In case you missed it: What was depraved about the errors on CNN and Fox News yesterday wasn’t so much that they both screwed up the Supreme Court ruling. It was that they did so in pursuit of the cheapest sort of scoop in the land.

Also: Bloomberg News and Bloomberg TV nailed it.


*Gawker and Mediaite do their part to keep Bill O’Reilly honest in light of the Supreme Court ruling upholding the individual mandate. O’Reilly had said for sure that it wouldn’t survive and that he’d apologize if he was wrong.

*Michael Calderone of the Huffington Post writes of Rupert Murdoch’s assurances that the Wall Street Journal would be fine in a split-off publishing company, separate from News Corp.’s highly profitable entertainment and TV properties.

During an interview with The New York Times, Murdoch tried to assuage fears of losing the News Corp. safety net, saying that “Dow Jones is a very viable company and the Wall Street Journal is a very viable newspaper and no one has any reason to feel that way.”

On Bloomberg TV, Murdoch said that that he expects to increase costs at the Journal, while acknowledging that News Corp. decided last week to make cuts in Australia and that “there’s some reorganization starting in Britain.”

*And do you want to know how Murdoch progressed from skepticism about the split-up plan to approval? If so, you’ll want to catch this story in Murdoch’s own Wall Street Journal:

In early May, shortly after the British Parliament’s Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee issued the findings of its inquiry into the phone-hacking scandal that has been wracking his U.K. newspapers division, Mr. Murdoch flew to his ranch in Carmel, Calif., for a 10-day break and thought things over.

Mr. Murdoch invited several News Corp. executives to his house, where they discussed business, including the split idea.

Still, when he returned to New York, he told executives that he was leaning against the proposal. Chief Operating Officer Chase Carey and Chief Financial Officer David DeVoe, who had long been proponents of the idea, ramped up their efforts to lay out the strategic rationale, people familiar with the situation said.

*Time magazine has a pretty cool cover based on the surprising decision.

*Geraldo expresses faux outrage as Gretchen Carlson expresses genuine outrage that the Supreme Court just might allow politics to influence decision.

*Jon Stewart takes issue with the notion that CNN was getting conflicting signals from the Supreme Court: