[Update] The News Corp scandal

[devilincarnate]

Originally Posted by Flyboy

I can't see that getting anywhere. Murdoch still has enough on these people to "persuade" them that everyone at News International are all nice, cuddly and love their mums.

HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM Nice.

The FBI is investigating reports that Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation sought to hack the phones of victims of the 9/11 terror attacks, reports say.

Reports of a criminal probe come as a growing group of senators and a senior Republican congressman have called for an investigation.

An FBI official told the BBC that reports of probe were "credible".

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14162545

[watzizname]

Originally Posted by Osem

Brown certainly wasn't as slick and media friendly as Blair and didn't call all the shots but the point is that he went along with what was going on for a very long term and now clearly regrets he did so. The venom in his recent words, I believe, betrays more about the personal hurt he feels towards NI (for reasons like those you mention) than anything else. He had his chance to take on Murdoch and ran scared.

Going only by what I've read, it sounds more like he ran into a wall.

Gordon Brown gave vent to two years of anger over the phone-hacking scandal when he turned on Sir Gus O'Donnell and directly accused the cabinet secretary of blocking his plans to hold a judicial inquiry into the affair.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/13/gordon-brown-turns-on-cabinet-secretary-phone-hacking?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_ campaign=Feed%3A+theguardian%2Fmedia%2Frss+%28Medi a%29

Mr Brown told the Commons he asked Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O’Donnell to back a judicial inquiry two years ago..

Charlie Elphicke: I thank the right hon. Gentleman for giving way. As a parent myself, I share the disgust at the invasion of his privacy, and I agree with him that the police have serious questions to answer. Nevertheless, criminality was disclosed in the Culture, Media and Sport Committee report in 2003 and by the Information Commissioner in 2006. As a new Member, I ask him: why was nothing done?

Mr Brown: I have set out the record of my desire to have a judicial inquiry. It was opposed by the police, opposed by the Home Office and opposed by the civil service, and it was not supported by the Select Committee of the day. However, if the hon. Gentleman felt that it was right in 2003 that there should have been an inquiry into the media, why at no point, even until last week, did the Conservative party ever support an inquiry into the media in this country?

http://conservativehome.blogs.com/parliament/2011/07/mr-gordon-brown-kirkcaldy-and-cowdenbeath-lab-it-is-a-bit-like-the-old-days-for-me-with-the-government-on-the-run-the.html

Brown, who volunteered to give evidence to any inquiry investigating hacking, denied accusations the relationship between his Government and News International broke down during the Labour Party conference in autumn 2009 when the media group's flagship title The Sun ditched its support for the party.

He quoted a string of negative headlines such as "Brown Killed My Son", "Doctor Evil" and "The Betrayer of Britain" proving he was not in league with News International's executives.

"The relationship between News International and the Labour administration I led was from start to finish neither cosy nor comfortable,"

http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=1&storycode=47500&c=1

Brown always stuck me as a poor leader, rather vindictive, but quite loyal to his beliefs and causes. I don't think he would be corrupt and I believe him when he says he wanted to stop News International - not only because NI were especially cruel to him.

---------- Post added at 21:22 ---------- Previous post was at 21:21 ----------

Originally Posted by devilincarnate

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-14162545

If it turns out that the FBI find credible evidence that 9/11 victims phones were hacked then all of this is a mere warm up for what News Corpse have coming to them.

Rupert Murdoch defends his handling of the Hacking crises, he tells Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopStories

Hellooooo, you stupid old fool - How about sacking the current CEO and then apologising to all the victims of phone hacking. You really do deserve your empire to totally collapse and implode around you.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by watzizname

Going only by what I've read, it sounds more like he ran into a wall.

A bit of both maybe but methinks he doth protest too much. Nobody forced Brown to deal with Murdoch or endure the shabby relationship during all the years he and Bliar were chums. I don't recall him complaining publicly about any of it at the time so clearly he put his personal/party interests first.

It's all very well the likes of John Prescott banging on about how awful it was that Murdoch had such influence over politicians but they tend to skirt around the fact that those same politicians allowed themselves to be influenced. Why? Probably because they felt it served their purpose....

[Ignitionnet]

Interesting this is what it takes to make Gordon Brown do his job and show up in the HoC.

Get the popcorn ready anyway all, this could be good.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Mick

Rupert Murdoch defends his handling of the Hacking crises, he tells Wall Street Journal.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...LEFTTopStories

Hellooooo, you stupid old fool - How about sacking the current CEO and then apologising to all the victims of phone hacking. You really do deserve your empire to totally collapse and implode around you.

An apology does appear on the front page of The Sun today

THE Guardian last night said sorry to The Sun for accusing us of hacking into the medical records of Gordon Brown's sick son.

The apology came after we told how our source was the dad of another child with cystic fibrosis - and that the ex-PM was mistaken in claiming we were guilty of wrongdoing.

The paper conceded: "The Guardian of Tuesday 12 July incorrectly reported the Sun newspaper had obtained information on the medical condition of Gordon Brown's son from his medical records.

More of an apology than anyone else has had in this whole sorry saga and why is it when they write lies about some one it's on page 31 in a small paragraph not on the front page.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-sick-son.html

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

More of an apology than anyone else has had in this whole sorry saga and why is it when they write lies about some one it's on page 31 in a small paragraph not on the front page.

Thats a Murdoch comic for you.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

An apology does appear on the front page of The Sun today

THE Guardian last night said sorry to The Sun for accusing us of hacking into the medical records of Gordon Brown's sick son.

The apology came after we told how our source was the dad of another child with cystic fibrosis - and that the ex-PM was mistaken in claiming we were guilty of wrongdoing.

The paper conceded: "The Guardian of Tuesday 12 July incorrectly reported the Sun newspaper had obtained information on the medical condition of Gordon Brown's son from his medical records.

More of an apology than anyone else has had in this whole sorry saga and why is it when they write lies about some one it's on page 31 in a small paragraph not on the front page.

http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage...-sick-son.html

They really have some brass neck. They put that on the front page and at the end of the day it's hardly that much better they got the information from someone who knew his medical records rather than his medical records. Not enough to vindicate them from the act and certainly not enough to vindicate this entire scandal - which The Sun has been less than keen on promoting.

---------- Post added at 10:10 ---------- Previous post was at 08:47 ----------

Rebekah Brooks has resigned. More Info here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog...-live-coverage

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Damien

They really have some brass neck. They put that on the front page and at the end of the day it's hardly that much better they got the information from someone who knew his medical records rather than his medical records. Not enough to vindicate them from the act and certainly not enough to vindicate this entire scandal - which The Sun has been less than keen on promoting.

---------- Post added at 10:10 ---------- Previous post was at 08:47 ----------

Rebekah Brooks has resigned. More Info here:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog...-live-coverage

Well thats geat news about Rebekah Brooks resigning, one down two to go.

[chris9991]

I wonder why her resignation has now been accepted - is it possible they've now found some incriminating evidence?

[Derek]

Originally Posted by chris9991

I wonder why her resignation has now been accepted - is it possible they've now found some incriminating evidence?

I'd wager its because the story is now getting some serious scrutiny in the USA. By sacrificing Brooks they can pin the blame on her rather than Murdoch Snr and Jnr getting it in the neck.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Derek

I'd wager its because the story is now getting some serious scrutiny in the USA. By sacrificing Brooks they can pin the blame on her rather than Murdoch Snr and Jnr getting it in the neck.

Well perhaps thats what they are hoping for but l doubt whether that ploy will work.

Originally Posted by Osem

A bit of both maybe but methinks he doth protest too much. Nobody forced Brown to deal with Murdoch or endure the shabby relationship during all the years he and Bliar were chums. I don't recall him complaining publicly about any of it at the time so clearly he put his personal/party interests first.

It's all very well the likes of John Prescott banging on about how awful it was that Murdoch had such influence over politicians but they tend to skirt around the fact that those same politicians allowed themselves to be influenced. Why? Probably because they felt it served their purpose....

Both parties need a kick up the bum about this.Neither can crow louder than the other.They really must stop these stupids digs at each other because it just makes them look childish and petty and it's not the behaviour I what to see and hear from the Houses of Parliament at this present time.

What I'd like is a full heartfelt apology from both parties WITHOUT any sidewise swipe at anyone else.
Fat chance of that.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by Maggy J

Both parties need a kick up the bum about this.Niether can crow louder than the other.They really must stop these stupids digs at each other because it just makes them look childish and petty and it;s not the behaviour I what to see and hear from the Houses of Parliament at this present time.

What I'd like is a full heartfelt apology from both parties WITHOUT any sidewise swipe at anyone else.
Fat chance of that.

Theres a lot of sense in your piece Maggy and yes both parties had their noses in the trough and should apoligise to the nation and come together on this but as you say there is more chance of me winning the lottery then that happening but we can always hope.