Phone hacking scandal gets serious

Politics and the media have become indistinguishable...news management, that's all it is. Maybe the moral of the story is for politicians not to recruit from News International. 'We are determined to end it' but why were they doing it in the first place?

Nick, Edmondson Is the tip of the iceberg Ray Chapmans tapes we'll be explosive If Murdoch don't get too them first ! .
By Steve Grayson former investigator / photographer

The Guardian and other papers are hoping that NotW will be made an example of and that their methods of obtaining scoops are not questioned!

Fair play to News Int. they are finally dealing with the issue. Query why it has taken so long.

But lets be clear about it - this is a strategic withdrawl. It will be interesting to see where they try to draw the line in the sand and who it is they try to protect. I am probably just a sad little blogger but I would be interested to know what (if anything) Rebekah Brooks knew about phone hacking. Is anyone going to ask her?

Why not allow a group of us nondoms, tax exiles and non-UK
nationals run the British media? We have your interests at heart, we
really do.

"Tonight Downing Street moved to distance the prime minister from this scandal, insisting that he had had no conversations about the subject when he met James Murdoch and a senior company executive for dinner over Christmas." - Nick @ zero

Yes I'd hate to think Mr Cameron is in any way involved in something as potentially murky as this. Surely he isn't - could easily become our "Watergate" otherwise and nobody wants to see that.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Gosh No. 2 are you real and what do you really know? And Nick how do you know that Coulson will not be linked to the Edmundson's activities - Has Murdoch told you so. I find it difficult to accept that at no time the Editor said to the News Editor "That's a really extraordinary piece of information how did you get hold of it?" Indeed you might argue it is the editor's duty to ask such a question.

How much would you expect Mr Edmundson to be paid not take his story to the Guardian?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

So why did Coulson pick that precise moment a few days ago to resign?

It's a mystery.

Totally innocent I'm sure.

What an ongoing disaster this shabby government is.

Our very own Watergate?

Come on moderators stop watching Andrew Neil, back to work please.

This whole affair reeks of posturing,obfuscation and deceipt. We need to know the whole story from pre and post election "private discussions " between the Prime Minister and The Murdoch empire and what deals were done, through to the phone tapping scandals and why News Corporation is being manoeuvred into a successful take over of BSKYB by the Government. Did any information from phone tapping get fed to The Conservative Party in the build up to the General Election? Immediate reference to the Competition Commitee should be mandatory. Why did Coulson get the job with Cameron and why did he resign just before the phone tapping scandal erupted again-did he hear something on the media grape vine?
News Corporation should not be allowed near any more of our media or if it is allowed to buy BSKYB it should be made to sell a number of its currently owned UK newspapers.
Anyone else want answers to these questions ?

Journalism is a very competitive business and in this case, our Nick is way behind the Peston curve.

Anyway, the essence of this story is phone tapping.

You are all aware that via the Lawful Intercept equipment that is at the heart of every phone provider in the country, potentially every single phone call can be tapped.

But as it is the Government doing the tapping and they don't leak information (sic) .... that is ok.

Given that perspective, this story seems a bit out-of-context i.e. naughty hacks on behalf of various news organisations, crack the answerphones of some celebs and politicians and pick up some tittle-tattle.

Yawn.

It bothers on professional malpractice and we only know about celebrities and politicians. I am very certain, ordinary members of the public have also had their phones hacked into. How will they know?

Number 14 you are number 1

Just to go back to Millicent's prescient comment, it is very true that the media and politics is peopled by individuals who have shared more than a good story - they went to the same schools, colleges and shared library staircases at Oxbridge. Hoping Andrew Neil's programme shines a light in the appropriate mouldy and dank corners. By the way where did Peston and Robinson sojourn?

As I sat back and heard our Presidents speech last night I was really taken back by what he had to say. He came across as sincere, honest and forthright to me. Just about everything he said I agreed with, the anger, name calling, killings just made sense to me.
I took a good hard look at that this morning, as I was reading the comments on WCCO, Fox, Star and Tribune, CNN, and KSTP. I looked at what people were writing and what I have written in the past. I was not that person who I thought I was, I was also writing the name calling and we are better than you crap just as I saw from the others.
I went to my email and it was full of the same kind of hate and disgust for my fellow Americans. My first email was from the American Tea Party asking me to call Michelle Bachmann and tell her she does not speak for the Tea Party? I sent them an email back to take me off their list. My second was from the Minnesota GOP telling me how wrong and evil President Obama is. My third was from the Minnesota DFL telling me to support our President on all fronts, and not the Minnesota GOP. I also sent them emails to take me off their lists.
Yes we need to watch where our money goes, and cut back on the spending. I think all parties would agree to that, but this hatred for each other has to stop.
If there is one wonderful thing that I got out of the Presidents speech last night it was we need to come together. We need to some how come together and work this out, or we will fail as America, not Americans but America. Our great country will go down in the history books as not the Great Society, but as the Worst Society.
We as a country have come so far where only white men ruled to a place where anyone can become President. We came from working the ground with a horse to feeding the world. We came from having a wagon train on the Nebraska fields to putting a man on the moon. We came from hitting the beaches of France to helping the survivors of an earthquake in Haiti.
We have done so much when we come together, and yet we push each other away when it comes to helping this country grow as a nation.
I can’t set here and not wonder what our founding fathers would think of us at this point in our history. Do they look at us as little children crying for what’s in it for me? or do they look at us as failures for what we have become. Ether choice I am not proud to be part of, but I have been both.
When I was a child growing up in St Paul my father always told me people have something to say and it’s important to hear them, today I think I really heard him.
I don’t know where to start, but I do know this. I will listen more to what others have to say, and I don’t mean just glance over it but to take it to heart as what my fellow Americans mean.
[Personal details removed by Moderator]

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Oh the irony of it! - a news organisation that has traded on the exploitation of people's misery and privacy and has paid scant regard to political correctness especially with regard to women has seen the light and is coming clean.

An act of remorse - I doubt it, more worried that their business interests here and abroad may suffer as the tide turns against them. I would hazard a guess this is a cold clinical business decision and they won't care who gets caught in the cross fire.

