Hacking scandal just keeps giving
Discussion
0a said:
I have plenty of journalist friends who tell me that they think that in light of the meltdown of Europe, for example, the public interest in this is now minimal.
Journalists are particularly bad at conflating "of interest to the public" and "in the public interest". They are two very different things, and just because something falls off the radar of the press doesn't mean it is any less important. Personally, I don't really care what a journalist thinks we should be interested in since his opinion is coloured by the need to sell as many newspapers as possible. Pretty much exactly the reason the whole situation arose in the first place.tank slapper said:
Journalists are particularly bad at conflating "of interest to the public" and "in the public interest". They are two very different things, and just because something falls off the radar of the press doesn't mean it is any less important. Personally, I don't really care what a journalist thinks we should be interested in since his opinion is coloured by the need to sell as many newspapers as possible. Pretty much exactly the reason the whole situation arose in the first place.
Important or not, falling off the radar (not the press radar, but the radar of public attention) does matter. This story was rumbling along for months with little interest in the Guardian until the Milly Dowler stuff broke. Without public interest no change will ever happen. It’s not helped by the fact that there are two guilty parties – the press (investigated by the press) and the Met (investigated by the Met)…
0a said:
It’s not helped by the fact that there are two guilty parties – the press (investigated by the press) and the Met (investigated by the Met)…
I think the press are being investigated by the police at the moment. The police are, thankfully, being put the to sword by the press and there is a third party, MPs, who are, to a great extent, trying to hide the importance of this matter by lies and obfuscation.The Guardian and the Telegraph have provided a public service in revealing this sordid nature of the collusion between al three parties in this matter.
The way the powerful and the MPs are in one-another's pockets is, I suppose, only to be expected. The role of the police, at least those of senior ranks, is a public scandal.
The press have not revealed this out of public interest but the motive is less important than the truth, or at least as much as we are going to get.
The way the leaders of our governments have given into the demands of the Murdoch empire is appalling. Thatcher, Blair - very much Blair - and Cameron have all, to varying degrees, been guilty of this.
What a cynic you are.
Do you really think that the only reason an area of public is investigated because Jo Public is all fired up about it?
Do you not think that are real people out there with a genuine interest in geting to the bottom of nefarious goings on.
You seem to think that this issue is dead. Well, it';s not. The public (and the other media) will take renewed interest in the affair if and when some other major revelations emerge. In the meantime, those who want to get to the bottom of this will keep plugging away.
Thank God for them as well. We need dedicated researchers and journalists who are willing to keep going even if "the man in the street" loses interest.
Do you really think that the only reason an area of public is investigated because Jo Public is all fired up about it?
Do you not think that are real people out there with a genuine interest in geting to the bottom of nefarious goings on.
You seem to think that this issue is dead. Well, it';s not. The public (and the other media) will take renewed interest in the affair if and when some other major revelations emerge. In the meantime, those who want to get to the bottom of this will keep plugging away.
Thank God for them as well. We need dedicated researchers and journalists who are willing to keep going even if "the man in the street" loses interest.
Eric Mc said:
Just been anounced that the News of World were also using private detectives to track and follow -
Prince William and Daniel Radcliffe's parents.
Why?
I don't know about Daniel Radcliffe's parents, but that Prince William - he's a shady character. He keeps himself well out of the public eye; nobody ever knows what he's up to.Prince William and Daniel Radcliffe's parents.
Why?
Randy Winkman said:
Eric Mc said:
Just been anounced that the News of World were also using private detectives to track and follow -
Prince William and Daniel Radcliffe's parents.
Why?
I don't know about Daniel Radcliffe's parents, but that Prince William - he's a shady character. He keeps himself well out of the public eye; nobody ever knows what he's up to.Prince William and Daniel Radcliffe's parents.
Why?
If Prince William is so public, what "dirt" were they trying to get on him?
Eric Mc said:
Precisely.
If Prince William is so public, what "dirt" were they trying to get on him?
Simple: PI follows Wills to a trichologist. Tells journo, who tells editor. Editor may run with it... we all know that mouth-breathing tabloid readers will lap it up.If Prince William is so public, what "dirt" were they trying to get on him?
Alternatively, the editor will hold on to it. And will have a quiet "we're all working together here" meeting with Wills' chief flunky and negotiate for the next official scoop, and just keep this one on file.
Eric Mc said:
Precisely.
If Prince William is so public, what "dirt" were they trying to get on him?
