the nineteen-eighties, as Gabriel Sherman observes about Rupert in his new book, “Bonfire of the Murdochs: How the Epic Fight to Control the Last Great Media Dynasty Broke a Family—and the World” (Simon & Schuster), “the question was no longer whether he could survive in America, but whether America’s media establishment could survive him.”

Sherman proves a fairly reliable chronicler of the family’s Oedipal gymnastics. A previous book of his on Roger Ailes, the former head of Fox News, performed its own double salto in describing the mixture of fiction and advertising dollars that defined the network, its operators, and its splenetic stars. Sherman also wrote a fetching screenplay for “The Apprentice,” a film examining Donald Trump’s mind and life style (if those things can be separated) before he turned the White House into Caesars Palace. Books on Murdoch are generally in a rush to get to the warring children—the wellspring of HBO’s series “Succession”—and on to COVID politicization, the Fox News follies, the Capitol riot, and Trump’s reĂ«lection. But we might first examine the Britain that Murdoch ravaged in earlier days, cutting his fangs as a journalistic vampire. What he did with the News of the World, the Sun, and the Times of London remains fundamental to understanding his legacy, and I haven’t yet read a book that gives these campaigns full amplitude. As often happens with dynastic crimes, the fundamental question involves not just succession but half-obscured precedent.

I grew up in a world where some newspapers featured a topless woman on page 3 every morning. There she would be—Debbie, Mandy, Linda, or Sam—her breasts only marginally less threatening than the missiles being stockpiled by Leonid Brezhnev. In our house, my parents most often took the Daily Recordor the Daily Mirror, where the girls were modestly covered, and where, starting in 1984, the morning display came courtesy of Robert Maxwell—the father of the now more famous Ghislaine. Most of the papers featuring naked women and naked untruths belonged to Rupert Murdoch. From the start, the Sun, which Murdoch acquired in 1969, was loved by the man in the street and loathed by his left-wing guardians. The Communist Morning Star declared that Murdoch’s tabloid, despite its name, resembled less a celestial body than a paraffin lamp in a brothel. Editorial control at the Sun was always questionable. The original deputy editor, Bernard Shrimsley, formerly of the Liverpool Post, reportedly spent most of his authority in the photographic department, where he might instruct a retoucher to “make the nipples less fantastic.”

Private Eye magazine, the home of British satire, dubbed Murdoch “the Dirty Digger.” He once wrote an indignant letter to Harold Evans, then the editor of the Sunday Times, in which he defended the News of the World from accusations of prurience and insisted that the Observer was smuttier because it wrote about “women masturbating on horseback.” But, when Murdoch bought the Times newspapers and hired Evans to edit the daily, the Australian’s instincts as both a businessman and a power monger became obvious. To William Rees-Mogg, the Times’ previous editor, Murdoch was “a newspaper romantic,” but Evans detected something more calculating. He later observed in his superb memoir “Good Times, Bad Times,” that a fellow needn’t own eighty newspapers to satisfy a love of journalism. (One might do.) Evans noticed that the new proprietor turned politics into a machismo contest, discussing everything in terms of personalities. The Digger wouldn’t directly criticize opinion pieces or suggest topics, “but would make what would please him unmistakably clear,” Evans wrote. Murdoch demanded more “conviction” in the journalism, sending cuttings from America—usually by right-wing columnists—marked “worth reading!” This eventually became a crusade of cheerleading for politicians he favored. Evans was asked to resign after just one year, by which point Murdoch was instructing journalists and editors what to write and to print. “Murdoch’s attitude was exactly as H. G. Wells described Northcliffe’s toward the Times,” Evans wrote. “He was a big bumblebee puzzled by a pane of glass.”

Journalistically charismatic but politically compliant: that was Murdoch’s ideal editor, exemplified by the vinegary brutes running his British tabloids. The Sun’smost famous editor, Kelvin MacKenzie, nicknamed MacFrenzie, embodied populism before it was really a thing, ginning up outrage and sponsoring hatred in the name of some fabricated principle or other. Nothing was too seedy for MacKenzie, nothing too spurious. He could appear sulfurous in both appearance and prose, delighting Murdoch while capturing the Zeitgeist.

Alongside his hero Margaret Thatcher, Murdoch battled the printers’ unions and the British miners, while his editors proved that sleaze and propaganda were profitable journalistic partners. In a miasma of inflammatory opinion, racist sentiment, bare breasts, and bingo, the “soar-away Sun” and “The News of the Screws” demonstrated to Murdoch that journalists could be trained to say anything. “MacKenzie is what he is,” Murdoch told Charles Wintour, a former editor of the Evening Standard. “He’s out there, screaming and shouting, and he’s good. Somehow it works.”

Not everyone agreed. Murdoch’s emerging news values drew criticism during the Falklands War, when the Sun turned “from bingo to jingo,” celebrating the sinking of the Argentinean cruiser General Belgrano with the infamous headline “GOTCHA”—a gleeful response to the deaths of more than three hundred naval conscripts. The paper attacked rivals like the Guardian and the Daily Mirror as treasonous for being insufficiently enthusiastic about the war. “There have been lying newspapers before,” Joe Haines, a former press secretary to Harold Wilson and a Daily Mirror editorial writer, wrote of the Sun. “But in recent months it has broken all records. It had long been a tawdry newspaper. But since the Falklands crisis began it has fallen from the gutter to the sewer.”

