Rebekakakakakaka

gtvlusso

So,

Brookes admits NoTW paid off Police, but does not know anything about voicemail (so called "phone" hacking). Yet she was editor of said rage when some of the allegations were made.

Story has spread to other NI Publications and there is now an FBI investigation. Murdochs have now agreed to be questioned by MP's.

Tom Crone, senior legal eagle at NI has left his post - no reason given (that I have seen)

Police and certain MP's appear to have an "unhealthy" relationship with certain media outlets - dinners together etc etc.

Mudochs have backed brookes 100%, refused her previous resignation - Brookes warns of more revelations to come. Brookes now resigns pre judge led enquiry and commons enquiry.

What do you think about this?

From my POV, this has several parts;

1, Proves that MP's and elected officials don't run the country - a very select few individuals do and have more influence than an entire constituency

2, people in high ranking, well paid jobs don't have to take responsibility for the actions of their business - as seen in many public companies where CEO's have failed and been paid off.

DonDaddyD

I think someone will come clean or in an act of vengence reveal everything. After that....

I honestly think:

Someone is going to commit suicide from this. Either they were guilty or made scapegoat and couldn't hack the pressure.

Heavy fines will be issued, a restructure of how much % of the media market can a single company own in the UK.

People will be sent to prison.

Cops outed as criminal and some politicians coming under serious fire, some sacked and or sent to prison.

I also fully expect someone at the top to go into proper hiding. Like in another Country.

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think someone will come clean or in an act of vengence reveal everything. After that....

I honestly think:

Someone is going to commit suicide from this. Either they were guilty or made scapegoat and couldn't hack the pressure.

Heavy fines will be issued, a restructure of how much % of the media market can a single company own in the UK.
People will be sent to prison.

Cops outed as criminal and some politicians coming under serious fire, some sacked and or sent to prison.

I also fully expect someone at the top to go into proper hiding. Like in another Country.

Nigh on impossible to enforce

For example Murdoch sets up company a - owns Sun
company B - owns Times
Company C - owns Sunday Times
Company d - owns sun on sunday


All 4 companies are seperate entities and as such not caught by the restiction.

joelsim

I have a friend who said that we will all find out in due course why the NOTW was closed down. Expect a far biggle scandle to emerge.

DonDaddyD

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think someone will come clean or in an act of vengence reveal everything. After that....

I honestly think:

Someone is going to commit suicide from this. Either they were guilty or made scapegoat and couldn't hack the pressure.

Heavy fines will be issued, a restructure of how much % of the media market can a single company own in the UK.
People will be sent to prison.

Cops outed as criminal and some politicians coming under serious fire, some sacked and or sent to prison.

I also fully expect someone at the top to go into proper hiding. Like in another Country.

Nigh on impossible to enforce

For example Murdoch sets up company a - owns Sun
company B - owns Times
Company C - owns Sunday Times
Company d - owns sun on sunday


All 4 companies are seperate entities and as such not caught by the restiction.

I was told other Countries have laws that prevent a single company from controlling an entire industry/market.

If that is in fact correct, then I think that (or something similar) will be adopted.

bails87

Joelsim wrote:

I have a friend who said that we will all find out in due course why the NOTW was closed down. Expect a far biggle scandle to emerge.

You're friends with Rebekah Brooks?! Is she having to crash on your lounge floor for a few weeks while she gets back on her feet?

In reality, I wonder if that's a distraction. We keep hearing "it's going to be much worse", which makes you think, "ok, this is bad, but I won't get really angry yet, I'll just wait and see what the really bad stuff is".

Also, why hasn't she been rounded up by an angry mob and forced to reveal what the "worse things" that she spoke about are?

veronese68

I reckon other papers are also up to a variety of wrongs. I'm sure a lot more will come out. Politicians are guilty of trying to get in to bed with the press so have been turning blind eyes to a lot of things. I notice the replacement for Rebekah Brooks has been running News Corp in Italy, no corruption in the Italian media is there.
I suspect a lot more will come out.

gtvlusso

I wopndered if this is all a way of reducing staff overheads? i.e. Sun on Sunday - sacrifice NoTW.

notsoblue

Paul Dacre is being very quiet about all this...

veronese68

Throwing things to the mob in a carefully selected order of most expendable first until the baying stops. Get rid of NOTW, still baying for blood. So, sacrifice the ginger tart, see what happens. If still baying, throw something else to them. Focus moves elsewhere, job done.

spen666

DonDaddyD wrote:

....
I was told other Countries have laws that prevent a single company from controlling an entire industry/market.

If that is in fact correct, then I think that (or something similar) will be adopted.

you forget that most other countries have a legal system based on a different system and what is possible there may not be possible here

DonDaddyD

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

....
I was told other Countries have laws that prevent a single company from controlling an entire industry/market.

