Murdoch 'not a fit boss', say MPs

Murdoch 'not a fit boss', say MPs

www.bbc.co.uk

Rupert Murdoch "is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company", MPs have said.

The culture committee questioned journalists and bosses at the now closed News of the World, as well as police and lawyers for hacking victims.

Its report has concluded that Mr Murdoch exhibited "wilful blindness" to what was going on in News Corporation.

(visit the link for the full news article)

Watching this on the news right now.

They are saying that BskyB may even have its license removed, which will stop it from any future broadcasting of anything.

This is gonna hit someone really hard.. Hopefully the right 'someone and hopefully in the right place(s)...

TV news saying that three top bosses and the murdochs are all guilty of turning a blind eye to the issue before it became public knowledge and of hoping that the turned eye did not turn back during the investigation.

The big question now is what punishment to give them?

I say shut them down completely and jail all those involved.. Take back their assets as part of the punishment and give the wealth back to the people..

the "crunch" statement was that Rupert Murdoch was "not a fit person", adding: "This is a blow to the very heart of the Murdoch empire. They are questioning his integrity, his honesty."

lock him up.. he needs to wake up to what he is a part of..

After initially claiming that malpractice was limited to one "rogue" reporter at the News of the World, News International has now settled dozens of civil cases admitting liability for hacking between 2001 and 2006.

More than 6,000 possible victims have been identified and the police have so far made a number of arrests in connection with an investigation reopened in January 2011 - although no charges have yet been brought.

What more can I say but I'm glad this has come to this sort of ending, I just hope the punishment is swift and severe..

www.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)

Yea right.

The Government going after one of the MSM or the Government trying to shut down one who doesn't play ball.

I don't know the answer but I do know that the intel community and the Police do the same thing as a matter of normal operating procedures. I would prefer to have them in jail.

I smell a rat.

P

Originally posted by pheonix358
The Government going after one of the MSM or the Government trying to shut down one who doesn't play ball.

No, they are roasting a Media empire that for a long time has exercised an extreme influence in the UK and has acted in not only an illegal manner, but also morally reprehensible.

Originally posted by pheonix358
I don't know the answer but I do know that the intel community and the Police do the same thing as a matter of normal operating procedures. I would prefer to have them in jail.

You're not exactly special mate, it is common knowledge (and has been since phones have been around) that the Intel/Police can snoop, but they need a warrant and it's all legal and traceable. If you don't want to attract the attention of the intel/police services then don't get involved in dodgy activities! They won't waste money listening to you if you're of no interest.

reply to post by stumason


Sir, I respectfully say that you are not up to speed on what your Intel organizations or the Police are up to. Warrants disappeared when the anti-terror laws came into effect. The fact that you post on this forum is more than enough to monitor your activities.

I understand that you do not like Rupert's press. I am none too keen on it myself! Never the less, some of what they were accused of has been proven wrong.

What they did was to snoop, and anybody who wants to can do it. It is that easy. Privacy is dead!

If the Government hits too hard Rupert may retaliate in other countries by explaining how many D notices are issued and why they were issued. That would probably bring down the Government. They will not be too harsh!

P

reply to post by pheonix358


They still need a warrant matey.

Even with the new snooping powers being proposed, they still need a warrant.

EDIT: and no, this isn't something anybody can just "do". Aside from hacking voicemails, which to be honest is as much the fault of the idots who kept default PIN's as it is the hacks themselves, intercepting phone calls and IP traffic requires a modicum of technical knowledge and some expensive (and in some cases illegal) equipment.

Why stop there, they should look at the Australia Broadcasting Corporation here in Australia, it had its own shonky business dealings going on when it had its baby company ATVI. Money via advertising sponsorship, for going light on certain political parties, I would bet they all do it!

Where ever there is money and power, we all know if you dig deep enough, you will find corruption of one form or another.

reply to post by marsend


As much as you may want the UK Parliament to investigate ABC, I think the small fact of your independence might ruffle feathers ..

Unless of course it was a generic "they", then of course, given the nature of the rest of Murdochs Empire (such as the FBI inv in the USA) it would stand to reason the whole organisation should be shook down.. Any other MSM's that then think of behaving like this will have an example of what will happen.

reply to post by marsend


We do not know where this could all lead..

We may find that the rolling stone does gather moss and this collected moss is the evidence needed to bring all the dirt into the open..
Apparently there is still a certain amount of evidence that was not submitted to the enquiry, but this may soon suddenly emmerge as the rats start to leave the sinking ship..

It's one of those things where you hope certain events will take place but you can only sit back and watch to see what happens.. Sometimes a cornered rat loses its rational thinking and strikes back..

True as that may be I can't help but find it ironic that MP's have the nerve to question Murdoch's moral fibre when they repeatedly prove that they themselves are completely devoid of any morals whatsoever and are the biggest grouping of amoral, corrupt, self-centred and self advancing bastards that have ever congregated in one place.

Originally posted by Freeborn
True as that may be I can't help but find it ironic that MP's have the nerve to question Murdoch's moral fibre when they repeatedly prove that they themselves are completely devoid of any morals whatsoever and are the biggest grouping of amoral, corrupt, self-centred and self advancing bastards that have ever congregated in one place.

Here here to that!

reply to post by Freeborn


Oh, that is good! Hey, can I borrow that para sometime, it is that good! Star material!

P

From what I understand about mans history, corruption in one form or another has run most, if not all of our societies, this is rather sad, it appears to be systemic in mans nature.