Tonight as the scandal amplifies and Murdoch senior flies in for damage limitation, I will repeat my comments in an earlier blog, and a couple of replies from other bloggers.You will probably guess who they are.

I wrote:-
."It`s a big event because of its economic and political ramifications.No-one knows tonight where it will lead.It is fairly certain there was a police cover -up,who authorized it and why? What is the relationship between members of the political elite and the police? Neither you or I know,but however it unfolds it`s a major story because it impinges on police impartiality, judicial independence and the political role of News International.

They are all big players,this could become the political story of the new decade."

One replied:-"Probably the same people who bumped of Princess Di." In other words I was promoting a conspiracy theory.

And another: "It`s not her fault,she watched the Godfather..from her latest paranoid offering..."

They were not angry that someone had different views ,merely uncomfortable their complacency was being challenged.They should be even more uncomfortable tonight.

It's not phone tapping, it's phone hacking. They are very different.
One involves listening in to conversations. The other involves illegally accessing voicemail messages.

And congratulations on the hight levels of sanctimony.

"....a news organisation that has traded on the exploitation of people's misery and privacy."
ALL news organisations exploit someone's misery by the very nature of reporting news.
The relatives of the 9/11 victims were fairly miserable . . . should that not have been reported?
And by those standards, the BBC's extensive coverage of the Haiti earthquake was pretty exploitative. Another close-up of a child dragged from the rubble, anyone?

And please, no more sub-sixth form wailing about Murdoch ruining democracy. His newspapers and TV stations are popular because they give a large proportion of the population exactly what it wants - showbiz tittle-tattle and lurid tales of sexual derring-do.

Is it just me, or do other people find the whole narrative of this investigation unconvincing? Including the police investigation. The statements from government and opposition. Even the way the media itself has covered it. Is there a cover up going on, and someone being protected? Has the judgment been formed that some things need to stay hidden, and are too costly to disclose, or too damaging? And so, is the whole investigative process orchestrated? This affair, and the police's irresolution, just smell of suppression of truth.

Sorry but I must ask. What is this story doing on the Political Editor's blog?

Okay so Andy Coulson was editor for some of the time when some of the hacking may or may not have gone on. This has been investigated and he was not found to have had any direct or indirect involvement.

Andy Coulson was, until last week, DC's spin doctor or Communications Director. He isn't anymore.

'Has been' Labour politicians are saying they don't trust the Met to conduct an investigation (pots and kettles, methinks!) and are making loud protestations which get widely reported now but when, as is likely, no evidence is found there will be no retraction just an eventual 'well of course, the Met investigation was flawed'

I won't go into the fact that thsi was the same Met that investigated many MPs, current and former, expense claims and found that there was insufficient evidence likely to lead to a conviction. I also won't point out that insufficient evidence is not the same as they were innocent of wrong-doing.

The original conviction was of the Royal Affairs editor of NOTW. I don't read the tabloids but my guess is that what sells more copies is the titilating information rather than a prince's view on reductions in NHS spending.

So where, apart from trying to embarrass David Cameron and the Tories, is the political angle? Coulson was hired after his stint at NOTW and has stepped down as that period of his life is rearing its potentially (and it is only potentially by all accounts, including the above) ugly head.

Is Coulson accused of any wrong-doing - hacking for example - while at No. 10? Didn't think so. Therefore no political angle.

Oh but what about DC's judgement, I hear you ask.
Well, let's look at what occurred. DC needed a Communications Director. Coulson seemed eminently qualified - experience wise. Coulson had no convictions and no investigations pending against him and to all intents and purposes had a clean record. So where is the poor or bad judgement in hiring a qualified and innocent man?

Can I remind those of the left persuassion of the glasshouse in which they live? Mandy? Cash for honours? And a whole host of other shaming incidents during their 13 years in 'power'. 'nuff said?

Let's leave this story to the crime or media reporters. Let's get this blog back to 'politics' - Control Orders, spending reductions, Jobless numbers, Voting Reform

In all of the hubbub about the hacking of phones and such, why is it that the 'Guardinistas' and those of the Left see it is okay to publish illegally obtained material such as Wikileaks but not okay to publish illegally obtained material gained through a phone hack.

Surely both are equally wrong?

On a related subject.
Julian Assange seems to have asserted that he doesn't want to go to Sweden, to face charges related to alleged sexual assaults, because he fears being extradited to the USA.

So questions for those of the Left.

Can you provide examples of when Sweden has been accused, in say the last 100 years, of being a reactionary state that doesn't respect the rights of human beings? Hint. If you use Wikipeadia then don't type in Sweden, Reactionary, illiberal in your search string

Can you explain how people regularly say that the US/UK extradition treaty is biased and abused by the US and why Assange would want to stay in a country (the UK) where most people would percieve that the risk of a successful extradition application (if one was made) would seem to be considerably higher?

Could it be that in the UK, the media conflate the extradition to Sweden story with Wikileaks and his being some kind of hero, whereas in Sweden the media might just focus on the actual story about the sexual assault allegations?

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

4.Cassandra wrote:
Fair play to News Int. they are finally dealing with the issue. Query why it has taken so long.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Fair play & Murdoch don't mix Cas'.
The Dirty Digger knows that this one is bigger than his Hacks are letting on & wants to carry out a damage limitation exercise to try & protect what little reputation he has.
He hoped that it would all blow over, but it hasn’t.

Was Brown’s phone being tapped or not, & if so where was the information being channelled?

This whole thing could turn out to be a UK Watergate & it’s a lot more serious than some here are making it out to be – stay on the case Nick.

Do we really want the Murdoch empire to interfere with our Democratic process any more than they already do?

Perhaps the Digger thinks that his intervention in this matter will help sway the BSB deal – I hope not.

I am trying to recall which broadcasting outfit caught Gordon Browns indiscretion in Rochdale.

Glad to see this whole sleazy saga is finally being investigated, and I hope some light is shed on why the police have been so reluctant to follow this through before.

This government are too far entwined with News Int, and what with Couldson resigning last week, Jeremy Hunt's strange decision to fall over backwards with Murdoch senior, and Cameron's frequent meetings with Murdoch junior, it is fast becoming a cause for concern.

