web analytics

MPs: RUPERT MURDOCH ‘NOT FIT’ TO RUN NEWS CORP

By Pete Moore On May 1st, 2012

Oh yeah?

Rupert Murdoch is “not a fit person” to run an international company because he showed “wilful blindness” to the extent of phone-hacking at the News of the World, a devastating report by MPs has concluded.

So what? Those 650 criminals, nonces and ponces in the Commons – like everyone else – aren’t fit to centrally plan and manage an economy, and they’re certainly not entitled to decide who runs any firm.

39 Responses to “MPs: RUPERT MURDOCH ‘NOT FIT’ TO RUN NEWS CORP”

  1. Just to point out there are only 650 MPs.

  2. “they’re certainly not entitled to decide who runs any firm”

    Agreed, and certainly not Fatty Watson.

  3. Thank you Seamus, now corrected. Gosh, I must have imagined I was filling out an MPs expenses form and added a few more.

  4. they’re certainly not entitled to decide who runs any firm

    Correct.

    That’s for the shareholders to decide.

  5. He is a creep, but that doesn’t mean he can’t run his company.

  6. Besides, for better or worse, News Corp is a US company.

  7. Pete Moore, I have to agree with you. Present day Politicians, with exceptions, do not fill me with admiration nor confidence. In fact, some of their voting behaviour fills me with dread.

  8. But surely they – the MP’s, – do have some say over the bSKYb ownership, via the granting of a broadcasting licence.

    If they don’t have a say in the matter, the why the heck was Murdoch and his cronies sucking-up to Blair, Brown and sundry other vermin when the broadcast licence was ‘up for grabs’?

    With the decline of print media, bSKYb was supposed to be a mainstay of the NewsCorp presence in the UK.

    So yes, MP’s do have some control over who runs what, and how.

  9. Ernest, no one is arguing that MPs don’t have some say over it. There is the question as to whether or not they should.

  10. “no one is arguing that MPs don’t have some say over it. There is the question as to whether or not they should.”

    They can say what they like – they like the sound of their own voices anyway!

  11. Sorry, cut myself off.

    As far as I’m concerned, the less politicians have a say over the better as the decisions they make are often political.

  12. As far as I can see, the Murdochs are being stitched up, sacrificed on the altar of hypocrisy by politicians who’re full of sanctimonious venom.
    I carry no great regard for them. I know that to a degree I am being (willingly and knowingly) manipulated whenever I read my favourite paper.
    But then one has to ask,
    What is the BBC doing every day of every year, except cynically exploiting a captive public with their own biased opinions?”

    I think it is quite possible that this act of spite will seriously backfire on the people so recently converted to probity and modesty..
    I for one, hope so.

  13. Those simian MPs are well protected behind parliamentary privilege, otherwise Rupe could sue them and probably win.
    Given a choice between News Corp’s reporting and the BBBC, I would always prefer the objectivity of the former.All those slebs, poseurs, and politicos whose phones were hacked,should have known and it was easily prevented. All this just to get their own back!

  14. Von Blitzen,
    I love watching PMQ, and when you see the naked opportunism and self righteousness rippling through the (mainly but not exclusively) Labour ranks, it is pukeworthy.

    I wouldn’t buy a rubber band from Ed Millipede (despite his being Jewish ;)). He is shot through with ambition and insincerity.

  15. Reality check for Rightworld.

    The various inquiries have uncovered a culture of corruption and industrial-scale lawbreaking in the Murdoch papers in the UK. That culture can only be set by the owner and the senior managers and editors appointed by him. Now he claims ignorance, innocence and forgetfulness. The MPs rightly find that, ahem, a tad unlikely, as does anyone else with more than one brain cell who has been paying attention.

  16. Reality check for Peter:
    First off, neither “right world” nor “left” has all the answers.
    Secondly this corruption knows no bounds.
    Don;t know if you watch tv but there’s been an excellent few programmes on the ’70’s.
    Last night they showed how “the bruvvers” led by often communist inspired Union leaders set about the destruction of British heavy industry and the automotive industry..
    Truly irresponsible.
    Up the Workers!

  17. Oh Peter. You’re such a laugh!

    If Murdoch had continued to back that lunatic Brown, all this would never have happened. In Leftworld, Year 0 started when the Coalition came into power. News International was at it (albeit on an industrial scale), the Trinity Group was at it, even the tax-dodging Guardian was at it.

    This is about scores being settled – no more, no less. I carry no torch for Murdoch. I abhor what went on but the hypocrisy from Leftworld is astonishing.

    Shame on you!

  18. Agitated

    Yes, the 70s. Forty (or so) years back.

