I'm really confused.
Somehow the same national media that made quite literally mountains -- Raniers, Denalis, Kilimanjaros -- of cash by turning the gory murder of a white woman by her former husband, the ever marketable OJ Simpson, into the television event of the century, is now leading a chorus of outrage -- Outrage, I tell you -- over Simpson's undeniably brilliant efforts to parlay his crime into cash.
(While, at the same time, riding the renewed wave of viewer attention: Last night, MSNBC broadcast reruns of their OJ true-crime docudrama. Ka-Ching! Thanks, Juice!)
The most notorious acquitted murderer in the country tries to publish his "hypothetical" account of the crime he didn't commit, and spill the non-confessional beans on national TV.
And this is somehow a bridge too far?!?
This is America. The land of Oprah, the Starr Report, and the porn star who runs for Governor of California. We just finished watching wall-to-wall John Mark Carr coverage -- truly a case of a hypothetical confession -- and CNN didn't seem too concerned about profiting, yet again, from the murder of lil' Jon Benet.
OJ wants to tell us the lurid details of his crime. And I think when all is said and done, Americans want to hear the blood-soaked epilogue to the crime story of the century more than they want to find easy outrage in blaming Fox and Rupert Murdoch for erroding our cultural standards.
So publish the damn book. Air the interview. Let the courts put a lien on OJ's cash and give the money to the Goldmans, and let's all stop this tisk tisk, tut tut business. It's more than unAmerican: It's boring television.
(Cross posted from Rolling Stone's National Affairs Daily.)
Follow Tim Dickinson on Twitter: www.twitter.com/7im