Peter Bale
Aug 25, 2017 · 1 min read

I disagree with quite a few of the assertions in this piece. It was not over the top by Vice standards. In fact, that was what made it so good. The reporter did not push herself into the story as Vice people often do and let the characters in the story tell their story and incriminate themselves. If an item like that has the potential to reposition a brand like Vice then it would be foolish not to. They actually did everyone a public service by releasing it so openly because it was one of the few really strong pieces of video reporting from the scene that did not turn it into an us v them circus of major media behind barriers trying to work out what as going on. The Rupert Murdoch line is silly. Rupert, and James and Lachlan, are business people and invested in Vice for its audience and talent at serving advertisers and the audience well. Rupert also created Fox because there was an enormous market gap. He also owned the Village Voice at one point. Roger Ailes might have had some of the foaming-at-the-mouth characteristics you describe but not the proprietor.

)
    Peter Bale

    Written by

    President of the Global Editors Network. Was Launch Editor of WikiTribune. Former CEO, Center for Public Integrity. Mainly journalism, media and coffee.