Murdoch, undaunted, saw that his campaign to go international was succeeding. He now owned the New York Post. “Something vaguely sickening is happening to that newspaper,” the journalist Pete Hamill observed, “and it is spreading through the city’s psychic life like a stain.” Sherman tells us that, on the Wednesday after Labor Day in 1985, Murdoch stood “with a group of 185 immigrants from forty-four countries” at a federal courthouse in lower Manhattan and became an American citizen. He was already extending his method beyond newspapers: in 1989, he merged Harper & Row and William Collins into HarperCollins, seeing books, too, as scalable content. Increasingly, Murdoch was thinking in terms of platforms—owning not just what people read but what they heard and watched—and in America that instinct led, a decade later, to the purchase of Twentieth Century Fox and the assembly of a broadcast network of his own.

Understandably, recent Murdoch narratives focus on the dismal story of Fox News and Donald Trump, where the dumpster fire, or bonfire, really begins to light up the modern sky. Michael Wolff, that sender and receiver of interesting e-mails, has already offered us, in “The Fall: The End of Fox News and the Murdoch Dynasty” (2023), a portrait of contemporary American journalism that would make Upton Sinclair petition for a bigger grave, all the easier to turn in. Wolff has written four books on Trump, along with an earlier volume on Murdoch, and he bears the distinction of having received a Trump lawyer’s letter accusing him of having “a reckless disregard for the truth,” which must count as both an enviable credential and a high point in the annals of pots and kettles. “He just wants his kids to love him,” Wolff quotes the late Roger Ailes saying of Murdoch. “And they don’t. Rupert is an odd bird. A cold fish, but a fucking wet noodle—it’s pathetic—around those kids. They’re always stomping off and giving the poor guy the finger.” Both Sherman and Wolff explore how Murdoch’s sons, Lachlan and James—favored by their father in that order—have absorbed the patriarch’s degraded vision of journalism. During the early two-thousands, when Murdoch seemed to own half the world and to orchestrate most of its arguments, his sons coasted on the high-octane fuel that comes with privilege, burning through decencies just as the old man had taught them to do.

The crack in the golden bowl was always there. Murdoch seems to have run his family the way he ran his companies, undervaluing civility and over-rewarding malice. He also pitted his loved ones against one another. This made the saga ripe for dramatization but proved bad for journalism, as each son competed to outdo his father’s destructiveness. Only as James began losing the family power struggle did he seem to grasp the nature of Fox News’s assault on journalistic standards—perhaps because he had overseen similar practices at Murdoch’s News Corporation. It was James, after all, who delivered the 2009 MacTaggart Lecture at the Edinburgh International Television Festival, declaring that “the only reliable, durable, and perpetual guarantor of independence is profit.” Shortly afterward, Sherman writes, James decided to topple the British Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown. At a Mayfair club, he met with the Conservative leader David Cameron, who planned to run on a free-market platform more hospitable to News Corporation’s planned acquisition of the Sky network. Over drinks, James allegedly informed Cameron that the Sun would endorse the Conservatives. At this point, News Corporation enjoyed annual revenues of thirty-three billion dollars.

Two people create a sundial to tell time.

“Now we’ll know exactly when it’s time for brunch.”

Cartoon by Avi Steinberg

The Murdoch legacy of editorial interference, which had brightened to Day-Glo normality in the nineteen-eighties, burned like a floodlight through the company by the time James and Lachlan joined the executive suite. The techniques of Murdoch-style journalism were finally revealed in the phone-hacking scandal that forced the closure of one of Murdoch’s most profitable titles, the News of the World. For years, with editorial encouragement and under a regime of corporate intimidation, reporters had illegally spied on individuals and mined their private messages, breaking into the phones of the famous, the unwitting, and the vulnerable, from victims of terrorist attacks to bereaved parents. Exposure came when an investigator hired by the paper, Glenn Mulcaire, hacked the voice mail of the murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, creating the cruel impression that she might still be alive and checking her messages. As Tom Watson and Martin Hickman recount in their book, “Dial M for Murdoch,” it soon became clear that this was no aberration but, rather, part of an established practice. Readers and advertisers recoiled at the disclosures. Dozens of detectives were assigned to investigate phone and computer hacking and the corruption of police officers, and members of the paper’s senior staff found themselves under arrest. James Murdoch’s rhetoric about journalism collapsed under the weight of the evidence. The reality was out there: anything goes, take no prisoners, lie if you have to, and destroy evidence when you can. Summoned before Parliament in July, 2011, Rupert Murdoch denied direct responsibility, but conceded the obvious truth: “They caught us with dirty hands.”

