Les tricoteuses

[ThisIsANiceCage]

New thread to continue from God those NoW journos were utter scum weren't they?

Nancy what's the atmosphere like at the DM? are some people looking a bit uncomfortable?

RB saying she is detracting from the issue just makes her sound big headed. I really dislike what I have seen of her.

not to mention that she meant distracted

Yay, Ponders. it made me want to kick her on the leg.

This illiteracy probably makes her ideal for any stratospheric role at NI.

Murdoch Junior next, I hope.

However, I am left with the feeling that someone else will arise to promote the idea that ordinary folk should vote for certain people, without telling them that they are the very people who will ensure the really, really rich get to make even more money.... (Money talks).

The real danger with the Sky bid was that Sky is 4th biggest ISP. Murdoch wanted to integrate papers/TV/internet - and has been lobbying to be allowed to differentiate over access to websites. So punters would get a good deal on their Sky footy, and fast access to Fox and Sky News, but would no longer have fast access to inconvenient bloggers or (dare I say it!) MN.

"I am writing to update you on the actions we have been taking as a company to solve the problems at News International relating to the News of the World"

Jimmy boy is still trying to locate the problem comfortably within NOTW.

Graun has done a deconstruction of Bekky's statement. (Dear god they must be mainlining speed to keep up with this lot - not just reporting but analysing.) About to read that now.

teej I hope you're right but unfortunately too many of the voting public read one paper, one source of information and take it as read. Unfortunately too many of those papers are the Mirror, Express, Sun and NoTW..

nancy having worked in media with lots of highly placed women (my sister included) I have zero respect for the ones that think in order to succeed as a woman in this industry you have to become a ball busting macho psuedobloke. I think it's bollocks that you can't get to the top if you're a decent person and retain uniquely female characteristics. I'm particularly suspect of women who get to the top by shafting other women and schmoozing the men. To me that means they have absolutely no talent and just an accommodating t**t (sorry to be so crude).

OK, the only bit missing from the Graun deconstruction is that she apologises "As Chief Executive", ie it's not personal but as holder of this office I'm taking responsibility for others' actions.

Whereas in fact she was editor and made day-to-day decisions to do these things eg personally called the Browns to say they were running the story regardless.

People keep asking who does their PR? Would it be Matthew Freud, wife of Elisabeth?

Thanks for the Guardian link Cage.

Did you notice this?

"My resignation makes it possible for me to have the freedom and the time to give my full cooperation to all the current and future inquiries, the police investigations and the CMS appearance."

Guardian comment: "Trying to run the company while facing multiple legal, regulatory, criminal and parliamentary attacks must have been increasingly impossible. This clears her to concentrate on the defence strategy. It presumably means that she stays on the company's payroll. She confirms that she will still be appearing before the Select Committee next Tuesday.

Blimey, is this true??

I can't quite frankly fathom why the woman has not been thrown to the wolves! She no doubt has something on them.............

What I don't understand is why Coulson and the other bloke have been arrested about it and yet she hasn't - perhaps they will be rethinking this?

Many years ago I worked for a paper, the women in the higher roles were feared and had a "teflon" coating - always blaming those below them for any errors etc etc, bullying and mainly unpleasant. I actually believe there is a different breed of human being, they are not female or male but a third more ambiguous sex. Infact perhaps if they were men they would turn into psychopaths or sociopaths. My thoughts only from my experience with dealing with them however from all reports of this woman she is and never has been someone to respect and I for one would be very sad to be put into any sort of category of similarity with her and that includes going as far down the line as being a woman!

I heard Jeremy Vine (not vile!!) yesterday discuss the fact that this is our "watergate". I don't remember Watergate, however there is no way that this scandal can be brushed under the carpet, the tentacles reach far and wide and now that other countries have become involved it will be impossible for them to return to any sort of glory (I hope). However at the same time I feel quite a compounding sadness that this could well be the end of other iconic newspapers from around the world - The Times, The Sunday Times, The Wall Street Journal etc, they have been around for a very long time and it is a bit like seeing a national heritage property be damaged irreperably. I hope someone with morals is able to snap them up with glee and give us unbiased journalism if there is such a thing.

Sadly there is the whole sky issue too. I say sadly as we don't recieve any tv reception whatsoever and are not in an area to recieve cable. DD will sorely miss Ben and Holly and Peppa Pig!

"every dog has its day, and i suppose, rebekah brooks is that dog." from milly dowler's family lawyer

Oooch at that from the Dowlers. They are quite unhappy, aren't they?

Yeah, sayanything, I'm puzzled by that as well.

Ben and Holly and Peppa are both on Channel 5. Who needs SKY? Wouldn't Freesat cover you?

snigger

sayanything I think RB needs to be explicitly asked whether she is still on the company's payroll and what her contractual exit terms are with NI. The first thing I thought when I heard she'd resigned was but is she no longer being paid, or how much is her executive pay-off? I wouldn't be surprised if she's on some super-duper deal and then it raises qns about being paid for her silence/as a scapegoat. There's been some talks about certain people being given immunity for the committee so.....if she's as hard and as duplicitous as rumours have it she could take the money AND take the immunity AND cast the blame far and wide. But if she is Murdoch's daughter then she will take the money and the immunity and be the scapegoat. Jeez....am definitely going to have to free up Tuesday at this rate...

It's all far too murky for words Spartacus.

Damn and blast it, I'll be several time zones away on Tuesday, hope I'll be able to watch the Commons' show. Although I fear it may be disappointing, if they all say they can't comment on anything pending the inquiry.

The Graun's deconstruction has missed out one major point. Namely Brooks reference to the threat to press freedoms. Under current laws the British press gets a good amount of liberty and, as a woolly minded lefty liberal I am all for that . What Brooks and co were doing was to work outside the law in cases of giving money to police officers and to act unethically in cases of phone hacking where there was no real public interest.

gilberta nope freesat doesn't work here it does occasionally work but very unreliable, have been told there is nothing that we can do about it. However perhaps someone will purchase it who has better morals! (One can live in hope!)

Bullet234 Agree with you about concerns about stifling free press. From a legal angle, "in the public interest" is going to become far more defined throughout the judicial inquiry and will probably end up defining the boundaries of privacy rights.

Which survey was it again that showed even the Guardian had between 100 - 200 'incidents' and Daily Mail was at about 800+ with 58 staff involved? From what I've read DM stopped these practices after first inquiry (so circa 2003? 2005?) but we'll see...but presumably the judicial inquiry will be casting its net wider than News Corp.

TBH US prosecutions for bribery and corruption are compliance/regulatory breaches and should not impact on the judicial dealings with our issues but I do worry that if we're not careful we are going to lose the initiative to deal with this to the US in a way that is appropriate for our people who have suffered at the hands of News Corp.

Just saw Andrew Neil's tweet that non-NC shareholders of BSkyB are getting together to ask James Murdoch to step down.

Wow. Revolution from the inside. That will set the cat amongst the pigeons. But for the other major shareholders to retain their value they have got to fight Murdoch on his 'scandal management plan' because he's driving down the stock price.

Did anyone listen to the Profile of Murdoch on R4 on Saturday? Am just off to find it on iplayer.

I'm encouraged by the fact that several sets of people keep mentioning the rest of Fleet St, too.

Hacked Off (Hugh Grant, Dowlers etc) are focusing on this for one reason.

The non-fake Sheikh and occasional other News Corp folk for another reason.

It's all good.

I worry those stupid, grandstanding MPs are going to prejudice the ability of police ( I know, but we must hope) and the judcial enquiry to get the turds prosecuted for what they did. I'd much rather people went to prison than got humiliated by a Select Committee.

that's my fear too eldritch. Exactly what jurisdiction does a select committee have? Can statements made there be admissable evidence in an ongoing case, or will anything said potentially damage a case?

Who are they on trial/answerable to in a select committe hearing? What's the point of them?