Murdoch's News of the World Closes

[Dark0ne]

He threw a pie at him as a joke, he doesn't need to be beaten up.

 

He should be charged with assault possibly, but people need to calm down.

 

Stupid response really.

 

The Murdoch's were there by their own will (they didn't have to be there) to answer questions from some of our MPs on how this all happened. It was an important process that this idiot made a mockery of. He should be given a few months in jail to think about his idiocy in whatever parliament's "contempt of court" ruling is.

[marharth]

He threw a pie at him as a joke, he doesn't need to be beaten up.

 

He should be charged with assault possibly, but people need to calm down.

 

 

He threw a pie at him because he was a left wing crack pot that wanted to make a name for himself with his adolescent friends by assaulting a 90 year old man for kicks. You want to do something brave? Throw one at someone able to defend himself, not someone old enough to be your father or older. What have we got so civilized that we can't punish people for the simple audacity of assaulting elderly people. Should we give the same punishment for someone tripping a 90 year old lady than we do if they had tripped a 20 year old.

He is actually a stupid comedian who was trying to get publicity. He wasn't doing it as a message or anything. I am pretty sure pies don't hurt much, I could be wrong though. The whole pie thing is just a distraction from the real issue in the long run. What if a clown came up and threw a pie at your grandfather as a joke at a circus? Would you start claiming he was a left wing crack pot who needs to be sent to prison for months?

 

To be honest, the pie thing only pisses me off since it interrupted the questions and is now starting to be a bigger story then the scandal. Murdoch shouldn't of even been there on his own will. A massively illegal crime happened within his company, it should be required he at least answers questions. You have to remember that his company did not only invade the privacy of multiple people, it also involves bribing police.

[kvnchrist]

He threw a pie at him as a joke, he doesn't need to be beaten up.

 

He should be charged with assault possibly, but people need to calm down.

 

 

He threw a pie at him because he was a left wing crack pot that wanted to make a name for himself with his adolescent friends by assaulting a 90 year old man for kicks. You want to do something brave? Throw one at someone able to defend himself, not someone old enough to be your father or older. What have we got so civilized that we can't punish people for the simple audacity of assaulting elderly people. Should we give the same punishment for someone tripping a 90 year old lady than we do if they had tripped a 20 year old.

He is actually a stupid comedian who was trying to get publicity. He wasn't doing it as a message or anything. I am pretty sure pies don't hurt much, I could be wrong though. The whole pie thing is just a distraction from the real issue in the long run. What if a clown came up and threw a pie at your grandfather as a joke at a circus? Would you start claiming he was a left wing crack pot who needs to be sent to prison for months?

 

To be honest, the pie thing only pisses me off since it interrupted the questions and is now starting to be a bigger story then the scandal. Murdoch shouldn't of even been there on his own will. A massively illegal crime happened within his company, it should be required he at least answers questions. You have to remember that his company did not only invade the privacy of multiple people, it also involves bribing police.

 

 

Well, I'm sure it wasn't a right wing comedian. His actions were based on his desire to gain fame with the people he associates with.

 

It doesn't matter if the pie would hurt. Have you ever heard of common decency, or is that just a punchline in today's "WHATEVER!" society. You don't do that to elderly people, no matter what you think they've done. Stuff like this is common fare for activists and should be treated with the outrage that it provokes. What's the difference in doing that in the real world and flaming people here. The same result will be gained.

 

As far as his company, his company didn't do anything. A portion of people in a portion of his company abused their offices. Do you really think other news organizations don't do the same thing. Look at all the tabloids over in this country. You think The National Enquirer is a prestigious news paper?

[marharth]

He threw a pie at him as a joke, he doesn't need to be beaten up.

 

He should be charged with assault possibly, but people need to calm down.

 

 

He threw a pie at him because he was a left wing crack pot that wanted to make a name for himself with his adolescent friends by assaulting a 90 year old man for kicks. You want to do something brave? Throw one at someone able to defend himself, not someone old enough to be your father or older. What have we got so civilized that we can't punish people for the simple audacity of assaulting elderly people. Should we give the same punishment for someone tripping a 90 year old lady than we do if they had tripped a 20 year old.

He is actually a stupid comedian who was trying to get publicity. He wasn't doing it as a message or anything. I am pretty sure pies don't hurt much, I could be wrong though. The whole pie thing is just a distraction from the real issue in the long run. What if a clown came up and threw a pie at your grandfather as a joke at a circus? Would you start claiming he was a left wing crack pot who needs to be sent to prison for months?

 

To be honest, the pie thing only pisses me off since it interrupted the questions and is now starting to be a bigger story then the scandal. Murdoch shouldn't of even been there on his own will. A massively illegal crime happened within his company, it should be required he at least answers questions. You have to remember that his company did not only invade the privacy of multiple people, it also involves bribing police.

