Page 9 | To think Rupert Murdoch should burn in the fires of hell

Laughingstock1991 · 2023-07-12T19:11:04+00:00

Honestly, he’s evil. The Sun & all his press is the absolute worst of the worst. The mostly fabricated story about Huw Edwards was likely timed to cover up tory scandal, bring down the bbc. Boris Johnson STILL has defied a court order & not handed in his phone. This should be the main headline- not destroying a man for his sexual preferences (which weren’t deemed illegal activity anyway) Murdoch is absolute scum. The most morally empty vile arsehole.

StormShadow · 13/07/2023 17:23

Twitter is now full of stories about shit Dan Wootton has done and had covered up, including while he was working at The Sun. I won't link, people can search. There's also a story from Private Eye in 2018 about an unnamed journo there

This is the problem with behaving like they have done with the Huw Edwards story. Whatever one's own view of HE's actions, those of the BBC and the legitimacy of how The Sun covered the story, one inevitable consequence is that their own organisational behaviours are going to be under more scrutiny.

Dumbonellyfant · 13/07/2023 17:28

StormShadow · 13/07/2023 17:23

Twitter is now full of stories about shit Dan Wootton has done and had covered up, including while he was working at The Sun. I won't link, people can search. There's also a story from Private Eye in 2018 about an unnamed journo there

This is the problem with behaving like they have done with the Huw Edwards story. Whatever one's own view of HE's actions, those of the BBC and the legitimacy of how The Sun covered the story, one inevitable consequence is that their own organisational behaviours are going to be under more scrutiny.

Isn't it a good thing for them to be under more scrutiny themselves? For everyone who works in media to be? I thought we were hoping to stamp out the days of covering up for colleagues and celebs

StormShadow · 13/07/2023 17:33

Dumbonellyfant · 13/07/2023 17:28

Isn't it a good thing for them to be under more scrutiny themselves? For everyone who works in media to be? I thought we were hoping to stamp out the days of covering up for colleagues and celebs

Show quote history

The point I was getting at is, they might not feel that way!

Florenz · 13/07/2023 17:42

Laughingstock1991 · 13/07/2023 17:17

@Florenz there kind of is if you mean tabloids- the Daily mirror. It’s just not owned by a megalomaniac who is a threat to democracy.

So why does the Sun influence people but the Daily Mirror doesn't?

Micksdottir · 13/07/2023 18:20

Some on here might do well to check their facts before repeating old canards. That especially means you, the appropriately named Laughingstock1991. Take it from one who knows. 1. There was never a Charlotte Church countdown. 2. as for Sam Fo, she herself maintains that she harassed the Sun to run a topless picture of her once she turned 16, but in fact she was three months shy of 17 when it appeared. As she is now 54, all that took place at a long ago time when thinking was very different and no-one, least of all Sam Fox herself, saw any problem with it. There was, incidentally, almost no word from the public busbybodies, although the readers' reaction was a well-reported Phwoah!! 3. Then there's the Sun allegedly lying about Hillsborough. The Sun simply quoted what the police chief said was the truth about the behaviour of the fans. 4, Just as in the last week the Sun has simply reported what the concerned parents of an apparently vulnerable youngster believed happened between their child and Huw Edwards. The BBC had ignored their complaint and the South Wales police had shrugged it off. So, as it turns out, no evidence whatsoever of any fabrication as Laughingstock rather hysterically claims - rather, their original story seems to have understated what the BBC itself has now claimed has been going on. And, just for the record, the Sun never at any point said he had done anything illegal. 5. Finally, we turn to the absurd belief that Rupert Murdoch has somehow masterminded the Edwards story to cover up the George Osborne email and Boris Johnson's refusal to hand over his phone. Both stories have been widely reported (how else would Mumsnetters know about them - see the irony here?) , including in Murdoch's own papers, and prior to the Huw Edwards story. In the case of the Osborne wedding email, most national newspapers had had the same tip-offs from the same disguntled source over the course of several weeks. . Investigation found the allegations to be malicious, contradictory and without foundation. Even the Daily Mirror and the Guardian, whom you would expect to have seized upon the story with some alacrity, what with their anti-Tory agenda and all, couldn't stand it up. This week's Private Eye (whose own team investigated and found the allegations a non-starter) reports this in detail. As for Boris refusing to hand over his phone, (reported even in his fanzine the Daily Mail, so no press cover-up there) everyone knows he's bluffing. We all know how some Mumsnetters love a good conspiracy theory as much as they love to hate the Sun, but frankly they are barking up the wrong tree...or maybe just barking.

Harrythehappypig · 13/07/2023 18:28

Tabloids have always run stories about seedy behaviour even if legal. I’ve never seen so many objections to it before. I don’t really understand why this story seems to be regarded as so different.

In 10 years time, if the young person then feels it was inappropriate, will everyone say “yes, but you consented at the time so you can’t complain” or will the view be “ok, the power dynamic there sounds like it could well have been a bit off”.

StormShadow · 13/07/2023 18:37

Both stories have been widely reported (how else would Mumsnetters know about them - see the irony here?) , including in Murdoch's own papers, and prior to the Huw Edwards story.

The deadline for the phone handover wasn't until 4pm on Monday just gone, and the HE story broke earlier than that. As such, the story about Boris Johnson being in contempt of court couldn't have been reported prior to the Huw Edwards story, because it hadn't happened yet. That suggestion is, well, absurd.

I appreciate that it didn't come as a great surprise, but even a twat like Boris shouldn't be reported as being in contempt of court on a matter until he actually is.