If that is in fact correct, then I think that (or something similar) will be adopted.

you forget that most other countries have a legal system based on a different system and what is possible there may not be possible here

True, I still think that a law will be past preventing a single company from owning more than (insert number) percentage of the media market/industry in this Country.

I also think laws will be past to prevent or restrict the type of relationships the press and police have enjoyed with the media.

I think a MP, major player in the police and a person from the Press will be sent to prison.

I think someone will commit suicide.

I think the US will have far greater issues with Murdoch than we do.

bails87

notsoblue wrote:

Paul Dacre is being very quiet about all this...

The Daily Mail decides it's time to move on from phone hacking

Paul McMullan, trustworthy fellow that he is, said that up until 4-5 yeards ago the Mail were the biggest users of private investigators, an operation by the Information Commissioner's Office also found that the Mail was the biggest user of private investigators, with "58 Daily Mail journalists completing 952 transactions" with just one investigator (who was investigated himself by the ICO).

estampida

really any one who spells that name that way should not be
in charge of any newspaper, and having only done a 1yr course
before becoming a hack at 20, should not be able to steer a massive media corp

The scary thing is that the murdochs were slow to chuck her, that suggest she knows somthing that would do more than shake the share price, and loose a contract for tv.

Maybe she will become the new PR at number 10..........

bails87

estampida wrote:

Maybe she will become the new PR at number 10..........

Well, given Dave's penchant for giving people up to their eyeballs in criminality 'second chances'.....

DonDaddyD

Hug a Hoodie!

joelsim

My friend works for a paper. Nothing more is known ATM.

Sewinman

DonDaddyD wrote:

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think someone will come clean or in an act of vengence reveal everything. After that....

I honestly think:

Someone is going to commit suicide from this. Either they were guilty or made scapegoat and couldn't hack the pressure.

Heavy fines will be issued, a restructure of how much % of the media market can a single company own in the UK.
People will be sent to prison.

Cops outed as criminal and some politicians coming under serious fire, some sacked and or sent to prison.

I also fully expect someone at the top to go into proper hiding. Like in another Country.

Nigh on impossible to enforce

For example Murdoch sets up company a - owns Sun
company B - owns Times
Company C - owns Sunday Times
Company d - owns sun on sunday


All 4 companies are seperate entities and as such not caught by the restiction.

I was told other Countries have laws that prevent a single company from controlling an entire industry/market.

If that is in fact correct, then I think that (or something similar) will be adopted.

We already have such laws and restrictions...hence the Sky deal being referred to the Competition Commission unless they separated Sky News. Perfectly possible to enforce...

dhope

Sewinman wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think someone will come clean or in an act of vengence reveal everything. After that....

I honestly think:

Someone is going to commit suicide from this. Either they were guilty or made scapegoat and couldn't hack the pressure.

Heavy fines will be issued, a restructure of how much % of the media market can a single company own in the UK.
People will be sent to prison.

Cops outed as criminal and some politicians coming under serious fire, some sacked and or sent to prison.

I also fully expect someone at the top to go into proper hiding. Like in another Country.

Nigh on impossible to enforce

For example Murdoch sets up company a - owns Sun
company B - owns Times
Company C - owns Sunday Times
Company d - owns sun on sunday


All 4 companies are seperate entities and as such not caught by the restiction.

I was told other Countries have laws that prevent a single company from controlling an entire industry/market.

If that is in fact correct, then I think that (or something similar) will be adopted.

We already have such laws and restrictions...hence the Sky deal being referred to the Competition Commission unless they separated Sky News. Perfectly possible to enforce...

http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_competition_law

Confusedboy

So far, it looks to me like everyone is behaving in a completely predictable fashion. There are 3 basic interests involved in this; the press (not just NOTW, they have been one of the worst and been caught out, but all the papers are at it in some way), the corrupt Police, and the polititcians. Each of these parties is now involved in a damage limitiation excersise, in the following forms:-

The Murdoch press has cut it's losses by scrapping NOTW, which it was going to anyway, and eventually getting rid of Rebecca. while still not expressing any regret or sorrow for anything other than the damage done to thier reputaiton and earnings. They will try again to buy out BskyB, and no legislation will be enforcesd to prevent them.

The Police (specifically the Met, who have little credibility anyway) have simply wrung thier hands in despair, in a 'some police are on the take, what do you expect us to do about it' stance (we expect you to hunt down and punish the perps-you must know who they are), and to blame the other 2 parties, and

The politicians have made a lot of noise about democracy and press freedom, and the value of Parliamnet, and that we have been saved from a terrible fate by thier bravery and straight talking against the all powerful Rupert. In fact, they are having a field day getting revenge on the hated press, who have legitimately made thier lives miserable for years, in an orgy of self righteousness. But, they will set up the enquiries with a remit which will not upset the politcal status quo, and hope that everyone else will be satisfied with thier findings.

