Hacking thing has been ludicrously overblown

[Brendan]

This whole thing is getting jolly exciting though isn't it. Enjoyed this little bit yesterday: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jul/13/rupert-murdoch-simon-hoggarts-sketch

[Jah Lush]

The reviled Rebecca Brooks has finally resigned. Probably due to pressure from shareholders rather than Murdoch.

[mockney piers]

I can't wait for next week's Private Eye, it's going to be a classic!!

[Brendan]

At the risk of lowering this into the gutter of physiognomy. She would actually be rather good looking if she didn?t have those dead eyes and the waxen, expressionless visage of someone who has learnt not to feel.

[Loz]

And Brian May's hair. Dyed.

[StraferJack]

To shift the focus away from the Murdoch Clan briefly (pausing only to say give me Elisabeth over Rebekaah any day), judging by the number of people I see reading the Sun on the bus this week I can't help feeling that the real problem isn't Rupert himself

[Brendan]

People are dicks. What you gonna do 'ey?

[Jeremy]

Brendan - Rebekah Brooks? Good looking? No. Way.

StraferJack - I don't think that "giving people want they want" is an excuse for irresponsible / immoral practices

[Brendan]

Fair enough but that Brian May?s a dreamboat.

[StraferJack]

Quite so Jeremy, and hopefully my many many anti-tabloid posts in the pasts make it obvious where I stand on that score.

But watching people this morning I did think "still? you are still buying the sun this week after everything that's happened?"

[Brendan]

Well in their defence, if they read the Sun they probably haven?t read anything about all this huff.

That, and the Guardian doesn?t have tits.

[StraferJack]

Brendan, just tees them up.....

[Brendan]

It is more justifiable than buying it for the articles.

[Loz]

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well in their defence, if they read the Sun they

> probably haven?t read anything about all this

> huff.

>

> That, and the Guardian doesn?t have tits.

I dunno. A few of the Guardian columnists are complete tits.

[StraferJack]

Quote:

That, and the Guardian doesn?t have tits.

Brendan, just tees them up.....

And Loz smacks 'em down the fairway

[Brendan]

If the Sun goes down the Swannee what do you think the chances of convincing Ian Hislop to keep pg3 going in the Eye are?

[longsocksofthelane]

Now we find out that the reason why the bbc news today has been so light is that they are all out on strike. Why......well ironically the licence fee deal that the BBC did behind closed doors with Cameron's old friend leading negotiations for the BBC (?)The Director General had been heavily leant on by some conservative politicians who inturn and been really really heavily leant on by......yes you guessed it.....Rupert + James. Apparently thats the cost of getting your party a prime minister !

So irony of irony, on the big day when the flame haired secretary finally got fired, who do we have to report it, SKY ! Meanwhile at the BBC we are left watching broomcupboard journo's and their tea lady acting as roving reporter ! Bloody makes you weep.

Anyway standby for a total eclipse of the SUN......yep.

[mockney piers]

Allfornun, it's actually now disturbing. Seriously, give it a rest.

[StraferJack]

This whole thing is getting more surreal by the day

If spaceships took off from wapping tomorrow I wouldn't be surprised at this stage

[Marmora Man]

It is not safe for a democracy to have so much media controlled by one person who has been very clear in wanting to be the 'kingmaker' of British politics. With having such a huge share of the print media and with plans to do the same with broadcast media the old adage - power corrupts, etc - and clearly NoTW had been corrupt in ethical terms for many years.

How much if the British media us controlled by the BBC, for which I am obliged to hold, and pay for, a licence?

A soggy left of centre organisation that has consistently promulgated a left of centre point of view, while often accepting uncritically government propaganda. This doesn't in any way condone Murdoch's actions but his empire isn't the only one setting an agenda.

[Marmora Man]

Additionally:

MPs expenses scandal

Matrix Affair

Jonatahn Aitken

Mandelson Mortgage

Birmingham 6

T Dan Smith

Profumo affair

Use of Snatch Land Rovers in Afghanistan

Sexed up "Dodgy Dossiers

John Prescott's affair

Cecil Parkinson's aiffair

Just some of the stories broken by investigative journalist - taken from the top of my head. With research 100s more would be listed over the last four decades. Whatever the outcome of the NOTW hacking scandal (and we should always remember they weren't alone - just the first to be caught) it should not compromise the ability of journalists to expose politicians and others in positions of power /authority in wrong doing / corruption and sleaze.

[DJKillaQueen]

The resignations and arrests are rising.

MM makes a very good point, that valid investigative journalism relys on something to prise open corruption - be that bribes, or whistleblowers or whatever. Such practices are as old as journalism itself. The worst thing that could come out of this would be that those who already use the law to hide their immorality/ corrupt practices, find themsleves with an even stronger ability to do so.

[Loz]

I am loving this photo...

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2010/4/16/1271420598837/Rupert-Murdoch-and-Rebeka-001.jpg

[StraferJack]

So even with a right-wing government it manages to simultaneously promulgate a left of centre pov whilst simultaneously accepting government propoganda uncritically? I'm almost impressed

BUt regardless of your view on the BBC's output, it can't be denied that for such a large organisation it has more regulation and controls in place than Murdoch would entertain even at his most benign. And they don't publish a single newspaper, which is still the main topic at hand.. the newspaper business and the conduct therin.

The problem wasn't JUST the size of one man's media empire, but the power it had and what they did with it. If it was just promoting right of centre views it wouldn't be so bad . But as we see, that power was largely derived by almost mafia-like domination by fear, based on "dirt" whcih was sytematically dug up, just to have in their back pocket.

I don't think there is much disagreement that investigative journalism needs to employ some under the radar methods to obtain results, but the end must justify the means. And the NI end was as far from a noble one as is possible. Indeed, some of the examples MM uses above are good examples of what has got us to this point. Cecil Parkinson and John Prescott's affairs? Are they really worth the man hours?

the Birmingham Six? What did The Sun have to say about them? On the day of their release the front page headline read LOONY MP BACKS BOMB GANG. An editorial said, 'If the Sun had it's way, we would have been tempted to string 'em up

years ago

Long live a free press, but don't shed any tears for the back of this powerbase

[DJKillaQueen]

It's a difficult balance to get right tho isn't it. The exposure of affairs have little to do with morality and more to do with the hidden agenda of those exposing them anyway....in that context the press abuse power and might also be in the pocket of other persona in doing so. Politics and public life automatically brings enemies (even having any kind of public viewpoint is enough to do that, as we see on this forum even) and when someone is squeaky clean (or thorough in covering their tracks), set ups have not been unheard of.

For me, all that this latest hacking case does is yet again expose the dog eat dog and murky underworld of press, politics and public life. And the personel may change but let's not think that any inquiry will make a hoot of difference to the way these worlds operate in the future. The people involved are ruthless.