Festoonedflurryfairy · 13/07/2023 19:36

Interesting tonight on Newsagents podcast that David Yelland, former editor of The Sun, said that one of his first stories in that job was titled “why we should get rid of the BBC” and he said he wrote it purely to curry favour with Rupert Murdoch back in NY and he didn’t even believe in what he was writing!

mastertomsmum · 13/07/2023 20:08

Abhannmor · 13/07/2023 15:52

The late playwright Dennis Potter called his cancer Rupert which is a bit extreme . Cancer can often be cured nowadays .

Depends which one and when you catch it

Original poster

Laughingstock1991 · 13/07/2023 20:35

@Micksdottir is that you Rupert?

OP posts:

Original poster

Laughingstock1991 · 13/07/2023 20:40

Micksdottir · 13/07/2023 18:20

Some on here might do well to check their facts before repeating old canards. That especially means you, the appropriately named Laughingstock1991. Take it from one who knows. 1. There was never a Charlotte Church countdown. 2. as for Sam Fo, she herself maintains that she harassed the Sun to run a topless picture of her once she turned 16, but in fact she was three months shy of 17 when it appeared. As she is now 54, all that took place at a long ago time when thinking was very different and no-one, least of all Sam Fox herself, saw any problem with it. There was, incidentally, almost no word from the public busbybodies, although the readers' reaction was a well-reported Phwoah!! 3. Then there's the Sun allegedly lying about Hillsborough. The Sun simply quoted what the police chief said was the truth about the behaviour of the fans. 4, Just as in the last week the Sun has simply reported what the concerned parents of an apparently vulnerable youngster believed happened between their child and Huw Edwards. The BBC had ignored their complaint and the South Wales police had shrugged it off. So, as it turns out, no evidence whatsoever of any fabrication as Laughingstock rather hysterically claims - rather, their original story seems to have understated what the BBC itself has now claimed has been going on. And, just for the record, the Sun never at any point said he had done anything illegal. 5. Finally, we turn to the absurd belief that Rupert Murdoch has somehow masterminded the Edwards story to cover up the George Osborne email and Boris Johnson's refusal to hand over his phone. Both stories have been widely reported (how else would Mumsnetters know about them - see the irony here?) , including in Murdoch's own papers, and prior to the Huw Edwards story. In the case of the Osborne wedding email, most national newspapers had had the same tip-offs from the same disguntled source over the course of several weeks. . Investigation found the allegations to be malicious, contradictory and without foundation. Even the Daily Mirror and the Guardian, whom you would expect to have seized upon the story with some alacrity, what with their anti-Tory agenda and all, couldn't stand it up. This week's Private Eye (whose own team investigated and found the allegations a non-starter) reports this in detail. As for Boris refusing to hand over his phone, (reported even in his fanzine the Daily Mail, so no press cover-up there) everyone knows he's bluffing. We all know how some Mumsnetters love a good conspiracy theory as much as they love to hate the Sun, but frankly they are barking up the wrong tree...or maybe just barking.

And frankly, he hacked a murdered 13 year old child’s phone. Would you like to add that to your justifications list too? He should have been finished after that & it’s a travesty that hes still peddling his poison.

And your excusing what happened at Hillsborough is grim. It went to the press complaints & it’s regarded as one of the worst periods of press misconduct.

OP posts:

Nellynoowhoareyou · 13/07/2023 22:33

Doesn’t even matter if he rescues kittens ffs 😆 Hitler was veggie!

Rosiesmum23 · 14/07/2023 20:50

Micksdottir · 13/07/2023 18:20

Some on here might do well to check their facts before repeating old canards. That especially means you, the appropriately named Laughingstock1991. Take it from one who knows. 1. There was never a Charlotte Church countdown. 2. as for Sam Fo, she herself maintains that she harassed the Sun to run a topless picture of her once she turned 16, but in fact she was three months shy of 17 when it appeared. As she is now 54, all that took place at a long ago time when thinking was very different and no-one, least of all Sam Fox herself, saw any problem with it. There was, incidentally, almost no word from the public busbybodies, although the readers' reaction was a well-reported Phwoah!! 3. Then there's the Sun allegedly lying about Hillsborough. The Sun simply quoted what the police chief said was the truth about the behaviour of the fans. 4, Just as in the last week the Sun has simply reported what the concerned parents of an apparently vulnerable youngster believed happened between their child and Huw Edwards. The BBC had ignored their complaint and the South Wales police had shrugged it off. So, as it turns out, no evidence whatsoever of any fabrication as Laughingstock rather hysterically claims - rather, their original story seems to have understated what the BBC itself has now claimed has been going on. And, just for the record, the Sun never at any point said he had done anything illegal. 5. Finally, we turn to the absurd belief that Rupert Murdoch has somehow masterminded the Edwards story to cover up the George Osborne email and Boris Johnson's refusal to hand over his phone. Both stories have been widely reported (how else would Mumsnetters know about them - see the irony here?) , including in Murdoch's own papers, and prior to the Huw Edwards story. In the case of the Osborne wedding email, most national newspapers had had the same tip-offs from the same disguntled source over the course of several weeks. . Investigation found the allegations to be malicious, contradictory and without foundation. Even the Daily Mirror and the Guardian, whom you would expect to have seized upon the story with some alacrity, what with their anti-Tory agenda and all, couldn't stand it up. This week's Private Eye (whose own team investigated and found the allegations a non-starter) reports this in detail. As for Boris refusing to hand over his phone, (reported even in his fanzine the Daily Mail, so no press cover-up there) everyone knows he's bluffing. We all know how some Mumsnetters love a good conspiracy theory as much as they love to hate the Sun, but frankly they are barking up the wrong tree...or maybe just barking.

Wow, there is so much to unpick here, methinks you doth protest too much.

To think Rupert Murdoch should burn in the fires of hell