I guess I could see it differently if my family had of killed many of the inhabitants of an island and then enslaved the remainder 500 or 600 years ago, so I could now be King Blah Blah with my woo woo, and all the power and money previously stolen. Its all perspective I guess, but none the less, I see today’s societies full of much the same, but rather covered in sliminess in one form or another. We all know its there, the systems know its there, and everyone is involved in someone way at some point. Heck I understand that the first 12 cops in Aussie were convicts. I get the idea that, this in its self is a pretty big statement.

Lets be honest, if you could do an open audit of all our political, government and business systems, the next round of votes would not be to see who should be running the various countries, but rather how many years should they be serving and or a game of who’s loosing all their stolen or fraudulently gained monies. Where would you end. There are not enough jails to hold the real criminals and that is after you let the 50% out that should not be their already.

Hey stumason yes independence ruffles feathers, but the truth chops heads off. I agree with you, an old Chinese idea, sometimes its best to chop heads of roosters to keep the monkeys in order, I can see some point in this. However the one swinging the Axe should be beyond reproach, show me a man and in most cases I will find you someone who has cheated the rules and is not beyond reproach, hence lays the problem in swinging the Axe.

Extralien lets hope, the www has been a bit of a help in many ways, for all it takes, it also gives I guess. And yes I hope Hendrix was wrong and these stones gather great moss, our systems need to be cleaned of moss and filth, for all of us to prosper and live healthy content lives.

I am pleased to see that this report has come to some robust and actionable conclusions, although I am somewhat confused as to the statement which has come to the fore from that report, which states that Mr Murdoch is not "a fit and proper person to excersize control over an international company". Although this conclusion is one that many of us had come to already, the remit of the commitee which met to discuss the News of The Worlds corperate management of contempt of parliament, does not extend to the level at which a persons fitness to control a company is concerned.

The fact of the matter is that this commitee was set up for a very specific reason, as stated above, and has no business doing the job of Ofcom, in stating that Murdoch is not fit to control his company. That is for Ofcom to decide, in the proper course of events, not for a commitee to even speculate on.

The inclusion of this statement regarding Mr Murdoch's fitness to lead his company, was a bone of contention among the commitee members, with the commitee split down party lines, about its inclusion. I can understand why the Labour members thought it would be an idea to include such a harsh phrase in thier summary of the report, but I can also see why the Conservative contributors to the commitee would have found it impossible to agree with its inclusion, on the basis that stepping outside thier remit, makes the entire report slightly less valid. Of course, there is so much more than just that damning statement within the report, that it is sure to cause MASSIVE shockwaves in the News International/News Corp camp.

Furthermore, if it is found by Ofcom that indeed, the Murdoch's are not fit and proper persons to be running an international company, then there is the very real chance that BSkyB will be prevented from broadcasting in this country, or perhaps the Murdochs may be forced to sell thier shares in the company.

And it is not just the Murdoch's who appear to be on shakey ground just at the moment. According to the BBC news that I was just watching, one of the other people named in the report as having directly mislead parliament, is now the editor at a major New York newspaper... the ripples of this will be felt far and wide, and I for one am happy that this thing has been blown open to the degree that it has.

MP's calling a business man they have had dealings with 'no good' to run a company?
Me thinks Kettle calling the Pot black.

All the MP's are in bed with some form of company or not and this phone hacking scandal is wrong because some self obsessed, self grandising 'celebs' and MP's had the mobiles hacked?

Of course the MP's can order the phone companies to give YOUR details over to them and you have NO say in it whatsoever but as soon as its done to them or whoever is the most recent minute attraction, its all "Oh no, this shouldn't happen" and compensation is paid out hand over fist and the company bosses brought to book.

Set a fair example I say, don't do it to others, and it won't be done to you, make laws that prevent this kind of issue and then don't break them to suit your benefits.

This world is full of hypocrites who jump on any bandwagon, the MP's allowed through backhanders news companies to run roughshod over the public to get 'scoops' and dish dirt so when it comes home to roost maybe they should look closer to home before moaning and wailing about legalities.

Oh god I hope beyond hope that he's forcefully fired and someone who isn't a nutjob is put in his position.

reply to post by cetaphobic


Better than that, they might actually shut him (the company) down or sell a lot of it..

either way, they've gotta take what should be coming ..

reply to post by Extralien


Just a reminder to the American readers, Rupert Murdoch, owner of Fox, is an Obama supporter.

Fox News exists in the US to give the illusion of dissent. All other mainstream media "news" organs support Obama openly.

I'm sure Obama has already been told that he will be re-elected.

Originally posted by Freeborn
True as that may be I can't help but find it ironic that MP's have the nerve to question Murdoch's moral fibre when they repeatedly prove that they themselves are completely devoid of any morals whatsoever and are the biggest grouping of amoral, corrupt, self-centred and self advancing bastards that have ever congregated in one place.

Well damn at least they're trying. I swear, people find a reason to complain about anything. If the media gets free reign to do as they like everyone complains about us living in a mediocracy and governments siding with the rich. Then when the government does a good thing like expose corruption within the media and make an effort to reduce it, everyone complains about the fact that the government has no right to question anyone else when they have been accused of corruption. We've gotta start somewhere. We should be pleased about this. It's at least a step in the right direction.

reply to post by Faulks


Classic deflection tactics.

Murdoch and his cronies take a bit of grief for a while and we all forget about the amoral and unscrupulous scum who run this country.

The reality is that no matter what is said or done at this enquiry nothing of any substance will come of it and things will stay the same behind the scenes.

Maybe I have become far too cynical as I've got older but even though it's a cliche it's true - I have seen it all before!