A change of heart? Irrelevant.
Hang 'im high.
A former editor of the News of the World who also worked as a PR consultant to the Metropolitan Police has been arrested. News Corp chief Rupert Murdoch and his son James Murdoch have confirmed they will appear before a Parliamentary committee investigating the phone-hacking scandal that has engulfed their media empire. A …
While the press can sometimes go overboard both the US and UK governments are really trying to bend this out of proportion.
Both governments have had gaps in law enforcement ethics when it comes to surveillance, sometimes very large ones.
In my opinion this kind of pillorying of the press looks like the two governments attempts to run more press gagging legislation under the noses of the public.
Government surveillance is intended to protect the populace and advance the countries interest, however cack-handed, misguided or OTT.
Newspaper surveillance is intended to use people's private lives (and grief) to sell lies and distortions so unpleasant people can have more power and money.
Only News International. It was "the press", in the shape of the Grauniad, which broke the story, and doggedly pursued it . This the the kind of story that the press are supposed to report on & investigate, to the point of it being archetypal. The sort of prurient shite that is the Sun's stock-in-trade(and the wannnabe Suns) is not news, just playground tittle-tattle & name-calling, intermingled with right-wing neo-liberal polemic dressed as populism. The Sun et al. have distorted & damaged the UK's public life for far too long & the pols have just realised that if they don't get their collective tongues out of the Dirty Digger's arse quick, they're going down with the rest.
...were doing it. The guardian and Mirror a lot more than the NotW.
In fact the BBC and Guardian see this as a crusade to keep their monopoly on the government trough going. It only hotted up when NI wanted to buy Sky outright and the beeb saw it as a counter to their distouted presentation of so called 'news'. The guardian saw that if the beeb went down then the government job adds would fall and with that their income - hence their leading the scrum.
"I'm sorry I refuse to answer that question on the grounds that it may incriminate myself"
Yeah, I know we have no 5th Am't but these two are US citizens.
They don't have to say a word. They will be accompanied by a phalanx of Lawyers who will make sure that the MP's end up looking like bits of wilted lettuce.
Anon coz I don't want my phone hacked.
The only law that applied to Mr Murdoch is Murdoch's law.
He sneezes and governments catch a cold.
He almost certainly has career ending dirt on almost every politician, celeb etc in the world. He won't be afraid to use it.
Be prepared for governments to fall in his desperate attempt to keep his empire afloat.
Remember, A wounded animal is twice as dangerous as it was before it got wounded.
I predict he will sneer at the MP's and there is not a thing they can do about it.
Yes, it does, but we *also* have laws against self-incrimination.
"You do not have to say anything, but it may harm your defence if you do not mention something which you later rely on in court."
Murdoch senior is never going to get as far as court, it just remains to see who he might hang out to dry to protect his son...
So a right to silence has to be called the 5th Amendment does it? Or it doesn't exist?
It's because of tabloid papers and tabloid TV that the UK has an epidemic of idiots who think they went to school with Buffy the Vampire Slayer.
Let the Murdochs go and refuse to answer questions. There will be bods from Ofcom watching and forming opinions over 'fit and proper' persons.
Those bits of wilted lettuce will be watching the lawyers and the Murdochs pissing away their 40% of Sky TV.
The right to silence in the UK has never been absolute - if it comes to trial, the judge may order that certain inferences be drawn; this is, as I understand it, the big difference between the right to silence/5th amendment.
Equally, however, nobody can be compelled to give evidence against themselves, and even a confession can be inadmissible under certain circumstances (although evidence gathered as a result of information from a subsequently inadmissible confession can be used...)
Murdoch has corrupted the media as we know it today. journalism has become the tools of lobbyist and powerful politicians.
His media empire is a direct threat to our thinking and perception of events.
Consequently, its corruption is taking over democracy much like cancer does to a healthy body.
For all those who say the hacking scandal is overblown, here's some advice.
Hacking children is not cool. It's not nice, and it's certainly not good. When kids are affected by the press, people get pissed off damn quickly.
Please remember that before you make a fool out of yourself.
Perhaps Lachlan, James, et al. can divert some of the estate to build a new Escorial in memory of the old man's martyrdom. El Grecos, Velasquezes, and Goyas seem a bit up-market in this case; perhaps just gallery after gallery of page 3 (was it) babes?
Murdoch's slimy "entertainment" standards and right-wing extremist politics is a blight on both sides of the Atlantic, between "Faux" News and political corruption over there, and the degenerate pit of vice called Sky television and tabloid journalism over here. If this case marks the beginning of the end of Murdoch's sleazy empire then I'll throw a party and dance on his (metaphorical) grave. Good riddance.
people that buy papers, watch Tv etc and believe it's all truth are sad anyway, if we all thought the same then why isn't brown still primeminister? all the polls put him streets ahead.
Murdoch will not crumble, his empires will not fall....he's only ONE of the shareholders, does that mean all those hedge and pension funds that are invested in NI will have to be bailed out like Maxwell's investors?
As has been said, if the hacking had led to Rachel Nickel, Ginnette Tate or whoevers murderer being convicted, we'd all be raising our hands and cheering it.
Seem to be plenty of trolls here but it's just a case of "we didnt get the result, let's allay the blame before we get caught" from Mr Plod. Phone hacking is on par with having someone on the inside, but without the risk
I'd be taking a very close look at my pension scheme, and at the 'units' I'd been putting my contributions into.
FWIW, 'ethical' investment pension units seem to perform better than a lot of others, and you can be pretty sure these don't included NI in their portfolio.
I like to see daddy Murdoch go Jack Nicholson in "A few good men" but sadly I suspect he and Junior will be fully lawered up.
After all they know how easy it is to turn "Would you say Mr Murdoch?" questions into "Murdoch:"I'm a lying little b***ard"*
*This is purely for dramatic effect and no suggestion is being made that any member of the Murdoch family has ever acted in anything other than in complete compliance with the laws of whatever country they (or their companies) are operating in at all times.
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019