James was the “liberal” one, “the moral conscience of the family,” according to Sherman, or, as Wolff writes, the son who planned “to grow the Fox News brand beyond the U.S. cable market and to move it away from partisan political news.” Lachlan, the older brother and the current heir apparent, embodies a different type entirely. Like his former friend Tucker Carlson, he can be all steak and doughnuts one minute and all fiery Hell the next. After Roger Ailes was removed from Fox News, in 2016, over sexual-harassment allegations, Lachlan cut the brake lines of what was already a speeding train of misinformation, pushing American journalism further into alternative reality than even his father and his lieutenants had dared. However trashy they may have been, the British tabloids were occasionally funny, but Lachlan’s operation became something darker—a purveyor of apocalyptic doom-mongering, the sort that courses through Donald Trump’s mind, where America is a place of perpetual rape, murder, conspiracy, and terror. Lachlan, coming from a blushless world of billionaire-speak, never pretended interest in the rolled-up-sleeves world of journalism. Having outfought his siblings and aligned his father with his own vision, Lachlan now takes for granted his father’s core business insight: that great fortunes can be made from audiences who prefer their reality falsified.

We needn’t dwell on Lachlan’s failed internet ventures, his company’s promotion of climate-change denial, his protection of divisive propaganda as free speech, or his consistent support for profitable discord over journalistic integrity. What we know for certain is that Fox News refused to broadcast the January 6th congressional hearings in prime time, eschewing careful evidence in favor of in-studio opinion, lies, and provocation. The network continued to give airtime to Trump’s rigged-voting-machine fantasies even after legal challenges, a strategy that cost the company nearly eight hundred million dollars in damages.

The process of gaslighting the world goes on, but Rupert Murdoch, now ninety-four and worth twenty-three billion dollars, will leave even his own kingdom darker than he found it. “News Corp no longer behaves like a media outlet,” the former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull observes in “The Successor” (2022), Paddy Manning’s clear-eyed book about Lachlan Murdoch. The company now operates “like a political party . . . just as in the United States, Fox News’ relationship with Trump and the GOP was ‘like that of the state-owned media of an authoritarian government.’ ” Of course, as often happens with corrupt alliances—Fagin’s den of thieves comes to mind—Trump and the Murdochs are now at each other’s throats.

In a way, Rupert got his revenge on his recalcitrant children: first, by shaping their understanding of reality itself, and, second, by selling the company’s most valuable assets out from beneath them, in 2019. He left each with billions—hardly a punishment by ordinary measures, but existentially devastating for heirs who had expected to inherit an empire. He neutralized the succession problem by miniaturizing it. In the Season 3 finale of “Succession,” the patriarch, Logan Roy, wallops his children with old-style underhandedness, stripping them of power just as they try to unseat him. Having previously sent his son Kendall a birthday card with “Happy Birthday” scratched out and replaced with “CASH OUT AND FUCK OFF,” Logan moves to sell his company, Waystar Royco, to a tech mogul named Lukas Matsson. Kendall spirals toward a breakdown while his siblings Roman and Shiv scheme to recruit him against their father. (“Dad’s whole career is kind of one big dick pic sent to Western civilization,” Roman observes.) When they arrive to blindside Logan, they discover that he has already arranged their interment. “This is an opportunity for you kids to get an education in real life,” he tells them. Roman, played by Kieran Culkin, appears to be in a state of aching disbelief, as if the meaning of his life has just been surgically extracted.

Something similar had happened when, at the height of the Murdoch family’s civil war, Rupert sold Twentieth Century Fox to Disney for seventy-one billion dollars, netting each of his six children roughly two billion—the same sum that Logan Roy offers Kendall via his doctored birthday card. In life as in art, it was a battle for control in which nobody truly won, because nobody ended up owning what Rupert Murdoch had spent seven decades building. The family imploded, and there’s something almost novelistic in the trajectory—from cramped newspaper offices in Adelaide and Fleet Street to Lachlan Murdoch as the custodian of a journalistic enterprise’s fetid remains. Several generations have brought it to a state of sordid dereliction.

Let’s not forget, though, that Lachlan’s Princeton dissertation was “A Study of Freedom and Morality in Kant’s Practical Philosophy.” Granted, the categorical imperative—the great Prussian philosopher’s blueprint for moral action—isn’t likely to illuminate Fox News’s festering relationship with Donald Trump, or the enterprise of turning civic life into an ongoing platform for outrage. But maybe it’s fitting that the language of freedom and morality should buckle before the family’s talent for making reality pliable. To read about the Murdochs is to gain a lesson about punitive ambition, about men who expect the world to yield to their hand-me-down egos. Lachlan has been a good son, in a way, returning to his father’s side before the old man departs, but a look at his journalism proves that he has respected only the worst parts of the family legacy. In the arc from the Gallipoli Letter to Fox News’s prime-time carnival of grievance, the Murdochs’ bleak achievement is having shown how easily morality, like truth, becomes something to be invoked when useful, ignored when inconvenient, bent when resisted, and discarded the moment it no longer pays. ♦

An earlier version of this article misstated the birth order of Logan Roy’s sons on the TV series “Succession.”