The people who are really to blame for all this are the readership of the Murdoch press, who have for years lapped up the details of stories obtained by illegal methods and bribery. They have traditionally failed to distinguish between stories about celebs and about murdered schoolgirls in a way that might have modified the behaviour of the journos feeding thier sick appetites, or to care about it so long as they got thier daily fix of prurience and titillation.

I predict that no-one will pay any serious debt to society as a result of any inquiry into this scandal.

estampida

you seem quite certain for being confused :roll:

Confusedboy

estampida wrote:

you seem quite certain for being confused :roll:

Maybe just a tad cynical...

spen666

dhope wrote:

Sewinman wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

spen666 wrote:

DonDaddyD wrote:

I think someone will come clean or in an act of vengence reveal everything. After that....

I honestly think:

Someone is going to commit suicide from this. Either they were guilty or made scapegoat and couldn't hack the pressure.

Heavy fines will be issued, a restructure of how much % of the media market can a single company own in the UK.
People will be sent to prison.

Cops outed as criminal and some politicians coming under serious fire, some sacked and or sent to prison.

I also fully expect someone at the top to go into proper hiding. Like in another Country.

Nigh on impossible to enforce

For example Murdoch sets up company a - owns Sun
company B - owns Times
Company C - owns Sunday Times
Company d - owns sun on sunday


All 4 companies are seperate entities and as such not caught by the restiction.

I was told other Countries have laws that prevent a single company from controlling an entire industry/market.

If that is in fact correct, then I think that (or something similar) will be adopted.

We already have such laws and restrictions...hence the Sky deal being referred to the Competition Commission unless they separated Sky News. Perfectly possible to enforce...

http://www.competition-commission.org.uk/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_competition_law

completely different situation

spen666

bails87 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Paul Dacre is being very quiet about all this...

The Daily Mail decides it's time to move on from phone hacking

Paul McMullan, trustworthy fellow that he is, said that up until 4-5 yeards ago the Mail were the biggest users of private investigators, an operation by the Information Commissioner's Office also found that the Mail was the biggest user of private investigators, with "58 Daily Mail journalists completing 952 transactions" with just one investigator (who was investigated himself by the ICO).

What is the relevance of this?
There is absolutely nothing illegal or immoral in employing private investigators unless you are employing them to carry out illegal acts.

There is no suggestion here of any illegal acts by the Daily Mail

jimmypippa

Anyone else amused that Neil Wallis worked as PR consultant for the Met (2-days a month at £24k per year).


He can't have been very good at PR for the them

mybreakfastconsisted

The sooner this all blows over and Rebekakaka can get back to doing Groundforce the better.

Mikey2

Is it just me or has someone else noticed this...

bails87

spen666 wrote:

bails87 wrote:

notsoblue wrote:

Paul Dacre is being very quiet about all this...

The Daily Mail decides it's time to move on from phone hacking

Paul McMullan, trustworthy fellow that he is, said that up until 4-5 yeards ago the Mail were the biggest users of private investigators, an operation by the Information Commissioner's Office also found that the Mail was the biggest user of private investigators, with "58 Daily Mail journalists completing 952 transactions" with just one investigator (who was investigated himself by the ICO).

What is the relevance of this?
There is absolutely nothing illegal or immoral in employing private investigators unless you are employing them to carry out illegal acts.

There is no suggestion here of any illegal acts by the Daily Mail

It's relevant because notsoblue said Dacre was being quiet. There's a DM editorial saying "stop thinking about phone hacking done by PIs" and Paul McMullan claiming the mail were "as dirty as anyone".

SimonAH

If I were a cynic, oh wait, I am, I would say that the proof of the pudding that phone hacking has been absolutely prevalent across the entire industry is that it hasn't been reported as a big story (prior to NOTW of course).

Take it logically, journalism is a small incestuous field and they move from paper to paper. You couldn't possibly have kept this technique under wraps - how come we didn't get a big story in one of the tabloids years ago along the lines of "Sleazy Journos at the NOTW hack into your phones illegaly to steal your secrets!!!!!!" Answer, 'cos they were all at it.

TBH it's so easy to do that the only reason I can think of that they hired a PI was just to give one wall of deniability.

dilemna

Mikey2 wrote:

Is it just me or has someone else noticed this...

Rupert Murdoch = Mr Burns

Smithers = ?

dilemna

The most laughable thing this week was hearing copper Andy Hayman in front of the Parliammentary select committee.

He was asked "Have you ever taken payments from NOTW for information"?

Andy Hayman : "I can't believe you just asked me that! " (laughing). He certainly did sound very arrogant and very thick.

AH along with most of the top cops including the top man at the Met have been to numerous "meals" with News International and NOTW and employed News International hacks and vice versa - Andy Hayman writing a column. This is smellier than a bucket of stinky poo.