Feeds

back to article Rebekah Brooks quits - Murdoch accepts this time

News International boss Rebekah Brooks, who has been at the centre of the phone-hacking scandal, has resigned from her post and apologised for the "hurt" her company had caused to crime victims and others. She confirmed in an internal memo to staff this morning that she was leaving the sister company of Rupert Murdoch's News …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Silver badge
FAIL

The hypocrisy is astounding

"The reputation of the company we love so much, as well as the press freedoms we value so highly, are all at risk," wrote Brooks."

And who's fault is that then?

42
1
Silver badge

Re: The hypocrisy is astounding

You overlooked what, in my opinion, is the most unbelievable

>how sorry I am for what WE NOW KNOW to have taken place

And I now know day is light and night is dark.

I wouldn't want to call her a complete and utter liar but hands up all who believe her.

21
0
Silver badge
Happy

Re "The hypocrisy is astounding."

That is indeed one of the most striking things about all recent statements from key players within the senior levels of NI, the impression of hypocrisy one get. However, IMO, it is likely the case that to a considerable extent they do *not* actually get it, hard though that may be to believe. Hypocrisy requires that one *knows* that one is pretending to have a moral code whilst not actually practising what one is preaching. One should not underestimate the self-justifying pathology that such people are capable of exhibiting. Such types are fully capable of believing in their heart of hearts that they have not done anything wrong even when what they are doing is blatantly illegal. An American hotel-heiress who got caught bending by the US tax authorities a decade or so ago famously remarked that "rules are for the little people" (one assumes she was referring to me and thee and not leprechauns!). In this way these sociopaths (for that is what they are) manage to project (before they are eventually caught out) a very convincing front - because they have succeeded in convincing themselves.

BTW, if anyone feels that I have gone a touch over the top in using the term "sociopath" I include the URL to a list of the symptoms - I think that you will recognise many of the characteristics the moment you read them! A certain wealthy and influential businessman and his chums are positively *clinical* examples.

http://www.sociopathicstyle.com/traits/classic.htm

26
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

RE: The hypocrisy is astounding

Until she's sentenced to some serious porridge it's not enough.

26
1
Silver badge

Translation...

"The reputation of the company we love so much, as well as the press freedoms we value so highly, are all at risk," ---> "Damn. We've been doing this for ages and getting away with it. WTF happened this time?"

5
0
Gold badge
Happy

Poor choice of words?

Presumably she wouldn't have alluded to the management of NI as "the bridge" if she'd known that her successor would be called "Mockbridge".

Maybe someone at NI *does* have a sense of humour after all......

3
0
Silver badge
Happy

In the interests of journalistic integrity.......

... I should point out that his name is (apparently) Mockridge.

2
0
Gold badge
Happy

@frank ly

Ah, so someone at El Reg has a sense of humour?

Business as usual in both camps then.

0
0
Gold badge
Headmaster

@frank ly

"... I should point out that his name is (apparently) Mockridge."

So he's not a *real* bridge but just a fake or simulacrum of one?

0
0
Thumb Up

"I just want ...

... to spend more time with my cats" cackled the witch.

22
1
Silver badge

cats

and the flying monkeys

6
0
Coffee/keyboard

Can't... stop...

giggling in office

1
0
Megaphone

EXTRA! EXTRA!

Brooks hired for Palin 2012 campaign.

EXTRA! EXTRA!

14
1
Mushroom

Wrong.

That would be the Obama 2012 campaign already in progress as the Truthiness Czar.

<total silence from the Totally Transparent Obama Administration>

0
9
Gold badge
Joke

AC@09:56

Prepare for red hot ginger-on-moron action.

0
0
Silver badge

Second redtop gone in a week

At least there won't be a nasty conflict of interest at Call Me Dave's next dinner party.

It'll be interesting to see where La Brooks pops up next.

8
1
Happy

It'll be interesting to see where La Brooks pops up next.

Tuesday, 14:30, Parliament.

Popcorn.

16
0

Hopefully

...In a prison cell, if justice has even one good eye.

