[Update] The News Corp scandal

Originally Posted by denphone

But this is a man who's behavior a while back was front page headlines and he moaned like mad back then if l rightly remember to keep it secret and now he toady's up to the media like the usual hypocrite.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...gh+grant&hl=en

I'm sorry but I disagree.He's not a hypocrite to complain about illegal activities against him..

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by denphone

But this is a man who's behavior a while back was front page headlines and he moaned like mad back then if l rightly remember to keep it secret and now he toady's up to the media like the usual hypocrite.

http://news.google.com/newspapers?id...gh+grant&hl=en

Two wrongs do not make a right. Regardless of his activities before (none of which were actually illegal IIRC), the newspapers do not have the right to hack in to his voicemail.

[denphone]

l know two wrongs do not make a right but it seems some celebrity's want it both ways when it is convenient to them.

Originally Posted by denphone

l know two wrongs do not make a right but it seems some celebrity's want it both ways when it is convenient to them.

In what sense does he 'want it both ways'?

[denphone]

Well it seems Public figures want it both ways , It is grossly hypocritical of Hugh Grant– or anyone else in the public eye – to complain about the media invading privacy.
I’m sick of politicians and performers, who trade their profiles for money, biting the hand that feeds them and then complaining.

Originally Posted by denphone

Well it seems Public figures want it both ways , It is grossly hypocritical of Hugh Grant– or anyone else in the public eye – to complain about the media invading privacy.
I’m sick of politicians and performers, who trade their profiles for money, biting the hand that feeds them and then complaining.

But that doesn't make any sense. Are you saying that if your job involves any media work you no longer have a right to a private life? Hugh Grant is any actor, he plays characters, a musician makes music while a politician represents their electorate.

Why do these jobs mean forfeiting the right to a private life? If he had used the press to publish private photos of him in order to raise his profile, i.e in the way some talentless z-list celebrities do, then I might see your point but that isn't he case with Hugh Grant.

So where is the hypocrisy?

Anyway this is the very reason the NOTW and the media in general have used as a justification to illegally hack mobile phones of celebrities and it was only a short step to anyone being a target.

Let's try to stay with that topic shall we instead of arguing News International's excuses for them.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by denphone

l know two wrongs do not make a right but it seems some celebrity's want it both ways when it is convenient to them.

Why? Because we pay their salaries? I spend rather a lot of money in HMV. Does that mean I get the automatic right to know what their staff are doing in their personal lives? Of course not. In a similar vein, we don't get the automatic right to know what any celeb does in their private life.

Regardless of whether a celebrity keeps their private life to themselves or they are releasing new TV series/columns/autobiographies with each intimate detail of their lives, we do not have an automatic right to know everything. Nor do the newspapers have an automatic right to listen to their messages.

[denphone]

Lets get it clear that hacking in my mind is unacceptable and there are no excuses for listening to peoples messages.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

There will be supreme irony if there are any prosecutions against The Guardian but none against the NOW..

Might not be too far off the truth:

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16072953

The family of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler is finalising details of a substantial settlement with the News Of The World for hacking her phone, Sky sources say.

and:

https://twitter.com/#!/arusbridger

Originally Posted by Guardian Editor

Police approached CPS within last hour to seek advice on using official secrets act against guardian - legal source

Personally after some of the information that has been revealed about the Dowlers in court I'd be inclined to settle if I were in their shoes..And then buy an uninhabited island with the money so as to get right away from the media.However I'd go for at least 5.million.

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Personally after some of the information that has been revealed about the Dowlers in court I'd be inclined to settle if I were in their shoes..And then buy an uninhabited island with the money so as to get right away from the media.However I'd go for at least 5.million.

Yeah fair enough. They were the victims so it's not for me to judge how they wish to handle it.

[denphone]

Phone hacking: sacked Sun journalist will not face police questioning

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...sun-journalist



Max Mosley takes on News of the World publisher in French court

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...ley-news-world




Nick Clegg: NI will not be absolved over Milly Dowler phone hacking

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...l-milly-dowler




Phone hacking: Ted Turner says Rupert Murdoch will have to step down

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...rupert-murdoch

The Times, The Telegraph, The Independent and The Daily Mail have all had editorials condemning the police trying to get the sources for phone hacking. Even Richard Littlejohn wrote such an article (does make me stop and consider if I have the correct viewpoint ).

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011...police-consult

Scotland Yard only approached the DPP for advice after trying to force the Guardian to reveal sources using the Official Secrets ActScotland Yard officers failed to consult either the director of public prosecutions or the attorney general before invoking the Official Secrets Act to try to force the Guardian to reveal journalistic sources, it has been revealed.

Although police are not technically required to get the DPP's permission at an early stage of inquiries, Starmer told a media law conference he encouraged sensitive police investigations to be carried out from an early stage in close consultation with the DPP's lawyers from the Crown Prosecution Service.

Of course the Guardian is bound to be partisan..