 

 

Well, I'm sure it wasn't a right wing comedian. His actions were based on his desire to gain fame with the people he associates with.

 

It doesn't matter if the pie would hurt. Have you ever heard of common decency, or is that just a punchline in today's "WHATEVER!" society. You don't do that to elderly people, no matter what you think they've done. Stuff like this is common fare for activists and should be treated with the outrage that it provokes. What's the difference in doing that in the real world and flaming people here. The same result will be gained.

 

As far as his company, his company didn't do anything. A portion of people in a portion of his company abused their offices. Do you really think other news organizations don't do the same thing. Look at all the tabloids over in this country. You think The National Enquirer is a prestigious news paper?

Fair enough.

 

However just because its a part of his company does not mean it is not his company.

[Dark0ne]

Not to defend any actions, defend News Corp, or claim I know whether the Murdoch's did or didn't know about the hacking,but News Corp currently hires 51,000 people. 51, thousand, people. I was watching the MP's questions and a lot of them (and the BBC commentary) were expressing their shock that the Murdoch's didn't know what someone (not the editor, someone lower down the chain of command) in the company was doing. It'd be like asking Bill Gates if he knew that Tom in Human Resources was selling weed behind the bike-shed. Ridiculous!

 

The News of the World was one of hundreds of companies under the News Corp umbrella, and at the very top is Rupert Murdoch, whose only real decision making these days is a yes or no on what company to buy out next. Asking him if he knew what Tom and Dick were doing at the News of the World and then going ape-s#*! when he says "no" is just plain stupid.

 

He was asked if he spoke to his editors regularly and he replied that he'd call them once a week to "find out what's in the news". All the MP's were, once again, shocked. Then on Twitter a couple of minutes later Piers Morgan (who used to be editor of the NotW) backed that up, saying words to the effect of "yes, that's true".

 

How is this shocking to anyone? The owner of a multinational, multi, multi-billion dollar company who is, himself, a multi-multi-billionaire didn't know what some people in one of his hundreds of companies was doing. HOW IS THIS SHOCKING TO ANYONE!?

 

The situation is bad, yes, but it seems that Joe Public is utterly clueless about how these people, who might as well be living on another planet they're so far above us, live, and left-wing publications like the BBC compound this stupid thinking that Rupert Murdoch is some omniscient being who must have known and therefore must burn. He must burn, but for his ignorance (and probably willful choice not to ask too many questions), and not because he knew something he didn't.

[ub3rman123]

So what are they doing to the people who full well knew of the hacking and condoned it?

[HeyYou]

Not to defend any actions, defend News Corp, or claim I know whether the Murdoch's did or didn't know about the hacking,but News Corp currently hires 51,000 people. 51, thousand, people. I was watching the MP's questions and a lot of them (and the BBC commentary) were expressing their shock that the Murdoch's didn't know what someone (not the editor, someone lower down the chain of command) in the company was doing. It'd be like asking Bill Gates if he knew that Tom in Human Resources was selling weed behind the bike-shed. Ridiculous!

 

The News of the World was one of hundreds of companies under the News Corp umbrella, and at the very top is Rupert Murdoch, whose only real decision making these days is a yes or no on what company to buy out next. Asking him if he knew what Tom and Dick were doing at the News of the World and then going ape-s*** when he says "no" is just plain stupid.

 

He was asked if he spoke to his editors regularly and he replied that he'd call them once a week to "find out what's in the news". All the MP's were, once again, shocked. Then on Twitter a couple of minutes later Piers Morgan (who used to be editor of the NotW) backed that up, saying words to the effect of "yes, that's true".

 

How is this shocking to anyone? The owner of a multinational, multi, multi-billion dollar company who is, himself, a multi-multi-billionaire didn't know what some people in one of his hundreds of companies was doing. HOW IS THIS SHOCKING TO ANYONE!?

 

The situation is bad, yes, but it seems that Joe Public is utterly clueless about how these people, who might as well be living on another planet they're so far above us, live, and left-wing publications like the BBC compound this stupid thinking that Rupert Murdoch is some omniscient being who must have known and therefore must burn. He must burn, but for his ignorance (and probably willful choice not to ask too many questions), and not because he knew something he didn't.

 

I tend to agree with you. Not like he can know what each individual employee is doing, every minute....... I think this relates back to the military though, the commanding officer is responsible for the actions of those under him........ Of course, this is never applied universally. After all, was the then president held responsible for My Lai? He IS the commander in chief after all. Rupert is in the equivalent position of his empire...... So, some folks did some bad things. Bust THEM, hold THEM responsible for THEIR actions. If it turns out Rupert had knowledge of their actions (highly unlikely), THEN and ONLY then, hold him responsible for it.

[marharth]

Not to defend any actions, defend News Corp, or claim I know whether the Murdoch's did or didn't know about the hacking,but News Corp currently hires 51,000 people. 51, thousand, people. I was watching the MP's questions and a lot of them (and the BBC commentary) were expressing their shock that the Murdoch's didn't know what someone (not the editor, someone lower down the chain of command) in the company was doing. It'd be like asking Bill Gates if he knew that Tom in Human Resources was selling weed behind the bike-shed. Ridiculous!

 

The News of the World was one of hundreds of companies under the News Corp umbrella, and at the very top is Rupert Murdoch, whose only real decision making these days is a yes or no on what company to buy out next. Asking him if he knew what Tom and Dick were doing at the News of the World and then going ape-s*** when he says "no" is just plain stupid.

 

He was asked if he spoke to his editors regularly and he replied that he'd call them once a week to "find out what's in the news". All the MP's were, once again, shocked. Then on Twitter a couple of minutes later Piers Morgan (who used to be editor of the NotW) backed that up, saying words to the effect of "yes, that's true".

 

How is this shocking to anyone? The owner of a multinational, multi, multi-billion dollar company who is, himself, a multi-multi-billionaire didn't know what some people in one of his hundreds of companies was doing. HOW IS THIS SHOCKING TO ANYONE!?

 

The situation is bad, yes, but it seems that Joe Public is utterly clueless about how these people, who might as well be living on another planet they're so far above us, live, and left-wing publications like the BBC compound this stupid thinking that Rupert Murdoch is some omniscient being who must have known and therefore must burn. He must burn, but for his ignorance (and probably willful choice not to ask too many questions), and not because he knew something he didn't.

Having a big company is not a excuse to not know whats going on inside of it. As the Chairman of the Board of Directors and the CEO he needs to be checking up on his sub companies more often. This scandal has been going on for a while.

 

The news of the world thing did not involve people on the lower scale, it involved people in the higher scale. Its not like some random guy decided to screw with some stuff, it was a deliberate thing that was approved by the higher ups within the newspaper. Also everyone needs to quit acting like it was small employees. It was a large scale scandal with the news of the world leaders knowing all about it. Its more like the president not knowing what general was doing for years, not just a lieutenant.

http://www.newstatesman.com/uk-politics/2010/09/former-reporter-knew-coulson

 

Also, http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/09/phone-hacking-rupert-murdoch-gordon-brown

 

This is more then just a phone hacking scandal, it has to do with bribing police as well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/mar/11/news-of-the-world-police-corruption

Edited July 22, 2011 by marharth

[JimboUK]

Not to defend any actions, defend News Corp, or claim I know whether the Murdoch's did or didn't know about the hacking,but News Corp currently hires 51,000 people. 51, thousand, people. I was watching the MP's questions and a lot of them (and the BBC commentary) were expressing their shock that the Murdoch's didn't know what someone (not the editor, someone lower down the chain of command) in the company was doing. It'd be like asking Bill Gates if he knew that Tom in Human Resources was selling weed behind the bike-shed. Ridiculous!

 

The News of the World was one of hundreds of companies under the News Corp umbrella, and at the very top is Rupert Murdoch, whose only real decision making these days is a yes or no on what company to buy out next. Asking him if he knew what Tom and Dick were doing at the News of the World and then going ape-s*** when he says "no" is just plain stupid.

 

He was asked if he spoke to his editors regularly and he replied that he'd call them once a week to "find out what's in the news". All the MP's were, once again, shocked. Then on Twitter a couple of minutes later Piers Morgan (who used to be editor of the NotW) backed that up, saying words to the effect of "yes, that's true".

 

How is this shocking to anyone? The owner of a multinational, multi, multi-billion dollar company who is, himself, a multi-multi-billionaire didn't know what some people in one of his hundreds of companies was doing. HOW IS THIS SHOCKING TO ANYONE!?

 

The situation is bad, yes, but it seems that Joe Public is utterly clueless about how these people, who might as well be living on another planet they're so far above us, live, and left-wing publications like the BBC compound this stupid thinking that Rupert Murdoch is some omniscient being who must have known and therefore must burn. He must burn, but for his ignorance (and probably willful choice not to ask too many questions), and not because he knew something he didn't.

 

I think Rupert Murdoch said that the News of the World made only 1% of News Corp, he can be forgiven for not knowing everything. James Murdoch on the other hand must of known something was very wrong, he's no fool and wouldn't have authorised huge payouts to some of the hacking victims without good reason. He also appears to have told the inquiry a few porkies.

 

 

So what are they doing to the people who full well knew of the hacking and condoned it?

 

I assume those people are no longer with the company, they have stopped paying the legal fees for Glenn Mulcaire as well.

[kvnchrist]

I find it incredibly amusing how bloodthirsty those on the left get when they think there is blood in the water that has somehow related to anyone that is even remotly attached to Fox News. If this was a more liberal company you could hear a pin drop. I just hope non of them is standing over a extension cord outlet that's plugged in,. With the drool salivating from some of their mouths, They would probably electrocute themselves.