4
0
Happy

riddled

Her use as a meatshield for the murdochs had clearly run its cause.

I'm sure she will still get herself a plum job somewhere else... hopefully it will be working in the kitchens at her majesty's pleasure though.

15
0
Anonymous Coward

Pfft

If she doesn't appear somewhere else in the Murdoch empire in a year I'll eat my hat.

7
0
Mushroom

indeed

You can almost see her semtex and ballbearing jacket as she runs into the machine gun fire wearing a big hat saying 'I did it all, shoot me, not the Murdochs!'

5
0
Bronze badge
Thumb Up

plus 1

for the term "meatshield" especially as she has burnt up on re entry!

5
0
FAIL

Savvy

" I now need to concentrate on correcting the distortions and rebutting the allegations about my record as a journalist, an editor and executive."

I would have said this was impossible, but with the backing of News Corp (including Fox, Sky, The Times, The Wall Street Journal etc. etc.) there is a chance that key influencers will be got at.

Very badly handled by News Corp.

1) Fire her

2) Close the News of the World

3) Do *not* create a Sun on Sunday - i.e. lose market share

4) Keep BSkyB bid open

Thank goodness they didn't think about it too much and the old boy wanted to protect his CEO.

The formal enquiry will be, yet again, a whitewash - they'll get to the key personnell very fast - everyone has skeletons in their cupboards...

8
1
Coat

Must be a friday

Lots of good news on a Friday. A surprise it's taken this long but nonetheless not unexpected.

Meanwhile we are debating in the office what she's going to do for another job. Something tells me the police may have other plans however!

Pic related, it's her as she gets her coat to leave.

2
0

How much was the payoff?

I'm guessing that she is going to get a seven-figure payoff from Murdoch, so I won't shed a tear for her.

16
0

a career in PR

Because bad people always "go into" PR.

4
0
Silver badge

PR PM

Wot like Call-Me-Dave?

2
0

Precisely

Remember Paxman's question, to David Milliband : What are you ? And the aspiring leader of a great political party was stumped for a reply until he stammered "I'm an MP."

To Dave every problem is a matter of PR .

0
0
Silver badge

Could be worse

>bad people always "go into" PR

It could be worse. She might stand as an MEP. Although she would blend in nicely with the rest of the trough-feeders

1
0

To every thing.. churn, churn, churn

It is interesting to watch how a story that was largely, unearthed after long years of old fashioned slogging research-based journalism by Nick Davis, has (of all things) simply become the new 'churn' in the 'churnalism' bucket.

5
0
Silver badge

Next week's Private Eye

should be interesting...

15
0
Bronze badge
Meh

and I have to say

Private Eye is continuously on the money. Forget the Gruaniad, this is worth buying. Bit of a shame that having predicted the current press crisis their publishing schedule did not fit. The Guardian has been good but without Private Eye it would have been nothing.

2
0
LPF

Next Weeks Private Eye .... GAURDIAN AVOIDS TAX USING OFFSHORE COMPANIES

lol one wonders how long befor ethat one becomes to big to not notice :P

3
5
Silver badge

Avoiding tax

Is not a crime. Evading tax is.

4
0
Silver badge

Missing the point

They are campaigning against other companies who have arranged their tax affairs to legally avoid paying UK tax whilst apparently doing exactly the same thing themselves

4
0
Flame

Re: Avoiding tax

Yes - no issues with avoiding tax.

If, on the other hand, you publish articles criticising banks and multinationals for avoiding tax while doing the same, you are open to being accused of hipocrisy. Or treating readers to the "banks are bad, lefty media outlets are good, m'key?"

6
0
FAIL

@LFP

Would that be the same story the Eye have been banging on about for years? Along with the dodgy tax affairs of many UK companies, including several newspaper groups.

Of course, legally avoiding tax, whilst reprehensible, is in no way comparable to hacking a missing girls's voicemail and bribing police, which ARE illegal.

Seems to be the latest meme from the right - attack the tax affairs of the Guardian, now that attacking Johann Hari is no longer a goer.

6
3
Joke

Well, I think it's mainly Paul Staines

... who is, basically, a more secretive version of Julian Assange - with fewer sources, more skin-pigmentation and slightly better jokes.

1
0
LPF
Thumb Up

@IT veteran

"Would that be the same story the Eye have been banging on about for years? Along with the dodgy tax affairs of many UK companies, including several newspaper groups.

Of course, legally avoiding tax, whilst reprehensible, is in no way comparable to hacking a missing girls's voicemail and bribing police, which ARE illegal.

Seems to be the latest meme from the right - attack the tax affairs of the Guardian, now that attacking Johann Hari is no longer a goer."

Actually attacking a company which is AVOIDING PAYING ITS PROPER TAX by using off shore tax shelters , while at the same time its attacks a government that is trying to mean an economy cocked up by Labour is wrong?

You dont see anything wrong in them spouting off about morals, while denying tax revenue that could be used to buy decent protection for our soliders and resources for our children?

What makes their crimes even worse is they hold themselves up as some kind of moral gaurdian(sic) and defender of the week, while their tox executives screw this country out of tax revenue.

Your defence is that other companies do it, and Private Eye has been banging on about this for years..you are right , privater eye has been banging on about this for years and the thing with private eye is they tend to get their man in the end ;)

4
0

There will always be tax havens

how else do you think the oligarchs stash their cash?

0
0
Silver badge

Lots of hypocrisy but not where people see it

Firstly, it's not hacking - it's just guessing a pin number...

But the amount of fuss the politicians raise about the whole thing when compared to the insignificance of the alleged offence is truly disgusting.

Let's face it - there is only an investigation because a) it affected personally a few schmucks who had the power to start the inquiry and b) because it helped those same schmucks to get back at Murdoch and score some political points for that.

Things much more damaging to society happen all they time and the MPs don't talk about them, let alone call for inquiries.

Tell me how did that half-arsed digital economy bill get passed so quickly after few lunches between whatshisname and the industry lobbyists?

Why is Tony Blair still at large instead of doing jail-time for taking the country to a hopeless war for no good reason other than his personal benefit?

Many more examples can be found, yet, the revenge for outing the name of some MP's lover is so important that the whole country must work to pay for their personal crusade.

Yes, when someone accesses a voicemail of a missing person it disrupts the police investigation because they will see the messages being read - this is serious, so find the perpetrators and prosecute them for that.

But to present this as some sort of momentous crime against democracy? And using News Corp as a scape goat (I'm 100% sure that journalists in all other media companies do the same things and more)? At the same time ignoring the real problems? This is hypocritical to the extreme.

The Boys from Lagos are doing much more serious damage every day, hi-jacking corporate PBXs but try to get the police to do anything about investigating that or an MP to call for nationwide inquiry - fat chance!

6
27
Facepalm

Comment below

It may or may not be hacking. It is still illegal to intercept telecommunication messages not intended for you.

Same as reading someones post.

11
0
Bronze badge

"a few schmucks who had the power to start the inquiry"

There was no inquiry when it seemed only politicians and famous people and politicians were affected, so presumably inquiry is being set up by schmucky grieving relatives. Those bastards.

Crime against democracy? Somewhat. Crime against decency? absolutely

11
0
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Sorry Vladimir...

... But i could not disagree with you more!

I potentially could agree if the hacking (and it was hacking - illegal entry into an electronic device without permission. The technical details of how it was done are irrelevant.) was done in the interest of news worthy stories. Actual news worthy stories. And there exists a public interest defence in such cases, in fact, in the past MP's have been caught out doing illegal things by means of deception and illegal entry. This is considered legal due to being in the public interest.

But the fact of the matter was that, the hacking that the NotW was doing was not in the public interest, it was in the sole interest of peddling cheap trashy headlines to morons and selling more newspapers.

And for the examples you mentioned - if the hacking had been done to try to prove that there was collusion between MP's and industry lobbyists then no one would be complaining. Tony Blair's actions where immoral for certain, but unfortunately they were not illegal under UK law. Yes there are more serious crimes out there, but by the same token then you may as well ask the police not to bother dealing with assaults and robberies because theres murders happening out there.

