[Update] The News Corp scandal

[Damien]

Bit risky to say he isn't fit to run the company, doesn't seem like it was their role to judge that.

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by Damien

Bit risky to say he isn't fit to run the company, doesn't seem like it was their role to judge that.

How conservative of you.. That's exactly what the Conservatives on the committee said.Apparently they were not in complete agreement over the report 6 to 4.

[Damien]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

How conservative of you.. That's exactly what the Conservatives on the committee said.Apparently they were not in complete agreement over the report 6 to 4.

They have to be careful not to turn this political.

[Maggy J]

Quite a difference between Sky News and BBC news on this.Very much emphasising this split.

To be expected really, I love the unbiased BBC coverage vs Sky

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

How conservative of you.. That's exactly what the Conservatives on the committee said.Apparently they were not in complete agreement over the report 6 to 4.

But the committee was split six to four with Tory members refusing to endorse the report and branding it "partisan".

News Corp said in a statement it was "carefully reviewing" the report and would "respond shortly", adding: "The company fully acknowledges significant wrongdoing at News of the World and apologises to everyone whose privacy was invaded."

I wonder why?

'A blind eye'

The committee of MPs began its inquiry in July 2011 in the wake of fresh revelations about the extent of hacking at the tabloid newspaper, with reported victims including the murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler and the families of victims of the 7/7 London bombings.

It heard evidence from Mr Murdoch and his son James, and has now concluded that the notion that a hands-on proprietor like Rupert Murdoch had "no inkling" that wrongdoing was widespread at the News of the World was "simply not credible".

It noted that the newspaper mogul had "excellent powers of recall and grasp of detail when it suited him", and added: "On the basis of the facts and evidence before the committee, we conclude that, if at all relevant times Rupert Murdoch did not take steps to become fully informed about phone hacking, he turned a blind eye and exhibited wilful blindness to what was going on in his companies and publications."

I wonder what the statement will say?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-17898029

Scottish First Minister Alex Salmond has come under more pressure over links with Rupert Murdoch, after MPs said he was not fit to lead News Corporation.

Labour and the Lib Dems questioned the judgement of Mr Salmond, who met the media boss in February, in the wake of the Commons culture committee report.

The report said Mr Murdoch "is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company".

Mr Salmond said it was not a judgement for a committee of MPs to make.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotlan...itics-17915267

[Chris]

For once, Alex Salmond is correct. Tom Watson has the knives out for Murdoch, and whatever the arguments in favour, an individual's fitness to be in business is not a judgement for politicians to make. There are eminently qualified individuals already on the job at Ofcom, which has the necessary political oversight without being saddled with day-to-day political interference.

[Maggy J]

Watson maybe went overboard but as he has been the target of dirty dark arts for several years by Murdoch's press I think he can be excused for getting a little over excited..

[Osem]

Heard Gerry Sutcliffe (IIRC) banging on about how the buck stopped at the Murdochs and that their failure to properly oversee parts of their business meant they were culpable and not fit to be in charge. Odd that I don't recall that same harsh logic being applied to his former party leaders during the depths of their lies, spin and ineptitude whilst in office.

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by Osem

Heard Gerry Sutcliffe (IIRC) banging on about how the buck stopped at the Murdochs and that their failure to properly oversee parts of their business meant they were culpable and not fit to be in charge. Odd that I don't recall that same harsh logic being applied to his former party leaders during the depths of their lies, spin and ineptitude whilst in office.

Please can we not turn this into a party politics thread.There are plenty of threads for you to bash your favourite party in...

[mertle]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...on-claims.html

Yep tom watson got knives out claiming other murdered childrens phones may been hacked.

If his allegation true its sickening.

Now thing is how do they do it how would know who phone getting hacked.

If its general hack say on the network then how many phones could we be attacking.

This whole thing which has puzzled me.

How would they know the number in first place.

Are they just generally attacking till hit phone of note then how would they know its celeb, of interest.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Osem

Heard Gerry Sutcliffe (IIRC) banging on about how the buck stopped at the Murdochs and that their failure to properly oversee parts of their business meant they were culpable and not fit to be in charge. Odd that I don't recall that same harsh logic being applied to his former party leaders during the depths of their lies, spin and ineptitude whilst in office.

Don't get party political about this, as the same could apply to members on both sides of the commons.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Don't get party political about this, as the same could apply to members on both sides of the commons.

Is there a 2 hour echo in here?

It wasn't being party political. Sadly, yes all the parties engage in this sort of thing at one level or another but it was a Labour MP who made the point I was referring to. So just for the record (please make a note), I think it's a bit rich for politicians of any hue to be demanding resignations on the basis of 'the buck stops at the very top' when they clearly don't apply the same high 'moral' standards amongst their own. Is that non party political enough for you?

I don't much like the Murdochs and couldn't care less what happens to them on a personal level but I would care very much if what's happening now results in the closure of their printed news media operations. However, to believe that what's been going on hasn't been happening for decades and that similar dubious practice doesn't apply just as much within other major companies and indeed within parliament itself is naive. Hypocricy and political expediency are rife and if our politicians want to be credible in tackling wrong they need to get their own houses in order first.

Anyway that's my last comment on the issue.

[Hugh]

It may be relevant that Tom Watson released a book about his battles with the Murdochs two weeks ago.....

Cartoon from today's Times....

[Maggy J]

Originally Posted by Osem

Is there a 2 hour echo in here?

It wasn't being party political. Sadly, yes all the parties engage in this sort of thing at one level or another but it was a Labour MP who made the point I was referring to. So just for the record (please make a note), I think it's a bit rich for politicians of any hue to be demanding resignations on the basis of 'the buck stops at the very top' when they clearly don't apply the same high 'moral' standards amongst their own. Is that non party political enough for you?

I don't much like the Murdochs and couldn't care less what happens to them on a personal level but I would care very much if what's happening now results in the closure of their printed news media operations. However, to believe that what's been going on hasn't been happening for decades and that similar dubious practice doesn't apply just as much within other major companies and indeed within parliament itself is naive. Hypocricy and political expediency are rife and if our politicians want to be credible in tackling wrong they need to get their own houses in order first.

Anyway that's my last comment on the issue.

Agreed! There are many politicians of all hues who have played the media game..