marharth Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I posted multiple links that showed Murdoch was directly involved, as well as some other links that showed it wasn't just a small time employe. I believe that post is on the previous page, if anyone wants to read it. @Granny, THEY SHOULD be brought up on charges for tanking the world economy imo... Articles are back on page 7. All they show is that Murdoch tried to bury the investigation after it came to the attention of various folks. Nowhere does it state that he knew it was going on at the time it happened. True, a fair collection of higher-ups at NoW are currently implicated, one of which was given a government position..... Ooops. I suspect that there is yet more fecal matter to hit the rotary oscillating device before all is said and done.But he tried to bury it up, doesn't that mean that Murdoch IS involved in some suspicious activity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I posted multiple links that showed Murdoch was directly involved, as well as some other links that showed it wasn't just a small time employe. I believe that post is on the previous page, if anyone wants to read it. @Granny, THEY SHOULD be brought up on charges for tanking the world economy imo... Articles are back on page 7. All they show is that Murdoch tried to bury the investigation after it came to the attention of various folks. Nowhere does it state that he knew it was going on at the time it happened. True, a fair collection of higher-ups at NoW are currently implicated, one of which was given a government position..... Ooops. I suspect that there is yet more fecal matter to hit the rotary oscillating device before all is said and done.But he tried to bury it up, doesn't that mean that Murdoch IS involved in some suspicious activity? On that, you will get no argument. Though, the question at hand, I thought, was If he knew what was going on AT THE TIME IT WAS HAPPENING. He obviously knew about it after the fact...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marharth Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I posted multiple links that showed Murdoch was directly involved, as well as some other links that showed it wasn't just a small time employe. I believe that post is on the previous page, if anyone wants to read it. @Granny, THEY SHOULD be brought up on charges for tanking the world economy imo... Articles are back on page 7. All they show is that Murdoch tried to bury the investigation after it came to the attention of various folks. Nowhere does it state that he knew it was going on at the time it happened. True, a fair collection of higher-ups at NoW are currently implicated, one of which was given a government position..... Ooops. I suspect that there is yet more fecal matter to hit the rotary oscillating device before all is said and done.But he tried to bury it up, doesn't that mean that Murdoch IS involved in some suspicious activity? On that, you will get no argument. Though, the question at hand, I thought, was If he knew what was going on AT THE TIME IT WAS HAPPENING. He obviously knew about it after the fact......But can we all agree that Murdoch is definitely involved with the scandal in a bad way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted July 25, 2011 Share Posted July 25, 2011 I posted multiple links that showed Murdoch was directly involved, as well as some other links that showed it wasn't just a small time employe. I believe that post is on the previous page, if anyone wants to read it. @Granny, THEY SHOULD be brought up on charges for tanking the world economy imo... Articles are back on page 7. All they show is that Murdoch tried to bury the investigation after it came to the attention of various folks. Nowhere does it state that he knew it was going on at the time it happened. True, a fair collection of higher-ups at NoW are currently implicated, one of which was given a government position..... Ooops. I suspect that there is yet more fecal matter to hit the rotary oscillating device before all is said and done.But he tried to bury it up, doesn't that mean that Murdoch IS involved in some suspicious activity? On that, you will get no argument. Though, the question at hand, I thought, was If he knew what was going on AT THE TIME IT WAS HAPPENING. He obviously knew about it after the fact......But can we all agree that Murdoch is definitely involved with the scandal in a bad way? Most certainly. He was doing a classic version of the CYA dance. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonbird Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 I think that the whole left wing/right wing aspect of this may be relevant in the US, where Murdoch is associated almost exclusively with the Right Wing, but I don't think it applies to the core story in the UK. The Guardian started digging in on this story way back when Murdoch's papers were still supporting Labour, didn't it? The Telegraph is usually considered right wing, but has been covering it pretty much as heavily as The Guardian, and with a similar slant, once the main story broke at the beginning of July. I think it's more about worms turning than hypocrisy. There seem to be plenty of politicians on both sides who simply realised that this was finally the moment to get their revenge on someone that had they had been forced to kow-tow to for years, or who had been threatening them for years. The fact that it's the Tories who are being embarassed is just bad luck for them - if it had broken a few tears earlier it would have been Labour, as both parties have been either in bed with Murdoch, or afraid of him, for far too long. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JimboUK Posted July 26, 2011 Share Posted July 26, 2011 http://www.businessinsider.com/piers-morgan-recording-hacking-2011-7 Oh dear, it looks like Piers Morgan has some explaining to do. I doubt his employers at CNN will be impressed. @dragonbird Yes the Guardian have been digging away at this for quite a while but their coverage has been completely one sided, you'd think the previous Labour government had never met anyone from News International if you only got your news from them. The Telegraph have their own reasons for bashing Murdoch, they've been fighting the BSkyB deal from the off and aren't likely to stop while there is still a chance the deal could go through in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aurielius Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share Posted July 27, 2011 I think it's more about worms turning than hypocrisy. There seem to be plenty of politicians on both sides who simply realised that this was finally the moment to get their revenge on someone that had they had been forced to kow-tow to for years, or who had been threatening them for years. The fact that it's the Tories who are being embarassed is just bad luck for them - if it had broken a few tears earlier it would have been Labour, as both parties have been either in bed with Murdoch, or afraid of him, for far too long. I have a tendency to agree with you, the entire spectrum of parties have had to kneel to Murdoch and this is payback..the hyenas always gather around the wounded leopard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeyYou Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I think it's more about worms turning than hypocrisy. There seem to be plenty of politicians on both sides who simply realised that this was finally the moment to get their revenge on someone that had they had been forced to kow-tow to for years, or who had been threatening them for years. The fact that it's the Tories who are being embarassed is just bad luck for them - if it had broken a few tears earlier it would have been Labour, as both parties have been either in bed with Murdoch, or afraid of him, for far too long. I have a tendency to agree with you, the entire spectrum of parties have had to kneel to Murdoch and this is payback..the hyenas always gather around the wounded leopard. I rather like the way you put that. :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grannywils Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 Ditto on the above post, HeyYou. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dragonbird Posted July 27, 2011 Share Posted July 27, 2011 I'm not sure about describing Murdoch as a leopard. Leopards are pretty awesome. Maybe hyenas around a wounded giant rat? :) On The Guardian's reporting back at the beginning, the "excuse" I would give is that it wasn't so political then, so it was media-bashing rather than politician-bashing. But it sounds like you're in Britain, and I'm not and I only skimmed the articles back then, so I'll take your word for it. Why was the Telegraph more anti-BSkyB than other newspapers? I can understand the Beeb's interest, but not the Telegraph. I do remember the Telegraph (and other traditional print media) slagging-off the Guardian for keeping on about the hacking last year, but that seemed to be based mainly on media fears that digging up dirt about Murdoch wasn't in their interest because of possible regulation. Everyone has their own agenda on this, of course, but The Guardian's still coming up cleaner than anyone else. It's interesting to hear the views in these forums though. I've been getting "public opinion" mainly from the comments sections on the online press sites, which is probably not that representative. My sister back in the UK doesn't seem that interested. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now