home

British Hearings Underway: Murdochs to Appear

By Jeralyn, Section Foreign Affairs
Posted on Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 08:12:36 AM EST
Tags: phone hacking scandal (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

All eyes are on British Parliament today where hearings are underway in the News Corp phone hacking scandal. Newly resigned Scotland Yard Chief is being questioned, to be followed later this morning by Rupert Murdoch and his son James, and Rebekkah Brooks.

You can watch live here, or follow the Times' live updates here. All of our major cable news stations will carry Murdochs' questioning live, and when the second committee starts questioning the Murdochs and Brooks, the session is to be online here.

CNN yesterday unveiled live feeds of its tv programming for smartphones. If you have a home cable package that gets CNN, it's free. It took me only 3 minutes to set up yesterday on my iPad and the picture is great.

< Monday Night Open Thread | FBI Raids NY Homes of "Anonymous" Hackers >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    British Hearings Underway: Murdochs to Appear | 10 comments (10 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Curly.. (none / 0) (#5)
    by jondee on Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 03:11:23 PM EST
    Rupert needs a Moe: complete with ballpeen hammer, channel locks, and grease gun (though the last one might be kinda redundant.)

    Civility (none / 0) (#8)
    by bocajeff on Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 06:31:11 PM EST
    At least the tone of civility has risen around here...

    Parent
    Wonder if Parliment is... (none / 0) (#6)
    by ScottW714 on Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 05:19:30 PM EST
    ... the grandstanding comedy our Congress has become ?  That is rhetorical, what Murdock has to do with any of this is beyond me.  I hate the clown as much as the next guy, but trying to hang him on this is pathetic.

    Even I don't think he had any part of this.

    Depends (5.00 / 1) (#7)
    by Ga6thDem on Tue Jul 19, 2011 at 05:53:31 PM EST
    on how far reaching the practice is in his other news organizations. Les Hinton has resigned who supposedly investigated the claims against this particular paper back in 2009 and he's here in the USA.

    Murdoch really runs a sleaze organization but how much this is going to seep into all his other organizations is yet to be seen.

    Parent

    I Don't Doubt... (none / 0) (#9)
    by ScottW714 on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 11:44:00 AM EST
    ... the culture is ripe with this kind non-sense.  But that's not what they are going after, they are trying to link Murdock as some sort conspirator.

    These sleaze ball CEO types always know how to push without getting their hands dirty.  

    Just seems to me like they are going after him pretty damn hard, yet the people who could actually be linked to far worse deeds, never find themselves under and sort of scrutiny of this magnitude.

    Parent

    Murdoch--in the past--has asserted (none / 0) (#10)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 01:01:48 PM EST
    his "hands on" approach. IMO, while following the scripted PR "I know/knew nothing" approach at the Board meeting yesterday did a few things (1) The two Murdochs appeared contrited with in sync "mea culpas" in the most cotrite sense; and, in case the listeners didn't get it, they pointed out how contrite they were for everything they didn't know; and, inserted periodically how all this that they didn't know anything about in now way has crossed the pond to the US (where the right-hand busniseeman Hinton--until his resignation last week--headed the DOW and, as such, owned the Wall Street Journal. (2) By now professing to be ignorant of everything in their companies that they previously knew everything about, the Murdochs did succeed in raising the obvious question for the shareholders, towit: "What the h*** are they doing at the top of that which they say they can't/haven't managed?" And, if they know nothing, it may be that they will lose control of the operation (see now that inquiry is being opened in Australia) of the American corporation, NewsCorp.

    There are numerous issues, concerns raised by the repository of power in such concentrated form--how,as one Parliament Member, that power extends beyond one platform. The sleaze factor of British tabloids is a fraction of what this is all about. If you want to tap into the reason that a government may fall (or is at least threatened), it is not that there is porn or sleaze or plain scandal.... This situation has ensnared Scotland Yard at the highest levels (see Sir Paul's resignation and the #2 Yates resignation the other day as well) in view of allegations that are beginning to look like admissions about accepting bribes from the papers and cover-up and violating other criminal laws regarding use of private info.

    David Carr of the NYT explored, earlier this week, a number of widereaching examples of News Corp buying off/paying high to clear their way, of buying out opposition to shut down disagreement, etc. This is hardnose stuff. (In terms of the style of "know nothingism" & the plausible deniability approach of letting the underlings fall on the sword, this is reminiscent of the Valery Plame up-the-chain deniability--until Fitzpatrick applied the squeeze to move up the chanin.)  Finally: Christiane Amanpour on This Week elicited from her interviewee that the first question asked in newsrooms before front-page stories are aired "Who/where is the source?"

    In short: I think that you minimize the meaning of the Murdoch inquiry.

    Parent

    To ScottW: Please excuse the excessive typos (none / 0) (#11)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 01:11:44 PM EST
    in my sprawling missive above. My emotion about the subject matter--the manipulation of the news and the lines that appear to have been crossed by Murdoch operatives in doing so--is getting to me, I fear. Why? Because it bears every trademark of abuse of power at the highest international level of principal communication mechanisms via inappropriate consolidation of power in a sole personage.

    Parent
    inappropriate consolidation of power (none / 0) (#12)
    by jondee on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 02:20:32 PM EST
    and it's possible Orwellian uses is why the jackdaws of the Right get positivly apoplectic whenever anyone brings up the Fairness Doctrine.

    As if phenomena like the "liberal" NYT catapulting wmd propaganda weren't good enough for them..

    Parent

    The movie: "Page One: Inside the NYT" (none / 0) (#13)
    by christinep on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 02:37:44 PM EST
    Outstanding from many angles. And, yes, the wmd Judith Miller fiasco is treated fairly well in the context of this film. A go-see.

    Parent
    WMDs...... (none / 0) (#14)
    by Rojas on Wed Jul 20, 2011 at 09:22:22 PM EST
    We heard this all through the 90s..... do we need to remind ourselves?
    Take the auditors out and make the claim....mean while, people starve and die.... Was it worth it? Certainly said Madame Albright.....

    Media consolidation, along with everything else, was pitched and sold by the reinventing government bunch.... left... or right or right..???

     

    Parent

    British Hearings Underway: Murdochs to Appear | 10 comments (10 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment