For all its fluid writing and interesting language and well-partitioned story line, this profile of Rupert Murdoch fell short of what I thought it could have been. More than anything, I thought it was entirely too deferential to this pro-monopoly media mogul. The author gives him too much leeway on certain issues -- most notably his stated desire to own not one but two of the so-called "big three" American newspapers. I detect not enough healthy skepticism. Sourcing is also astonishingly poor. Paragraph after paragraph I found myself anticipating new voices that never came. The last third or so of the story makes obvious suggestions and conjectures about Murdoch's death, which given his age might not be far off. This is coupled with a discussion of his family, much of it revolving around his children, who are set to inherit his empire when the time comes. This is not a bad topic to parse, since his death is sure have strong implications for American and foreign media. But I find the author, in a typically light Vanity Fair style, dwells too long on the mundane aspects of his family instead of looking critically at his career and supposed personal, political and business transformations. The author saves his most apologetic words about Murdoch -- that in the future "there may not be newspapers unless he owns them" -- for the end. I can't decide if that conclusion is deliberately over-the-top or helplessly credulous.