News International's sudden 'concern' about all this is wholly dubious, and probably linked to getting control of SKY.

I hope Nick and the BBC stay on this one.

In Plato's The Republic, he wrote that there are really only three kinds of men - lovers of wisdom; of honour; or of gain. Murdoch dropping the annual trip to Davos calling in all his top people, I wonder which RM thinks Cameron and / or Hunt are? Checking BSkyB and NewsCorp share prices, market appears to have made a call.

"Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt said on Tuesday he would consider unspecified proposals put forward by News Corp to alleviate competition concerns before deciding whether to refer the proposed deal for a full, six-month competition inquiry" K Holton 24 Jan 2011.

I wonder what those who work at sky news are thinking? I wonder if they are thinking about the cuts for welfare and workers rights in quite the same way? I would guess it will only be a temporary measure before they work out a way to get it all resolved post the deal, so no real need to worry, and business can go on. Another thing for the Business Secretary not to preside over, far too biased, rather keep dancing.

Quite obviously Rupert Murdoch's interest is to make it easier for Jeremy Hunt to act in his favour. The sexism on Sky is another example of where the Murdoch empire is trying to look good. A guilty plea always leads to better treatment. However is this any different to Tescos or Sainsburys making donations to schools in an area where they want to build a store at the expense of a row of local shops and more traffic?

It is the world we live in.

This is proof positive that Rupert Murdoch is the real PM of this country not David Cameron who is completely beholden to him as evidenced by the shenanigans over his bid for BSkyB. Cameron must think that we are fools not to be able to see this (but then again it is evident in all his actions that he thinks this anyway)
Coulson will not be implicated in the probe as Cameron will have requested Murdoch to keep his name out of it albeit is it inconceivable that he did not know and was complicit in it.

N.o.w Just the tip of the iceberg! Steve grayson

My simple question:

How much information obtained from phone hacking was given to Cameron?

23. At 00:25am on 27 Jan 2011, Sertorius wrote:
"It's not phone tapping, it's phone hacking. They are very different.
One involves listening in to conversations. The other involves illegally accessing voicemail messages.
And congratulations on the hight levels of sanctimony.
"....a news organisation that has traded on the exploitation of people's misery and privacy."
ALL news organisations exploit someone's misery by the very nature of reporting news.
The relatives of the 9/11 victims were fairly miserable . . . should that not have been reported?
And by those standards, the BBC's extensive coverage of the Haiti earthquake was pretty exploitative. Another close-up of a child dragged from the rubble, anyone?
And please, no more sub-sixth form wailing about Murdoch ruining democracy. His newspapers and TV stations are popular because they give a large proportion of the population exactly what it wants - showbiz tittle-tattle and lurid tales of sexual derring-do."

If you haven`t read this before,allow me me repeat an edited version of an earlier post of mine when the story broke this week:-

I sometimes think that the original sin of the right is not the profit motive but complacency.It`s the Bourbon tendency of the relatively comfortable and established who ignore the shouting at the park gates until they`re sitting in the tumbril on their way to the Place De La Revolution.

It`s a failure of political imagination,the inability to see the interconnectedness of events and to form a picture of their possible course.

Why is the Coulson resignation a big story? Because it pokes into the grubby heart of power relationships in Britain where money buys power through the control and dissemination of information.It has a cast of thousands,more than one newspaper is involved,there`s the Met,News International and its corporate ambitions,cover ups and lack of proper scrutiny,huge pay-offs to buy silence,journalists running scared and you think it`s unimportant!

This story has legs,it will run and run.

"29. At 04:08am on 27 Jan 2011, poorpeasant wrote:
I am trying to recall which broadcasting outfit caught Gordon Browns indiscretion in Rochdale."

I'm trying to recall which politician went around calling someone a bigoted old woman when he thought no-one was listening.

I'm amused by various "nothing to see here" comments. It's not hyperbole to say that this affair impinges on the way we are governed and policed.

Of course, we have long known of the distortion of democracy wielded by a foreign media owner. However, when we learn that his chief executive has not only refused to appear before a parliamentary committee, but made barely veiled threats against members, we have to concern ourselves that a particular organisation considers itself above the law.

It also seems likely that this organisation was able to subvert the law by using its too cosy relationship with individuals, some at very senior levels, working for the Metropolitan Police.

A pox on your house all the other media organisations shout while scuttling around trying to ensure their own houses appear in order. How long before another is caught up in this and will the flood gates then open?

The only ones who are sitting thinking that there is an opportunity to make some hay out of this are those who either are totally in the clear or those who have the dirt to dish.....

No change there then.

I don't really care about this issue of phone hacking at all and nor do most of the public from what I can gather. I am as sick of hearing about this, as I am about the football reporters who have been sacked or left or whatever. All people are sexist, men and women, in fact women can be worse when they get together. A lot of recent adverts are sexist against men. Are we seriously saying that it is a surprise that football in general is sexist. I am sure this woman who has worked in the football world of men for a long time, is not surprised at all. As soon as she can prove she can do the job as well if not better than a man, she will get more support from men than women, I can tell you. Go with a woman to the hairdressers and you will soon find out what being sexist is. The media seems obsessed with these kind of stories when there are much more important ones.

If there has been phone hacking it is a job for the police. Though I have to say looking at most of the people who complain of being hacked, whoever was doing it must have been bored to death.

If you don't like newspapers don't read them, its a free Country, just. Britain has gone mad.

36 "I sometimes think that the original sin of the right is not the profit motive but complacency.It`s the Bourbon tendency of the relatively comfortable and established who ignore the shouting at the park gates until they`re sitting in the tumbril on their way to the Place De La Revolution.

It`s a failure of political imagination,the inability to see the interconnectedness of events and to form a picture of their possible course."

Is that what you sometimes think? Do you discuss it at dinner parties?

This failure of political imagination on the right. Why don't you enlighten us? Surely you've enlightened your husband? Over a nice glass of wine?

We're all in the dark, unable to see this interconnectedness, which you obviously see...yet you won't tell us! You don't shed the light on us poor people who are too busy working to sit back on our comfy sofas and tut as we read the Guardian and wait for the collapse of the current order.

You keep hinting yet supply no details.

Why? Why do you keep telling us how little we know and yet refuse to fill in all that's missing in our knowledge with your wisdom?

Have mercy on us, oh wise one, when are these tumbrils going to start rolling? How long have we got left?

well well well!!!
politics and the media, I wish they would stop pretending to "oppose" each other and admit there symbiotic arrangements.
We have the freedom of the press, only if the politics allow it,
We have no long range spy planes left (well they are in kit form).
we have no aircraft carriers left (again in kit form)
we only had one fixed wing aircraft with the ability to use our dinky aircraft carrier, the harrier (now also in kit form!!).
Our "nukiller" deteriant is obsolite (and so i have been told, can't be launched without the launch codes from the americans anyway!!!)
The "elected" politican's have there self interests, and ONLY there self interests, to serve.
The un-elected civil servants tell the politcians what to do (and say)
The voices of the common people have been ignored for over
two generations.
When will we raise the white flag and admit defeat to anyone wishing to use our "green and pleasent land".
How long before the aircraft carriers with red flags arrive to offer us "assistance" with our economic growth???. (or will it be the "torch bearers" of freedom who feel it is time to "assist"?)
I really feel for the armed forces, soldiers e.t.c. who put their very existance "on the line" for english values, (well it should be).
With such weak leadership from the politicans, and an un-healthy obsession with "cost cutting" to save there own incomes.
Please someone, ask the people what they want, and dont leave it up to the "elite" to tell us.
Bankers ruin the money flow, politicans help the banks by "bankrupting" the country, The bankers help the politicans and their relatives, The politicans leave the bankers alone to "sort their own houses out!!".
Everyone wins!!! (if you are a banker or a politician)

Personally, other than the admittedly huge point of legality, I'm trying to differentiate listening to someone's answerphone messges to going through their bins. It's what journalists do. I'm surprised anyone's surprised that they did it. Equally, I can see every editor saying that they wanted a story and that they didn't want to be told how the hack got it.

If I were a celeb, I'd shred everything before it went in the bin and tell people to assume that everyone is going to hear any message they leave on my answerphone.

He didn't say "old", Andy (37), you're gilding the lily. Although she was quite old.

Re NOTW, really grubby operation which has been getting grubbier in recent years. They do turn up the occasional story we benefit from knowing about but that's dwarfed by an ocean of salacious, privacy-violating tattle tittle. Not stocked in my local newsagent, I'm pleased to report. Have to walk quite a way to get it. Still, good exercise.

Cameron insisted 'that he had had no conversations about the subject when he met James Murdoch and a senior company executive for dinner over Christmas.'

Wouldn't you just love to know what they DID talk about?

I'm sure they'll be plenty of scape-goats and tokenist lambs to the slaughter! At the same time those that really prospered with these acts simply fade away into a nice comfortable retirement! Just like the ones that got away in the HOC & HOL, or the great many financial organisations that have wreaked havoc, throughout the world.........

"44. At 09:44am on 27 Jan 2011, sagamix wrote:
He didn't say "old", Andy (37), you're gilding the lily. Although she was quite old.

Re NOTW, really grubby operation which has been getting grubbier in recent years. They do turn up the occasional story we benefit from knowing about but that's dwarfed by an ocean of salacious, privacy-violating tattle tittle. Not stocked in my local newsagent, I'm pleased to report. Have to walk quite a way to get it. Still, good exercise."

I read the Sun when I'm in my local Chinese take-away as they have it on the counter. "mushroom foo yung" I order. Who am I kidding? It's an ommelette. And I order chips too. Good hang-over food once your appetite returns.

Anyway, when was it Murdoch became the devil incarnate for you lot on the left? Oh, yeah, when he stopped supporting Labour. Up till then he was tolerated. Murdoch goes to see Blair at no. 10. No-one bats an eyelid. Murdoch goes to see Cameron at no. 10. All of a sudden it's proof that Murdoch is running the country.

Is there any concern that this may spread throught journalism and possibly emcompass the main Television Channels?

At 09:06am on 27 Jan 2011, AndyC555 wrote:
"29. At 04:08am on 27 Jan 2011, poorpeasant wrote:
I am trying to recall which broadcasting outfit caught Gordon Browns indiscretion in Rochdale."
-------------------------------------------------------------
I'm trying to recall which politician went around calling someone a bigoted old woman when he thought no-one was listening.
==============================================================
Dunno, Andy. Too busy trying to remember which future PM and austerity fan was promising to match Labour spending plans as late as 2008.:)
Back on the topic and in the light of recent developments, do you think there is any connection between NI's urgent need to come clean and trying to negotiate the aquisition of BSkyB as soon as possible and without reference to a 6 month investigation? Do you think it is credible that the referral does not go ahead without seriouis damage to the reputation of the current government?

Maybe finally people will start to see the undemocratic nature of press and media corporations such as News International. I have never trusted the motives of Murdoch and would never trust his hypocritical newspapers such as the Sun, which continue to preach anti sexist morals whilst still retaining topless pictures on page 3. As for this voice mail hacking scandal. It shows the lack of any morality associated with that class of investigative journalist and their seniors who are just out for headlines to sell their old fashioned fish and chip wrappers.

I would expect it is widespread in all areas of media not just NOTW. Do you seriously think the Police and Security Services do not use these methods their selves

The one aspect of this I find that is not being aired is the individuals resposibility in this for not setting the voicemail password from the default one for their phone.

If I left my front door open and went out, I should not be suprised if someone came in and read my mail. Yes it is a crime but I must bear some responsibilty for that crime being perpetrated by providing opportunity to the criminal.

This then questions the abilty of some MP's enbroiled in this, around security of knowledge they have, if they have not set a voicemail password, even more incredulous if GB was hacked, where were the myriad of SpAd's and security services then.

"As soon as she can prove she can do the job as well if not better than a man, she will get more support from men than women, I can tell you." - SC @ 40

Well actually she's pretty much done that, Susan. Got a MASSIVE offside call spot-on in the Liverpool Wolves match - led to a goal for the reds. Was quite funny because the "boys" on commentary, thinking she'd got it wrong, were all set to tear in, then the slow motion replay showed the truth. It'll probably go down as one of the very best calls ever made by a football official in the history of the game. Highlight of the match, for me. Maybe the whole season.

Very surprised (and a little disappointed) to see you supporting phone hacking by tabloid journalists, by the way. It's almost as if you're not bothered about people's bread-and-butter liberties. Bet you'd be upset if someone (other than you) was listening to your voicemails.

I wonder just how high the knowledge of the phone hacking went. I would like to know what (if aanything) the respective editors of the News of the World (Andy Coulson, Rebekah Brooks nee Wade and Colin Myler) and the Sun (Rebekah Brooks nee Wade and Dominic Mohan) say they knew about phone hacking. So far it is only poor Andy Coulson that has been forced to answer that question.

Here is an extract of the News International CEO's (Rebeka Brooks nee Wade) written evidence to the Parliamentary Committee:

1. Please confirm the earliest date that Glenn Mulcaire was paid by News International.

... the earliest payment News of the World can find on its records either to Glen Mulcaire or to NXXX Consultancy is September 2001. I understand that there is a record of a payment to GXXXXX IXXXX Services Limited ... on 20 April 2000 and this is the earliest date that records show.


4. Was Glenn Mulcaire ever commissioned by News of the World whilst you (Rebekah Brooks nee Wade) were Editor?

I became Editor in 2000 after the date on which the payment referred to in the response to question 1 above was made.

Now is it just me or does it seem like the answer to 4 does not ibn fact answer the question?

We now know Mulcaire was commissioned while Ms Brooks nee Wade was editor of the News of the World. What was he paid to do?

32 Boilerbill

"Quite obviously Rupert Murdoch's interest is to make it easier for Jeremy Hunt to act in his favour."

But has it made it easier for Jeremy Hunt? VC did well to get out the way of this poisoned chalice and cetainly wouldn't want to be JH being on the receiving end of the Murdoch's trusted helpers, should he have the bottle to block the aquisition.

Meanwhile in the real world apart from a spin doctor and a couiple of Sky sport presenters another 50,000 lost their full time posts this month.

At least we now know why Coulson quit last week,
Even tho he's not named as part of this new allegation, his name is intrisicly linked to Phone Tapping and will be used by the opposition at every oportunity
His poition in number 10 would rapidly have become untennable,
at least now there is some distance and the PM's office can attemt to brush Coulson off as old news

Having worked for News International as an interim for several months I know that when they say they will "root out and hunt down anyone involved" they mean it.They are ruthless, when they have to be.They will not, however, let it touch Cameron because he is their boy, eventhough I am sure the practice of hacking would certainly have been known about at the top of the NotW.

We HAVE to get away from these unelected people who seek to influence our lives for their own advantage. We need a proper democratic system with no appointed worthies; a second chamber with removable, accountable, elected members in it and a root and branch clean out. We are wholly disempowered, led by the nose and simply a part of the game they are all playing.

Visit the Republic website where some of us are campaigning for an elected head of state and the scrutiny based, transparent, constitutional apparatus that goes with it. Help us de-activate this select tier of influence.

https://www.republic.org.uk/

If the Digger is going to root out phone-hacking from News International titles you can be sure he's going to take their opposition down with them. Every tabloid in Britain has indulged in phone-hacking (it's very easy) and I suspect some of the grander broadsheets are not entirely innocent either. But will it be enough to save his BSkyB bid?

"when was it Murdoch became the devil incarnate for you lot on the left? Oh, yeah, when he stopped supporting Labour." - andy @ 47

Yes, that would be about right. More to it than this, though. People on the left left - "Old Labour", if you like - were always angsty about Murdoch and his baleful influence on affairs. An integral part of the New Labour project, however, was to get elected - they had principles, sure they did, lots of them, but the sine non qua was to get in; put an end to what was becoming a more-or-less permanent state of tory rule (and for this, of course, they deserve our undying gratitude) - and the insecurities borne of losing so often and for so long led to certain things being done which shouldn't have been done. One of these was the rapprochement with Rupes.

The amount of fuss and coverage of this non-story is utterly disproportionate, particularly at a time when a lot of far more important things are happening. I know voicemail hacking is illegal, but there don't seem to be any vulnerable shrinking violets among the names of the injured parties I've heard about so far. It seems to be very much in the zone where there is no such thing as bad publicity
After all, it is the News of the World, and to update Oscar Wilde -
"I am glad to say I have never seen the News of the World. It is obvious that our social spheres have been widely different".

In terms of heft, I am now interested in seeing where the chips fall, so long as the hewing is equal and accurate.

Which pretty much invalidates almost all 'reporting' from the tribal rivals of the UK MSM, who are not interested in truth or facts, but simply petty point-scoring over each other and their tarnished lead whingers.

And speaking of heft, if the best that can be brought to bear on matters of moral outrage is John Prescott, then the barrel has already been scraped through, the gutter joined and then thew whole sorry shebang flushed down into the sewer.

Raises interesting questions about the quality of the police 'investigation.'

Police repeatedly state there is no evidence.

Murdoch flies in, demands emails and within a few days (hours?) uncovers documentary evidence.

Have the police declared an investigation closed without even asking for and reading the emails of the people allegedly involved ?

Would they have done this if the investigation had not involved the right hand man of a tory prime minister?

40 Susan-Croft

If there has been phone hacking it is a job for the police. Though I have to say looking at most of the people who complain of being hacked, whoever was doing it must have been bored to death.

If you don't like newspapers don't read them, its a free Country, just. Britain has gone mad.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

One of the saner contributions to the debate. If something illegal has happened then the police should investigate and if there is enough evidence then the CPS should prosecute. They should also widen the investigation to other newspapers as required, if evidence is there.

Some of the conspiracy theorists on here probably think that it was Murdoch on the grassy knoll.

Meanwhile, under cover of several resignations the government introduces Control Orders 'Light'.

Not another manifesto U-turn, just a moment of spineless-ness.

On a previous blog on the Murdoch NOTW story, a poster asked "who's running this government?"

Same as ran the previous one, I think you'll find.

At 10:15am on 27 Jan 2011, Indy2010 wrote:
I would expect it is widespread in all areas of media not just NOTW. Do you seriously think the Police and Security Services do not use these methods their selves

The one aspect of this I find that is not being aired is the individuals resposibility in this for not setting the voicemail password from the default one for their phone.

If I left my front door open and went out, I should not be suprised if someone came in and read my mail. Yes it is a crime but I must bear some responsibilty for that crime being perpetrated by providing opportunity to the criminal.

This then questions the abilty of some MP's enbroiled in this, around security of knowledge they have, if they have not set a voicemail password, even more incredulous if GB was hacked, where were the myriad of SpAd's and security services then.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Bit of a weak defence. Well very weak to be honest. You answered the main question yourself. To quote you;-"Yes, it is a crime but........". Nevermind, I'm sure that your efforts to deflect some of the blame will be appreciated in certain quarters.
Strangely we've had a succession of bloggers so far deploying the 'they're all at it' defence. If so, it will be all to the good if some,any of them, are bought to book for their 'crime'. I always thought the right were keen on criminals getting fully punished for their misdemeanours. Can we look forward to your support?

44 saga

Not stocked in my local newsagent, I'm pleased to report.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Perhaps your local moustachioed feminists stuff copies of it down their dungarees, useful for lighting fires at which effigies of Gray and Keys are burnt.

Millicent Harper wrote: "Politics and the media have become indistinguishable. News management - that's all it is." Spot on - and, I'd suggest, at the heart of what demoralises, and ultimately sickens, ordinary folk in Britain today to the point where they are completely put off all that it represents! In times of record cost-of-living increases and shrinking job opportunities, having to tolerate such self-interested, deluded and ultimately, vacuous rubbish spewing into their homes, seems for most, so far removed from what really matters. But you lot caught up in it all, you are also so far removed that you can't see that, can you!

#25 seems to be taking a long time for review.

My point is, where is the politics? Crime blog - sounds like it could be there. Media/Entertainment blog - could be some crossover. Politics?

Is it Cameron's judgement that makes it political? Let's think.
He hired Coulson when Caoulsoin was no longer employed by anyone.

He hired Coulson when he was not the subject of any inquiry police or otherwise.

No one has even suggested that Coulson has indulged in or instigated any hacking while working for Cameron.

So where is the political angle?

I really caution those in the glasshouse on the left to examine the history of power abuse that occured during the previous regimes' time before they starting throwing stones.

To those former politicians I remind them that Labour was in power when these incidents first surfaced and the Met investigations were carried out on their watch.

Sagamix 52

Very surprised (and a little disappointed) to see you supporting phone hacking by tabloid journalists, by the way. It's almost as if you're not bothered about people's bread-and-butter liberties. Bet you'd be upset if someone (other than you) was listening to your voicemails.

----------------------------------------------------------------

I can assure you that everything I write, say or do is very secure. No need to worry your head any further. If you think I am bothered about what some self obsessed celebrity has to say, I am not. I cannot imagine why anyone would be interested either. If it involves politicians, then that is a case for the police, as I have said. However, it is not an issue that is of any interest to the public, they have more important problems to worry about.

I am sure you want to go back to the days when the Government could control newspapers and get a story stopped. You know too much freedom there, to find out what Labour are up to when they are in Government. Though one has to say Labour had an easy enough ride over 13 years, anyway. I never read newspapers and my life and thoughts are not guided by them, unlike some. Half the time newspapers churn out, no interest, rubbish anyway.

I had to laugh, Labour and liberties just don't go together very well do they?, power of the state and all that.

Britain has just gone barking mad, they see conspiracy everywhere and tosh is reported as fact. People who lead decent, honest lives, are not rewarded, whilst the unworthy are. People who work hard, are taxed to death and the lazy rewarded. Old people are treated and fed, worse than prisoners and have less rights and respect. Those are the facts actually and I don,t need a newspaper to tell me so.

Interesting that none of the usual suspects chose to comment on the association I drew between phone hacking and Wikileaks.

Nice moral stance.

Someone illegally steals a phone conversation, passes it to a newspaper that publishes it and it is hacking and 'let's bring down the government'.

Someone steals confidential cables from their employer and then passes them to someone else who publishes them and becomes a 'hero'

Could we not have two blogs running parallel? One for the real world and one for the 'lefties' where logic and consistency is banned.

It seems to be agreed that the current slew of revelations is because Rupert Murdoch is in town and has told News International to clean up its act. If that is so, then the inevitable conclusion must be that up to now Murdoch was at best indifferent to the phone hacking allegations and had exerted little or no pressure on his senior managers to ensure compliance with a criminal inquiry.

It's interesting that tory 'leaning' posters poo-poo the phone hacking as unimportant, move along, nothing to see here. A classic new labour tactic!
I think they're worried David 'give that hack a job' Cameron has shown himself up. They should be. He has.

So the police didn't read all of the e-mails? Which should they have read? All the e-mails of all the journalists? (Help!!! attack on press freedom, I hear them cry) or just the editors (repeated cries of help!!)

Let's do this.

Let's forget that in the real world,the UK needs to make spending reductions.

Let's forget that in the real world there are terrorists in our midst, hell-bent on causing the death of our fellow citizens.

Let's forget that in the real world the UK must compete against emerging economies that have distinct advantages over the UK.

Let's forget that we are fighting a war in Afghanistan and our people are being killed.

Instead let's focus on the really important issue of phones of, seemingly only 'celebrities' being hacked.

Perish the thought that we might want to be taken seriously!

I was living and working overseas for most of the Labour era. Were these boards as shallow as this, when Labour was in power?

If David Cameron had the best interests of this country at heart, he would exploit the opportunity to curb Murdoch, and break what will become a stranglehold on British media. The examples of his newspapers here and Fox News in the US indicate that News Corp is not concerned with maintaining civilised values. However, Cameron will do nothing of the sort, and this country will continue its slide towards something that will correspond only with Orwell's worst nightmares.

Turning to Murdoch (I don't read the Times, Sun or watch any TV from his 'stable').

Where is the evidence of his 'baleful' influence.

The inference is that he is some kind of puppet master pursuing a right wing agenda to add to his empire and destroy the 'Left'

He has media properties in Australia (Labour government), US (left-leaning Democrats), China and across Asia (none particularly right wing) and in the UK (latterly an slightly right of centre coalition).

Does any of that count as evidence? For or against?

Cabinet ministers, including the PM, are there to represent us and should not be allowed to meet heads of corporations, or any large organisations, including other governments, privately. Any meetings that do take place should be minuted and be available to an elected body for scrutiny at any time.

Got to sign off shortly - plane to catch. Hopefully, when I land in 'blighty' some sanity will have returned (other than just mine!) and the Politics page will be discussing politics and the Business bblog business (other than Banks and bankers bonuses, I mean).

I can't decide who are teh culprits.

The 'journos' for banging on about stories that have limited depth and breadth or resonance with the general public or the posters who prattle on fighting a class war and election which they just lost. (Yes you did lose it!!)

The BBC has an agenda (along with other news providers in the UK) in keep this story going. The BBC are commercial rivals of News Corp and want Murdoch's bid for BSkyB to fail: hence the relish with which they are reporting the hacking scandal.

It would also appear that, to this end, BBC reporters have 'contacts' within News International itself - the so-called breaking of the fresh news evidence by Robert Peston is a case in point. We can therefore expect in the weeks to come a two-pronged appraoch from Murdoch: as well as his efforts to clean the stables there will also be an attempt to discredit the BBC (and others news groups) i.e. to portary hacking as wide-spread and not just the practice of the News of the World. It will attempt to portray and expose BBC hypocracy. If I was connected to BBC journalism at the moment I'd be watching my step! There'd better be snow-white!

The foreign owners and senior representatives of this despicable newspaper group, that has played a significant role over the last 30-40 years in dragging the British press into the gutters, ought to be thrown out of the country.
Their presence is no longer, if ever it was, 'conducive to the public good'.

Just before I leave these exchanges I can't help smiling at the howls of reprobation from the more left leaning contributors. I suppose Murdoch was the flavour of the month when his organ The Sun was backing the Labour Party? My, my the smell of hypocrisy gets everywhere!

65 Idont Believeit

Strangely we've had a succession of bloggers so far deploying the 'they're all at it' defence. If so, it will be all to the good if some,any of them, are bought to book for their 'crime'. I always thought the right were keen on criminals getting fully punished for their misdemeanours. Can we look forward to your support?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

To say "they're all at it" isn't a defence of NOTW's activites, it is pointing out that the investigation may need to be widened to other news organisations.

Phone hacking is illegal and rightly so.

I would support prosecution of anyone involved in it, whether they worked for NOTW or any other news organisation, unless there was prima facie evidence of serious wrongdoing prior to hacking being carried out and the CPS decided that the public interest was best served by not prosecuting.

Naturally, speculative trawling through the messages of high profile people would not meet any kind of public interest test.

"Perhaps your local moustachioed feminists stuff copies of it down their dungarees, useful for lighting fires at which effigies of Gray and Keys are burnt." - AS71 @ 66

I'm taking this as a colourful way of saying "political correctness gone mad". Well maybe, maybe not; PCGM isn't, however, the right way to view this story, the "furore" as Richard Keys put it. What we have here is Sky getting caught with their pants down (almost literally in Andy Gray's case) and then acting in haste to try and appease. Similar in this respect to latest events in the NOTW hacking scandal. Interestingly, Gray now has (potentially) TWO legal actions going - vs NOTW for phone snooping and vs Sky for unfair dismissal.

I think it is becoming increasingly apparent that Rupert Murdoch has not managed his companies professionally. The government should delay the decision on ownership of BSkyB until the facts of the situation at the News of the World are fully understood.

obritomf @ 75

All that shows is that if Murdoch does have a mission to destroy the left, he hasn't (yet) managed it. Unsurprising since it's a rather tall order; destroying the left is very tricky, even for a ruthless and ultra-powerful businessman and media magnate with a mission to destroy the left.

Everybody in the security services knew that Gordon Brown had his phone tapped. He was repeatedly ribbed about the word 'engaged' by Osbourne and Cameron when in opposition.The difficulty for the police in their investigation is the fact that members of the security services and their agents were tapped themselves.What a carry on!

#64. moi

Control Orders 'Lite' even.

Know of any good proofreaders Mr N?

75. At 11:48am on 27 Jan 2011, obritomf wrote:
Turning to Murdoch (I don't read the Times, Sun or watch any TV from his 'stable').

Where is the evidence of his 'baleful' influence.

The inference is that he is some kind of puppet master pursuing a right wing agenda to add to his empire and destroy the 'Left'

He has media properties in Australia (Labour government), US (left-leaning Democrats), China and across Asia (none particularly right wing) and in the UK (latterly an slightly right of centre coalition).

Does any of that count as evidence? For or against?

=====================================================

If Murdoch ever does try to influence a government or its policies, he does solely to benefit News International and any of its subsidiaries. His number one priority is not much different from his tenth - his businesses. During the 20th century millionaires routinely bought newspaper titles to try to influenece public opinion - read John Simpson's "Unreliable Sources".

If Murdoch really had a political agenda then Sky News would be identical to Fox News and channel 9 in Oz. But they are not - each are different and tailored to what the audience want to hear. News Int are in it for the money.

The other news groups in the UK must be hoping that the storm will blow over soon and they escape the forces of the law. i would expect a lot of plea bargaining going on as journos "rat" on each other. Fun times ahead...

#79

Was it the non-existent foreign owners of the Daily Mirror that led them to publish faked pictures?

Is it the foreign owners of the Guardian that lead them to publish stolen diplomatic cables?

Thought not.

Phone hacking is wrong and is a matter best left to the police and judicial system for them to handle. Pretty much the same applies to the stealing of confidential cables, fraudulent expense claims and sexual assaults (alleged or otherwise). Regardless of the victim or the political persuassion of the victim or wrong-doer.

Don't you agree?

52 sagamix
"As soon as she can prove she can do the job as well if not better than a man, she will get more support from men than women, I can tell you." - SC @ 40

Well actually she's pretty much done that, Susan. Got a MASSIVE offside call spot-on in the Liverpool Wolves match - led to a goal for the reds. Was quite funny because the "boys" on commentary, thinking she'd got it wrong, were all set to tear in, then the slow motion replay showed the truth. It'll probably go down as one of the very best calls ever made by a football official in the history of the game. Highlight of the match, for me. Maybe the whole season.

=========================================================
Whilst I agree with SC's general comment about trivial tittle-tattle, I've got to agree with you here. I'm no fan of Batty-Hatty style equality but I don't think it's acceptable to criticise someone ability to do a job based purely on their gender - which is what Andy Gray and Richard Keys did. Thinking about it, the niece of the Countess of Wessex has been surprisingly quiet on this one - can you enlighten us with what her views may be.

SC@69
"I can assure you that everything I write, say or do is very secure."
==================================================================

Email, voicemail and ansaphone messages are not secure and shouldn't really be regarded as such. They may take a bit of effort and time to "hack" but it can be done.

I wonder if there will be another fudged investigation and another couple of policemen getting 'nice little earners' afterwards ?

susan @ 69

Mmm, not sure tabloid journalists hacking into people's phones helps with any of those other problems you mention. Our treatment of old people, say; how is this going to be improved by listening to Max Clifford's voicemails?

Any case, glad to see you rubbishing "conspiracy theories" - I'm not a big buyer of that sort of thing, as you know. Cock-up over conspiracy every time for me. Like, can you remember all that nonsense about how thousands of scientists were in cahoots to make-up stuff about climate change? And the "story" that Labour were "using" immigration policy mainly for votes? Honestly. LOL.

Apart from that, couple of follow-up questions is all I have:

1. Sounds like you only care about the infringement of liberties if it's the state (and especially when Labour are in power) doing the infringing, would that be fair?

2. You say Labour got an "easy ride" from the press for 13 years and you also say you never read newspapers. Square that circle for me?

62. At 10:56am on 27 Jan 2011, jon112dk wrote:
Raises interesting questions about the quality of the police 'investigation.' ........

Would they have done this if the investigation had not involved the right hand man of a tory prime minister?
============================================================

I'm surprised at the implied criticism of the police investigation, though I've no detailed knowledge of what they did or didn't do myself. There does seem to be suggestion that the police weren't trying too hard on this for whatever reason.

Sorry to be critical of your anti-tory slant here, but all this started long before the general election in May, and when Andy Coulson was still editor of the NOTW, and David Cameron was leader of the opposition.

Apparently even Gordon Brown reported his suspicions to the police. I find it difficult to believe that if the Prime Minister reported such a thing as his phone being hacked then absolutely nothing would be done about it by the police. If the PM wasn't in a position to make this investigation happen properly then who on earth would be ???

"If I were a celeb, I'd shred everything before it went in the bin and tell people to assume that everyone is going to hear any message they leave on my answerphone." - c555 @ 43

What do mean, Andy, if?

I picked up (accidentally) a copy of "Fiscal Corner" the other week and I could have sworn that was you on the centre-spread; big story about a new and very very synthetic way to structure a wage packet so as to ... well I didn't actually finish it, but it sure looked like you.

Good to see even more Murdoch-bashing on the Beeb.

With this many anti-Murdoch stories someone might accuse the BBC of extreme bias.

Some independence please? Is this (a) really the most important story today or (b) just the one Labour spin doctors are telling you to plug?

#70
The difference between this and wikileaks is that in that case someone used information he was legally entitled to see and passed it on to the press. this is what we call whistle blowing and though i dont agree with it in this case it is an accepted part of life. The NOTW went on a fishing expedition, illegally accessing information they had no right to in the hope that it may produce some gossip worth printing for their financial gain. The political angle is clear..some politicians were hacked. The direct question needs to be put to David Cameron, "were you given any information by andy coulson about political opponents that was obtained in this way ?"

"This whole thing could turn out to be a UK Watergate" - forgotten @ 28

Really hope not, but yes - that too started with a story involving telephones and journalists and politicians; a story which, despite being poo pooped by most for quite some time, ended up with the resignation of the POTUS.

What did various people know and when did they know it? ... is the question, I guess.

How does anyone know if our phone(s) has been hacked? Just wondering?

#84 Sagamix
And you really believe such drivel? Or are you just trolling?

#83 Rob
Rupert Murdoch not successful! Again drivel or trolling?

Here's a thought. Maybe he is just trying to build a business and run it profitably. Any chance that's the case?

BTW - profitably means without handouts from taxpayers.

Incidentally,
what's the 'left's' take on Sky's treatment of Gray and Keys? Did they act properly and in accordance with all that is required in our so PC world or did they trample on the rights of Gray and Keys (the workers) and hang them after a shambolic kangaroo court.

I just wonder what is your viewpoint.

#95 Alexpo

Surely whistleblowing needs to serve a higher public interest? If someone knows that an illegal activity is taking place and reports it, then yes I can see that is for the public good.

If a cable of the record (doesn't necessarily have to be accurate) of a private conversation is leaked, I have to ask where is the public good or interest being served. Was any wrong-doing uncovered or exposed.

Generally, nothing I have seen of the Wikileaks disclosures has surprised me - even the generally boring nature of the exchanges. My only real surprise has been the way those on the left, who are usually so assiduous and 'right on' have seemed to assume the innocence of the 'sainted' Assange even before evidence of the alleged sexual assualts has been presented in court. I fully accept the 'innocent until proven guilty' arguement. I will await the outcome of the eventual case in Sweden. But I don't assume that there might not be a case to answer.

incidentally, doesn't innocent until proven guilty apply to Coulson, Murdoch et al??

obritomf @ 98

"you really believe such drivel?"

Odd comment. I was countering (your) drivel! And rather effectively too, I thought.

You offered up the fact of various countries where Murdoch has a presence NOT having a right wing government as being evidence that he doesn't have an anti-left agenda.

That's the drivel - or it fails a basic logic test, shall we say.

So I pointed this out; pointed out that all it shows is he hasn't succeeded in such an agenda. Also made the point that "destroying the left" would be very difficult for him even if he's hell-bent on it.

Yes?