The NotW journalists (ironic that theyve always been called Hacks!) broke the law and they did so not for some high ideal of journalism or attempting to unearth a stroy that it is in the public interest to know, but solely to peddle utter tat, and make a bit of profit from others misery. If that doesnt deserve the full hand of justice then i dont know what does...

15
1
Silver badge

Grieving realtives are being used

As a tool to push through the inquiry. Quite shamelessly and cynically too.

1
11
Silver badge

Re: Sorry Vladimir

>This is considered legal due to being in the public interest.

No it isn't. At best you may get away without being prosecuted for the illegal activity but that doesn't mean it is considered legal.

4
0
Mushroom

Hypocrisy indeed...

In case you hadn't noticed, the hacking story only reached epic proportions when it was revealed that some non-shmucks were affected too. It had rumbled on for years before that.

It's funny how in another comment you draw a distinction between tax avoidance and tax evasion and then proceed to rant about the lobbyists on the digital economy bill - how do you think many of the avoidance schemes stay or become legal? I would suggest that tax lobbyists do more damage than any of the examples you cite.

Damn straight it's a crime against democratic society. The phone hacking, while pretty illegal, isn't the big issue - it's the suborning of police officers.

6
0
Silver badge

@Richard IV

You're mixing so many things in one pot...

Avoidance is and should be the right of every tax payer. You just can not have a society where you have a duty to maximise your tax - you will become a slave to the state.

If you find loopholes - by all means, go ahead and close them. However, before you do that you must consider whether this closing of a loophole will not result in the underlying or related tax-generating business be taken away (so you will end up with less tax collected than if you'd kept the loophole open).

The bribery of police officers is a hugely serious issue. However, all I hear from TV is "phone hacking, phone hacking". So far, the police bribery is being swept under the carpet...

I absolutely disagree that the story has been drawn to epic proportions only after revelations about crime victims's messages interception. The inquiry was already inevitable long before that - so much powerful self-interest got on the band wagon and they have already been smelling blood for months...

You see, I am not trying to justify News Corp actions at all - I just abhor the cynical show put up by the politicians who cover their ulterior motives by the banner of public interest (there is nothing new in that, though...)

2
4
Black Helicopters

"peddling cheap trashy headlines"?

Not quite. Trashy headlines are just a lucrative sideline.

The *main* reason for the hacking was to build up a dossier of dirt on any potential political or business opponent. The lurid headlines in the NoTW were just a means to keep the threat real.

Any attempt to regulate the press? We'll smear you.

Any attempt to reign in the Murdoch empire? We'll smear you.

Any attempt to investigate criminal wrongdoing? We'll smear you.

There have been numerous examples of inappropriate influence on government policy by large media organisations. Just look at what happened to Labour's (eminently sensible) proposals on regional news. I dread to think what tactics led the UK Government to agree to Sky's monopoly on satellite broadcasting. The bodies must be buried *somewhere*.

The success of the Murdoch business empire is about much more than a few quid here and there from the red tops. It is about elimination of all competition, based on Rupert's freedom to do whatever the hell he likes.

13
0

Replies listed in order.

Re: Firstly, it's not hacking - it's just guessing a pin number..

Vlad, it really does not matter whether the number was guessed or not. It was unauthorized access. If you left your home unlocked and someone entered, its still illegal entry. It might not be BREAKING and entering

Re: here is only an investigation because a) it affected personally a few schmucks who had the power to start the inquiry

Ah, yeah, and the point is, these individuals might have other content (on their vmail) related to national security. So the UNAUTHORIZED access is potentially more serious and requires closer review than it would be if your babysitter left you a voice mail to say she won't make it friday. If you don't understand that, then the next point will truly be lost on you.

The rest of your comments seem to be where you really have some personal objections and are more just random rants than anything factual. Come up with something a little more relevant and we can resume the discussion. Thanks

2
0

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.