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

[headfairy]

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

"Brooks persuaded James Murdoch to throw the company's weight behind Cameron's Conservatives and the young Murdoch persuaded his father."

blimey - it was Rebekah's idea????

There was an interesting tidbit in one of the Sunday papers today (IoS or Observer, can't remember which).

Apparently, back in 2006 RM was asked what he thought of David Cameron. The short but succint answer was "Not Much".

This side of it is fascinating The hacking journos are minnows really

It is, it's fascinating and appalling at the same time.

"The bravest MP, the man who despite threats has persisted and stood up in parliament and told the truth (despite Blairs best efforts) is Tom Watson."

I do like Tom Watson, especially after the farce that was the DEA.

Reports from Guardian news blog state that RB is at RM's flat in Westminster now.

Oh to be a fly on the wall there...

BSkyB share price is falling so does this mean Murdoch could end up with money in his pocket if the deal goes through as its cheaper than he thought, thanks to the actions of one of the other organisations in his stable (or is it a pig pen).

I think advertisers and the public need to vote with their feet. Cancel Sky TV subscriptions, cancel advertising. Act people!

The government want to delay a decision so the heat has gone out of the issue. Profit is what Murdoch understands, take it away from him. Don't let Rebekah's staying or going become the issue. Tha's where Murdoch wants the story to stay. Take it to where it really hurts. Cancel those subscriptions.

flippinada - maybe some pissed off ex -NOTW journos are hacking into their conversation right now....now that would be some sweet poetic justice....

If we are suggesting reading stuff relevant to this, can I offer Shelley's "Mask of Anarchy" written in 1819 as a response to the Peterloo Masacre in Manchester?

It talks of how all the insititutions of democracy have allowed themselves to be cowed, and pay homage to a titan, until one woman (called Hope) throws herself at the feet of the monster's horse..

A taster, about one-third in, reads:

"Then all cried with one accord,
'Thou art King, and God and Lord;
Anarchy, to thee we bow,
Be thy name made holy now!'

And Anarchy, the skeleton,
Bowed and grinned to every one,
As well as if his education
Had cost ten millions to the nation.

For he knew the Palaces
Of our Kings were rightly his;
His the sceptre, crown and globe,
And the gold-inwoven robe.

So he sent his slaves before
To seize upon the Bank and Tower,
And was proceeding with intent
To meet his pensioned Parliament"

It's all a bit blood-curdling, but speaks directly to current events, and is easy to read. As well as being a nice intro. to Shelley.

charleneanne - out of curiosity, why have you always bought the NOTW? Genuine question, I don't read it, have never been tempted to and just wondered why it was so popular.

Wasn't there some sort of law which prohibited one person/family from owning more than a certain percentage of British newspapers. Also, I'm sure you had to be a British citizen to own a British newspaper, but I think Thatcher did away with that in order to let Murdoch get a toe in.

My memory of this is very vague, but I'm sure that my dad explained it to me when I was about 10, and that it was to prevent any one person from wielding too much power over what the population was told.

Shame it seems to have disappeared to the same place as honest politicians (not that there were ever many of those, of course).

Wouldn't it just donnie

They'll have made sure that can't happen though.

There is a clip of the now deceased playwright Dennis Potter being interviewed by Melvin Bragg doing the rounds on youtube just now - it's a fair few years old. He called his cancer 'Rupert' and is very eloquent as to why!

Blimey....Rupert and Rebekah think it's a hoot!
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013065/News-World-Rupert-Murdoch-Rebekah-Brooks-smiles-day-NotW-closed.html

The arrogance.

\link{\the Dennis Potter interview, from 1994} - it's only 10 minutes, not sure if it's the full interview, I thought it was longer than that (I remember seeing it at the time )

no, it was Denholm Elliott, not Dennis Potter

(& Paul McMullan)

\link{http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=439x1433889\story here}

it was an awful story, but listening I thought he sounded truly repentant (but that was before all his other appearances this week )

all the reader comments at the mail in the most recent pieces have gone unavailable.....gremlins or news international goons?

bkgirl - yes weird my last two posts here just disappeared - they weren't libellous or sweary - but they might get like that having seen Rupes and his gal swanking down Mayfair street with nary a care in the world. I hope Milly Dowler's family are going to give the govt hell - real hell tomorrow.

Pannus, do you mean your last 2 posts on \link{http://www.mumsnet.com/Talk/in_the_news/1255162-The-Murdoch-family-imbroglio2-fascinating-piece-by-Michael-Wolff/AllOnOnePage#26353325\this thread?}

(there are too many NotW threads atm - it gets hard to find the right one )

Ponders ha ha you probably right - I've got RSI from typing all over the shop - so you think I can bring a claim against NI?!

noddy no, i don't think it's acceptable to hack anyone's phone, whether they are a celebrity, politician, dead child or grieving family. And no, given the chance I wouldn't want to listen in to any of them either.

I want the news to be just that... NEWS. Not gossip and shite about who's shagging who. The Shropshire Star story is not an eye opener, it's absolutely the norm for tabloid journalism. Over the last two/three decades some people have courted the press for exposure and therefore money... I think it probably would roughly correlate with the rise of reality stars, but I couldn't give a rats arse about all these people flogging their stories for a quick buck.

Nowhere near the scale of the Shropshire Star story, but I and my family were hounded by the tabloids in the 80s and 90s for being distantly related to someone they found interesting. It was absolutely horrible and the money they offered was insane. But, you really do sell your soul and your privacy if you get involved and if you opt out, then you get nasty lies printed about you instead. Rock and a hard place.

I listened to a Rodio Four documentary a little while back about Kim Cotton, the first woman in the UK to accept money to be a surrogate mother. It was pretty awful stuff and her life was changed completely by it and her relationship with the press.

In truth, I really, really hope that this case and all those that will inevitably come after against those papers who came up high in the Informaiton Commissioner's report from 2006 (don't think it can be ignored any longer) will represent a seismic shift in the way our paper based media reports and behaves.

And yes, boycotting Sky will help to achieve that, as it's the one thing Murdoch cares about right now and if his shares drop and the takeover falls down, his grip on the British press will lessen. It's not right that he should own and influence such a large part of the British Media (nearly 40%) and I will be very happy for that to change for the better.