The House of Windsor were already aware and hadn't editors been warned off ? Was Harry's dope buying escapade not picked up on from messages ? If Prince William is so public, what "dirt" were they trying to get on him?
Prince William, as a healthy young man about town and a prime candidate. A half message would probably be enough to track the caller down for a kiss'n'tell "I bedded the future King of England" Sunday splash.
Surely a tempting prospect for a Red Top journo.
Eric Mc said:
Convince the shareholders that the Murdoch Dynasty may not be a good thing for News International and/or Sky?
Take your point put am unsure as to whether or not his performance would affect my opinion one way or the other.That wasn't exactly what my question meant though, does it have any actual power? What's to stop him telling Tom Watson to stick his impertinent questions?
I'm not passing an opinion either way I'm just wondering.
The story so far....
James Murdoch authorised a payment of between £500k and £1m but didn't authorise it specifically (?) and didn't set a cap. Nor did he enquire why such a high payment was necessary. Nor did he really apply himself to the question of reputation damage if the case was not settled. No, it was nothing to do with him. Nothing at all.
Tom Watson is an idiot, accusing JM of acting like a mafia boss.
James Murdoch authorised a payment of between £500k and £1m but didn't authorise it specifically (?) and didn't set a cap. Nor did he enquire why such a high payment was necessary. Nor did he really apply himself to the question of reputation damage if the case was not settled. No, it was nothing to do with him. Nothing at all.
Tom Watson is an idiot, accusing JM of acting like a mafia boss.
Ozzie Osmond said:
The story so far....
James Murdoch authorised a payment of between £500k and £1m but didn't authorise it specifically (?) and didn't set a cap. Nor did he enquire why such a high payment was necessary. Nor did he really apply himself to the question of reputation damage if the case was not settled. No, it was nothing to do with him. Nothing at all.
Tom Watson is an idiot, accusing JM of acting like a mafia boss.
Maybe he's a bit angry with the Murdochs since he found out that they were having him and his familly tailed by a private eye.James Murdoch authorised a payment of between £500k and £1m but didn't authorise it specifically (?) and didn't set a cap. Nor did he enquire why such a high payment was necessary. Nor did he really apply himself to the question of reputation damage if the case was not settled. No, it was nothing to do with him. Nothing at all.
Tom Watson is an idiot, accusing JM of acting like a mafia boss.
So let me get this straight.....
JM is a top executive of a multi national company. One of the UK businesses has a major problem. He tells the committee that the guys who run the uk business informs him of a total loss of 500k-1m.
He takes the decision to avoid the publicity, share price volatility and other headaches and tells the guys who run the uk business to sort it out under X figure.
MP's try to punch him in the nuts in public...didnt work! JM flies back in private jet sipping on bubbly while getting a BJ.
What exactly is the problem? Tabloid media gave the consumer what they wanted. The technique was exposed. That practice is now stopped and compensation paid out. JM is smart enough not to be caught in the witch hunt. MP's go back looking like idiots who cant get s
t done.
JM is a top executive of a multi national company. One of the UK businesses has a major problem. He tells the committee that the guys who run the uk business informs him of a total loss of 500k-1m.
He takes the decision to avoid the publicity, share price volatility and other headaches and tells the guys who run the uk business to sort it out under X figure.
MP's try to punch him in the nuts in public...didnt work! JM flies back in private jet sipping on bubbly while getting a BJ.
What exactly is the problem? Tabloid media gave the consumer what they wanted. The technique was exposed. That practice is now stopped and compensation paid out. JM is smart enough not to be caught in the witch hunt. MP's go back looking like idiots who cant get s
t done.bobbylondonuk said:
What exactly is the problem? Tabloid media gave the consumer what they wanted. The technique was exposed. That practice is now stopped and compensation paid out. JM is smart enough not to be caught in the witch hunt. MP's go back looking like idiots who cant get st done.
You have more confidence than I that all the illegal techniques have been exposed (let alone all the immoral ones), the practices have stopped and that all compensations have been paid out. And that#s just at NOTW.t done.As is often the case, however, it's the lies and cover-ups that matter at least as much. Today's circus wasn't a trial and had sufficiently small remit that Mr Murdoch was pretty much always going to fly home today unscarred. The final report (whch is unlikely to appear before the Christmas break) may have a few less than supportive things to say. We shall see.
The Chair of the committee didn't seem to have any opinions at all when interviewed after the event. Odd.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff