News of the World phone hacking scandal

IdleRich

IdleRich
Don't think there is a thread on this yet but it looks as though it's finally all starting to come back and bite them on the ass. Should be good fun to watch all this come out. Main thing though is, what the fuck have the police being doing, it's been clear from the start that there was more to it but they've consistently declared the investigation closed and insisted that there was nothing more to be done. I don't get how they were allowed to do that when everyone could see that they were turning a blind eye to a crime that was committed by people right in the public sphere and related to the new government. Who makes these decisions and how have they been able to blatantly act against the public interest for so long?
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
I'd like to know the NOW take on the latest revelations as well. Apparently they wrote an editorial congratulating the police on their correct decision to close the investigation earlier and, of course, they severely criticised their criticism from a select committee just before Christmas. Guess they won't apologise for any of that.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
I've been talking to myself about this over here for some time now.

Nick Davies – author of Flat Earth News and Guardian's prime mover on the case – talks a lot in FEN about the cosy relationship between tabs and cops. They buy tales of celeb wrongdoings from the police (something Rebecca Brooks admitted, then later denied at parliamentary select committee - no wonder they wouldn't let her back for another hearing) and in turn get tip-offs on NotW stories about crime. And of course Andy Hayman, original inspector on this case, has now left the force and writes an occaional column for.....The Times.

But yes, it doesn't fully explain it - house of cards time now. Just a question of how much will there is to pull the whole thing own. There have been suggestions that Edmondson has ben hung out to dry – no legal fees, no gag money, unlike Mulcaire and Goodman – so NotW is now desperately trying to present itself as a responsible law-abiding publisher. Ain't gonna wash.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
As a side note, Cameron was pitiful on this on yesterday's Today - he went on about giving Coulson a second chance, as if they'd taken him on straight from a Young Offenders Institution. Refused to confirm or deny that AC had offered to quit, even though his own spokesman had officially denied it just that morning.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Edmonson was gonna shop him.
How much mileage to you think is left in it?

On Coulson? Not much.

On NotW? Plenty. Lawsuits will be crashing in over next few weeks.

Incidentally, utterly shameful stuff from Adam Boulton, repeatedly trying to equate NotW phone-hacing with Guardian's use of wikileaks. Just mindboggling bullshit.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
"On Coulson? Not much."
Do you reckon? Isn't there a chance that he's perjured himself? Depends on what comes out in the near future I guess.
I guess it can't hurt Cameron any more though.

"On NotW? Plenty. Lawsuits will be crashing in over next few weeks."
Yes, yes, yes. What about the Met?
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Do you reckon? Isn't there a chance that he's perjured himself? Depends on what comes out in the near future I guess.
I guess it can't hurt Cameron any more though.


Yes, yes, yes. What about the Met?

fuck, fuck, fuck, just lost long post, so here's abbreviated version

My guesswork:

This story got its fuel from Coulson's position.

So who'll push it now?
Labour have their head-on-a-stick now he's gone and will want to avoid all-out war with RM.
Police don't want to investigate cos they look dodgy as fuck and some of their number could be sacked/jailed.
BBC doesn't want to be accused of anti-Murdoch agenda so will take its cue from the press.
The Guardian has done a great job but is a marginal paper which others are loth to follow. Many (esp. the Mail, the single most powerful paper in the country) also have too much to protect.

Even though the number of suing celebs will stoke the fires, ultimately a lot of people are gonna think this is a victimless crime.

Many rich people will get a lot richer from pay-offs and the odd trial, NI's fingers will be financially scorched and AC will stay out of jail.

And no coppers will be damaged in the course of this investigation.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
But surely they can't keep doing out of court settlements at a million pounds a pop - which means it's likely that someone will take them to court right?
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
But surely they can't keep doing out of court settlements at a million pounds a pop - which means it's likely that someone will take them to court right?

Don't see why it would keep being £1m a pop - previous cases got that much cos NotW were trying to keep the story buried.

Now it's out, so it's a case of gauging damage done to individuals. There's also an issue of institutional culpability, but pursuing that would be a massive decision.

I dunno. I hope I'm wrong, but the way I see it you've got the govt, the police & the most powerful media company in the land on one side, one small but noisy leftie paper on the other, and the remainder of the press in the middle anxious for an excuse to look the other way.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Don't see why it would keep being £1m a pop - previous cases got that much cos NotW were trying to keep the story buried.
Fair point - although I guess they must be pretty sick about the useless hush money they've already paid.
 

hucks

Your Message Here
the remainder of the press in the middle anxious for an excuse to look the other way.

Why's that? Genuine q. Why shouldn't the mail or the telegraph want to damage Murdoch? Although I agree that so far everyone has just been looking the other way. Don't get it.
 
Last edited:

crackerjack

Well-known member
Why's that? Genuine q. Why shouldn't the mail or the telegraph want to damage Murdoch? Although I agree that so far everyone has just been looking the other way. Don't get it.

According to Flat Earth News the Mail was probably the most prolific corruptor of the police on Fleet St, so much so Paul Condon ordered an internal inquiry into relations between some of his officers and the paper.

And not just the police, but social security officials, phone companies etc. Here's a quote:

As one Mail veteran put it to me, "If the Mail go for you, they get every phone number you have dialled, every schoolmate, everything on your credit card, every call from your phone and from your mobile. Everything."

No suggestion the Telegraph operates that way, though it was interesting how during the MPs expenses scandal, the fact they'd paid £300k for stolen info (which sfaik is illegal) was almost never mentioned, probably cos it would've looked terrible for the political establishment to be seen trying to shoot the messenger.


edit: *not suggesting the ends didn't justify the means in the MPs' expenses case

The broader point is that when it comes to issues of press behaviour they tend to close ranks, much like any other institution. This story would've have gone anywhere without Nick Davies. It'll be interesting to see how many, if any, press awards he picks up for it.
 
Last edited:

crackerjack

Well-known member
Alastair Campbell:
The four big issues flowing from yesterday are 1. Cameron’s judgement in appointing Coulson when it was so clear the News of the World phone-hacking story would unravel. 2. The growing sense of industrial phone-hacking by the News of the World and the reputational battering News Corp will take as more and more private cases are mounted against them. 3. The seeming desire of Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt to waive through News Corp’s attempted buy-out of BSkyB without proper consideration – let me warn him that will be a disaster if he does, not least for him and Cameron and 4, the growing stench surrounding the police handling of this, which will go centre stage as it emerges how much they knew and how little they investigated.

The talk is of Coulson today. But as things stand I would say that points 2, 3 and 4 are where this scandal is now headed. Cameron’s judgement will be tested once more when his government is forced to decide upon 3.

http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blo...confront-cameron-hunt-murdoch-and-the-police/
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Peston's got the goods.

Money shot:


In this context, it matters that Mark Lewis - the solicitor who obtained a whopping settlement from the News of the World over the hacking of the phone of Gordon Taylor, the chief executive of the Professional Footballers' Association - is preparing cases for clients alleging unlawful breach of privacy against media groups other than News International.

I spoke to Lewis yesterday, and the allegations of his clients are pretty hair-raising. Which implies that those other media groups (and they know who they are) should probably be conducting thorough internal reviews, to ascertain just how liable they may turn out to be.

Not to over-dramatise, this has all the potential for the newspaper industry to turn into its version of the MPs' expenses scandal.
 

crackerjack

Well-known member
Television does this to people. It raises them to a plane of imagined grandeur. What has this to do with the pair insulting Sian Massey, the assistant referee at the Wolves-Liverpool match, in a leaked exchange that arrives while Gray is suing Rupert Murdoch's News of the World over the phone tapping scandal? The point is that if either has a warning siren in his head alerting him to the folly of parading stupid prejudices at work then it has been knocked out of service by a life in football and TV.

2nd person (after Campbell) I've seen speculate about a possible link between Gray suing NotW and the leak of his stone-age sexism.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2011/jan/24/richard-keys-andy-gray-sky
 

hucks

Your Message Here
That is a fantastically catty article. "Gray and Keys, who are unpopular with many viewers..."
 
Top