to think that the entire country should boycott NoW?

[cricketballs]

I can't believe the headlines from the last 2 days; I thought he Milly Dowler story was bad enough but to target the Soham girls as well is beyond contempt. Infact I can't remember a story that has got me so angry in years.

I honestly believe that the entire country should boycott the paper and see their sales achieve 0 on Sunday

I have never bought a Murdoch paper and never subscribed to Sky so a boycott is pretty easy for me, but I support the sentiment!

80's - I'm sort of wondering if boycotting all NI services is exactly what I want to do or if its better to focus on the parts exhibiting bad practice. For instance, Sky news is widely reckoned to be a decent news service; The Times and Sunday Times are (AFAIK, and correct me if I'm wrong) no worse behaved than the other broadsheets and do some good investigative journalism.

Grimma me too, though I can see it's open to charges of rationalising on my part. I do also think it's a lot less practical and achievable to get a boycott going on a wide scale because Murdoch owns so much (never mind Sky, is everyone going to never watch a Simpsons episode again as well?) It will be easier to focus on not buying the paper(s) and on persuading advertisers to withdraw support. Also sends a clear message to other papers. But I can see a lot of people feel differently and want a larger-scale withdrawal, which I won't argue against if they feel strongly.

YANBU. I actually feel ill thinking about it.

NormanTebbit Wed 06-Jul-11 12:49:18
I think the Daily Mail is being quite shy about this story. It's quite far back in the paper today and usually they would jump at a chance to give a good kicking to a media rival.

My thoughts exactly.

With the introduction of its online paper and the apparently ever increasing demand for miserable, nasty (and fallacious) copy, the DM will stoop to whatever lows it deems necessary.

What happend at the NotW is the result of a depraved and corrupt culture in which you are only as good as your last story, morality is a a dirty word, and nothing matters but breaking a story, the more sensational and shocking the better. If you work in such an atmosphere for long enough, you will eventually betray your values and go over to the dark side. It's either that or leave.

I see several advertisiers are pulling out of the paper. Excellent. The only thing these appalling people understand is when cold hard cash starts seeping out of the door.

I personally feel it would be unfair on staff at other Murdoch organisations - Times, Sky, the Sun etc - to boycott them just because of dodgy goings on at the NoW. We have to remember that 99.999 pc of people in the Murdoch empire didnt have a clue this was going on. Why should they suffer?

Yanbu. I don't have Sky but am trying to wean myself off The Sun online.

maurice - that's like saying let's not boycott SA when they were still living under apartheid because most of the people living there didn't support it.

Anyone who takes money from Murdoch and his corrupt empire doesn't get a lot of sympathy from me frankly

lashings - hear hear.

YANBU

Rebekah Brooks has begun her investigation into Rebekah Brooks? involvement in the News Of The World phone hacking scandal by telling Rebekah Brooks that Rebekah Brooks is completely innocent. But its ok because: News International have revealed they will stop at nothing in their efforts to find a plausible scapegoat to take the blame for the News of the World hacking scandal.

I don't give money to Murdoch and will continue not to do so

Haven't bought a Murdoch paper for years, partly in principle, partly because they are all rubbish. Even the Times is nothing more than a comic these days.

I am usually a great believer in free press and freedom of speech, but this is just . There is absolutely no justification for it. i am sure that many many people were aware that it was going on, and I can't imagine that regulation is the answer.

I agree that the only language these people understand is sales - so that's where they should be hit!

I read the Guardian anyway, but I'll be sticking to those news outlets who have been able to report freely on this issue because they are innocent of such tawdry practices: the Guardian, the Independent, the BBC. The phone hacking scandal has been bubbling away for THREE YEARS. How many redtops have you seen run with it in that time? How about the Times? Wait a moment! You haven't, because they've bloody well been doing it too.

Now imagine if it was the BBC that had been caught doing this? We don't have to look too far - remember Sachsgate? Or the way the tabloids reacted in the Baby P case?

When the Guardian first broke the story, Rebekah Brooks accused the Guardian of lying to the British public over this issue. Hmmmmm.

I urge people to seriously investigate other providers of satellite television. Sky is Murdoch's cash cow; by paying for it you are assisting in the slow destruction of the BBC and the creeping stranglehold this man has over British media. It'll be the internet next - everyone should google 'net neutrality' and see what plans he has for that. When we're all paying fortunes for limited net service it'll be Murdoch who is behind it.

"from my understanding the majority of the money comes from very rich investors so i doubt losing sky would have much impact on them"

Nope. The majority of the money comes from tv rights. To lose them would crush the teams. However if Sky somehow lost the rights someone else would take their place and pay similar rates because the premiership is such a bankable asset at the moment.

I have no doubt that all newspapers engage in practices - like digging through bins, etc - that may raise eyebrows, but serious investigative journalism does sometimes require such practices. I accept that. But employing a PI is not in the same league, the same planet, the same UNIVERSE as instructing that PI to engage in illegal behaviour, interfere with criminal investigations, and pay off the police for information (the corruption of the police is a whole different story here - I have no doubt this was not done without their knowledge).

I think there's a clear line to be drawn between those papers who have participated in hacking phones, and those who have not. The Guardian aren't especially noble - if they'd hacked phones their silence would be deafening as well.

Another Liverpool supporter here.

I don't give money to Murdoch.

I do have Sky, though

I do like the Times and the Sunday Times though.

Seems a bit mean to punish their employees for the behaviour of other 'departments' of this organisation.

Rebecca Wade should stand down and there should be an independant inquiry.

Agree entirely Reeling. There is a sense, however, that people want to use this as an opportunity to really stick one over on Murdoch - simply because so many people dislike the guy.

I ready boycott these newspapers due to the reporting of the hillsborough disaster but how will we know which advertisers to boycott as we all won't be buying the paper?!

It's very sickening - scumbag's the lot of them

The NOTW did not engage in bribing police without the knowledge and agreement of the people at the top. Murdoch runs a contemptible organisation, where morals are left in the bin by the door, whatever part of the business. You don't think there are shady deals going on in other parts of the business? Utter naivety IMO.

Yes boycott - also on news tonight that parents of soldiers killed in Afganistan also suspected of being targeted by NoW.