Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

News

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

God, those NoW journos were utter scum weren't they?

2476 replies

headfairy · 04/07/2011 17:02

apparently by deleting Milly's messages her family still had some hope that she might still be alive

OP posts:
AwesomePan · 09/07/2011 17:13

but first I should learn to type....

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 17:17

I did wonder that so NI could collapse under the cost of all the lawsuits that may be brought.

NormanTebbit · 09/07/2011 17:19

I thought Will Self was on the money.

Are the journalists indemnified? That's interesting - We 're not talking about criminal matters but if say Coogan decided to sue for... sue for what? I know journalists can be personally sued for libel.

AwesomePan · 09/07/2011 17:24

Can they? I thought the legal depts. see to the liklihood of prosecution. I would have thought that no journalist would work and print if there was no defense for them IF someone sues for libellous stuff.

Will Self is fine - just wish someone else could speak his words - his whinney sothern accent is a bit of an obstacle for me.....(haven't maanged to drop 'epiphenominal' into a convo yet..)

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 17:26

I don't think there would be many libel suits as a result of this because hacked phones produce facts I suppose. It would be the act of having your phone hacked which is illegal .A lot of the 'stories' are true it is just the methods of sourcing that is illegal

franke · 09/07/2011 17:28

Did Will Self argue that the MD hacking was the natural progression from sleb hacking and was driven by market demand? If that's the case then I don't agree.

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 17:30

No I don't think he did.

gramscisgirl · 09/07/2011 17:32

to hell with them all in a hand cat. NOTW was a loathsome rag, vilifying the the disadvantaged and celebrity alike while making money from a gullible gossip hunger public. Newspapers are an outdated mode of communication, to hell with them all in a hand cart. Newspapers are mediums to influence rather than inform.
The smug Guardian do their own dirty deeds like sucking up to the big pharma and big dr while they try to crush complimentary practitioners mainly women under. Lest we forget the libel case by the chiropractors against Simon Singh his costs were paid for by Guardian.
Gone are the days when the guardian was a nice middle of the road newspaper, it's the smug middle class nerdy boys club. MN have taken a few low swipes by the SMCNB's club. I've boycotted the Guardian and Observer for over two years as have many other complimentary practitioners and users of natural medicines.

franke · 09/07/2011 17:32

Oh ok then I'll stop labouring my misplaced point then Smile

NormanTebbit · 09/07/2011 17:39

Yes you can be sued personally although there's little point - much better to sue the nice fat media organisation the journalist works for.

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 17:40

I think it is like anything you become hardened to it. When you first see over seas disasters etc on tv you can't take your eyes off them and are shocked and horrified but the more reporting you see the less it affects you and it is quite easy to switch over and get on with your day. I am sure the phone hacking was like that. The first time they did it and were successful i bet there was a huge rush of fear adrenaline and self disgust in all likeliness but like anything I am sure it became run of the mill and the enormity and vileness of what they were doing left them.

NormanTebbit · 09/07/2011 17:42

Alkthough - I think the onus is on the journalist to prove what he writes is true - and if the truth is obtained through illegal - possibly criminal means that makes it all a bit tricky.

Although I might be wrong - I studied that stuff a looooong time ago

Nancy66 · 09/07/2011 17:44

Phone hacking definitely was part and parcel of getting a story for a while on NOTW - and i know plenty that did.
But any journalist that continued to do it AFTER the royal/Clive Goodman scandal was bloody stupid - ever hack I know that might have employed those tactics in the past certainly has not done so for 5 years or more

NormanTebbit · 09/07/2011 17:44

I think you are right Noddy - coupled with a very macho atmosphere and bunker mentality.

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 17:48

Nancy do you think it was just the NOTW?

Nancy66 · 09/07/2011 17:50

I KNOW it wasn't....!

sonearsofar · 09/07/2011 17:50

Another reason to appreciate the Guardian:

'The smug Guardian do their own dirty deeds like sucking up to the big pharma and big dr while they try to crush complimentary practitioners mainly women under. Lest we forget the libel case by the chiropractors against Simon Singh his costs were paid for by Guardian.'

Thank God they supported a journalist who had a writ issued against him by The British Chiropractic Association for writing an article that criticised them. Another blow for justice and free speech.

franke · 09/07/2011 17:51

"Yes you can be sued personally although there's little point - much better to sue the nice fat media organisation the journalist works for."

Depends what you want out of it. The British Chiropracters sued Simon Singh personally rather than the Guardian because they figured he wouldn't be able to afford it and would therefore withdraw all his comments (long story short). Little did they know...

gramscisgirl · 09/07/2011 17:53

Hacking illegal, paying police and then receiving money illegal. Standing up in court and saying that you didn't know anything about paying police for information when you are found to have done just that is perjury. Having a top barrister won't change those facts for NI past employees.

gramscisgirl · 09/07/2011 17:57

Guess the Guardian readers amongst MN will always defend from the right wing

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 18:01

I didn't think so nancy. So I suppose this will all be exposed as those who have lost jobs won't be able to resist spilling

NormanTebbit · 09/07/2011 18:05

Common sense would tell you that if the NOTW was doing it, they all must have been because the competition for stories is so intense - logically you would think that as journalists move frequently from one paper to another, it would quickly become the norm.

noddyholder · 09/07/2011 18:08

Well obviously common sense would but I am surprised that no one has come out saying X paper also did it in an act of sabotage for other papers and to take the heat off the NOTW

Empusa · 09/07/2011 18:10

"Common sense would tell you that if the NOTW was doing it, they all must have been because the competition for stories is so intense - logically you would think that as journalists move frequently from one paper to another, it would quickly become the norm."

What I found interesting was on Newsnight they showed the results of a report which said that the top newspaper for trading in confidential personal data was the Daily Mail, with NOTW coming up 5th.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread