Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

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:
LeninGrad · 12/07/2011 19:35

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

hammybobs · 12/07/2011 19:36

I think the response from NI re GB story is due to his repeated use of the words 'illegal means' or whatever it was. He's relying on that as his reasons for doing nothing about it i.e. he didn't know at the time what was done involved 'the criminal elements' or words to that effect. So he is basically saying he thought it was 'someone random' who gave out the info about his son. In fairness, he did complain to those who held the info that was obtained, and that was the correct course of action. I'm guessing with hindsight he wishes he did something, but either there were more important issues i.e. the chances of getting re-elected or the fortunes of the party he represented as opposed to the hurt he felt personally about the situation, or the 'dark forces' really were putting the thumb screws on anyone who was considering doing something about it, even the then chancellor.

I think we will see more and more 'joe bloggs' types being dragged out saying I did it, to counter both the illegal actions being alleged and to undermine the moral outrage of those in the public eye who are getting involved in the debate, or who were directly involved i.e. hacked/exposed etc. Why these 'joe public' types would put their necks on the line for either the 'journos' who broke the story or the global corporation that stands to crumble with the weight of this scandal, is beyond me. I mean, another parent whose child had CF felt it their right to give that kind of info to a newspaper? Sheesh, it really does get murkier and murkier with every twist and turn.

LeninGrad · 12/07/2011 19:38

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bullet234 · 12/07/2011 19:39

"Not sure I'm following, of course you compromise your principles if you want to get to the top, which is why I don't want to."

Am bloody glad I don't think like that. I'm sure that you are right and it would be a standard belief of most people who wished to "get to the top". But I would not.

bullet234 · 12/07/2011 19:41

And to be honest it is not so much the abandoning principles, which is upsetting enough. It is the fact that one organisation was able to dictate to someone to such an extent.

LeninGrad · 12/07/2011 19:42

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Hassled · 12/07/2011 19:53

I have nothing constructive to add - just wanted to say keep up the good work; this is fascinating reading.

I don't know what to think re Brown. Yes, he probably should have had the strength of character to go in guns blazing at the time he found out re Fraser. But a) he'd just had some awful news re his son and must have been very vulnerable and b) he would have known that an attack on NI then would have meant he would never have been PM. Presumably he felt, rightly or wrongly, that him being PM would do more good in the greater scheme of things. What I just don't begin to understand is the subsequent relationship the Browns had with RB.

re Ivan Cameron - I suppose the difference is that his medical condition was always in the public domain; there was nothing "sensational" to find out.

Pannus · 12/07/2011 20:01

Well Charlie Whelan who was Gordon Brown's Alastair Campbell is also remarkably quiet. GB was advised by him.... The Thick of It was accurate!

LucaBrasi · 12/07/2011 20:07

Hassled
I hate the smoozhing of Labour politicians with NI. But it's generally agreed in the press that the Tories do it because they have the same political agenda as NI and that Labour do it because they are too scared not to.

Remember the
'If Kinnock is elected today, will the last person in Britain please put the lights out' headline that the Sun ran on the day of the 1992 election? When Blair started as Labour leader in 1994, he had a clear plan to avoid the negative press that had dogged the Labour Part for years. That included courting the Murdoch press in particular. And it worked....to an extend but at a terrible price. I don't think that the press won the 1997 election but the fear was too much not to continue the press smoozhing. It's sad, but it's true.

I don't know what the solution is, but I do know that Murdoch owning 100% of Sky would be a disaster for anything resembling free press in this country. He would certainly go after the BBC - you just have to read James Murdoch's contempt of the BBC in that regard.

And we would be left with Fox News UK.

LucaBrasi · 12/07/2011 20:09

Charlie Whelan has to go when he was clearly the one who briefed against Mandelson, resulting in his resignation, (the first time)

Pannus · 12/07/2011 20:09

YOUGOV POLL JUST OUT: Almost four out of five British people believe that the nation?s tabloid press is out of control, our poll has discovered. The poll demonstrates the extent of the tabloid press?s poor reputation, with nearly three quarters of people expressing the view that tabloid newspapers are ?not fair and accurate? in their reporting.
Even so, more than two thirds of people believe that, in the wake of the still on-going News of the World phone-hacking scandal, it is only a small minority that is tarnishing the reputation of other honest and hardworking journalists.
78% of British people agree with the statement ?the tabloid press is out of control?
While just 14% disagree
71% of people say that, generally speaking, tabloid newspapers are ?not fair and accurate? in their reporting
Just 9% think that they are fair and accurate
69% of people agree that the News of the World scandal represents only ?a small minority of journalists tarnishing the reputation of other honest and hardworking journalists?
While just under a quarter of people (23%) disagree with this statement
'Thank you and goodbye'

Ponders · 12/07/2011 20:12

I did a Yougov poll earlier today, was v disappointed that it wasn't about this, just general political stuff Sad

ThisIsANiceCage · 12/07/2011 20:14

James Murdoch's MacTaggart speech in Edinburgh in 2009.

That link's to the Guardian summary, which has links to the whole speech & BBC response.

Basically Jimmy boy says that the BBC "is incapable of distinguishing between what is good for it, and what is good for the country," and "The scope of its activities and ambitions is chilling."

Which, oddly, is exactly what I think of News Corp.

AitchTwoOh · 12/07/2011 20:19

he looks so much like Herr Flick, i think.

Ponders · 12/07/2011 20:19

I have seen several references to that speech in the last few days, TIANC - chilling in its self-satisfaction

I wonder how the income/budget/salaries of NI & the BBC compare?

Pannus · 12/07/2011 20:20

At the risk of repeating ourselves: WTF is Dave Cameron - and has George Osborne evaporated?

Ponders · 12/07/2011 20:21

they're probably busy sliding through lots of bad news & horrible legislation while our attention is diverted

Pannus · 12/07/2011 20:25

There's a line in "The Eton Boating Song" that goes: "Nothing in life shall sever the chain that is round us now". Ho ho ho

chipstick10 · 12/07/2011 20:26

Its somehow alright for Labour to have been scared but not the torys, wotever. And having mps now taking the moral high ground is really bloody funny.

LucaBrasi · 12/07/2011 20:28

Ponders
there was an article I read about that recently, will try to find it, but needless to say, Sky have much more profit at their disposal - they did have £1 Billion Profit (profit!!!!!) last year. And the good ol' BBC have the tax payers contribtions.

Plus, the BBC have to be 'balanced' in their opinions. Now this has certainly been up for debate in the past, and in particular when Thatcher was well known to apply political pressure and the BBC put ot some dodgy stff Bt generally, they are balanced. And respected all over the world. .

But Fox News is certainly not balanced. A news show which called Obama 'racist' and hounded him re his birth certificate to prove he really was Amercan. And not a Muslim. They are scum.

LucaBrasi · 12/07/2011 20:29

Oh dear, my 'u' key is dodgy too. Might have been the wine at some point!!!!!!

Pannus · 12/07/2011 20:49

Ponders - they're probably busy sliding through lots of bad news & horrible legislation while our attention is diverted
Monsters inc should be the new name for the (have to be) rebranded Conservative party!!

chipstick10 · 12/07/2011 21:00

Fox news are a total joke.

Pannus · 12/07/2011 21:13

Randall - creepy, scary reptile that slides under doors and tries to capture children screaming in Monsters Inc....... Hmm who fits the bill?

ThisIsANiceCage · 12/07/2011 21:14

Ooh he does have that Flicketty Flick look, doesn't he?

He also looks far too much like my first employer, who could lie his way through a four-inch plank while smiling and looking you in the eye. If I've ever met a sociopath, that guy was one.

So I've been trying to compensate and not distrust Jimmy boy just on his looks.

Someone should tell him not to sit on a swivel chair for interviews, tho.

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.