    Murdoch is now. His papers have bullied governments of all persuasions. Thatcher met him and spoke to him dozens of times while she was PM and yet her memoirs do not mention any of these contacts. I wonder why? Cameron discussed the Sky bid with James Murdoch at the notorious drinks party in December 2010. Offcom recommended a competition inquiry, but Murdoch’s Cameron’s Culture Secretary rejected that advice and sought to approve the bid with piffling concessions from News International. Only the explosion of Hackgate derailed the best laid plans.

    His papers bribed police officers for information and a revolving door developed between News International and the Metropolitan Police. No wonder they were so reluctant to investigate the initial phone-hacking case several years ago, and later to throw cold water on the Guardian investigation which did their job for them.

    This is a major scandal, end of. No amount of red herring posts like this one can change that fact.

  19. Matt

    Four separate criminal investigations are underway. Lies have been told to a Parliamentary inquiy and possibly to the Leveson inquiry as well. Murdoch is under attack just as much in the Daily Mail and Telegraph as in the Guardian.

    But you claim that it’s all just partisan political point-scoring, nothing to see, move on. Pathetic.

  20. Peter –

    As Matt McCarthy points out, this is about settling scores now that the rabbit’s out of the hat. And yes, the Guardian and Trinity Group Newspapers are guilty too.

    As for the Sky bid/James Murdoch/Hunt business, that’s a classic case of public choice economics. The clear lesson, though it will evade most, is that when buying and selling are regulated, the first things to be bought and sold are regulators. The Sky bid ought to have been none of the government’s business. If markets instead of government decided these things then we wouldn’t have these episodes.

    No, don’t reply with an insult.

  21. “But you claim that it’s all just partisan political point-scoring”

    Whats going on at the moment is, yes.

    “nothing to see, move on”

    Read what I wrote.

    “Pathetic.”

    Yes yor response is!

  22. Peter 8:29

    In your comment, you leap from Thatcher to Cameron with no mention of what went on in-between. Are you taking this debate seriously or just having a laugh?

  23. “Murdoch is now. His papers have bullied governments of all persuasions.”

    BULLIED?!

    “His papers bribed police officers for information and a revolving door developed between News International and the Metropolitan Police”

    You mean the Police, charged with enforcing and upholding the Law, couldn’t say” No”!?
    Politicians have egos the size of beach balls, sonny. As do Union leaders. Politicians have sucked up to newspaper magnates for years and years. Some politicians would jump into bed with a pig, if it promised them a chance to influence the price of bacon!

    These are all marriages of convenience, where egos are massaged and weaknesses exploited all round.
    Your assertion that it is solely the fault of the “fat cat media owners”, is touchingly naive.
    It smacks of vindictiveness and envy and the kind of mindset that existed to quote your words, “Forty (or so) years back”.
    People don’t change Peter. Only the settings.

  24. As Matt McCarthy points out, this is about settling scores now that the rabbit’s out of the hat.

    No it’s not, it’s a major scandal.

  25. Are you taking this debate seriously or just having a laugh?

    Are you? To repeat, this is a scandal, get real.

  26. politicians have sucked up to newspaper magnates for years and years.

    True, especially one that controls 80% of newspaper circulation. And the Tories wanted to give him full control of Sky as well. Only Berlusconi would have had comparable media power in deeply corrupt Italy.

  27. “To repeat, this is a scandal, get real.”

    Please refer to anything I have posted that suggests, infers or implies that this is not a scandal.

    Take your blinkers off!

  28. ” And the Tories wanted to give him full control of Sky as well. ”

    And of course Labour wouldn’t if it suited them?

    As I said, Year 0.

  29. “To repeat, this is a scandal, get real.”
    You sound just like Milliband!

    Feast your eyes on this, the top 50 political scandals…
    http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/5188738/part_2/top-50-political-scandals-part-two.thtml

    Nothing changes much.
    I’m not saying it’s right or acceptable,
    but it’s not a reason to become hysterical either, Peter..

  30. As I’ve already posted (perhaps you missed it) Offcom recommended a competition inquiry into the Sky bid. The Murdoch groupie James Hunt rejected that advice, which Labour would have followed.

  31. Agiteated

    I’ve already posted on the main facts of this scandal. Cameron, Hunt, Rebekka Brooks, James Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch, all in cahoots to give Rupert what he wanted.

    Phone hacking, bribing police, using private investigators to dig dirt with which to bully politicians. It’s all there, and there’s much more to come out. Cameron should be worried.

  32. Peter,
    there are lots of known and unknown ‘shenanigans’ that have gone on behind the scenes of so many deals, governments included.
    I think it’s called horse trading.
    Far more serious surely is the phone hacking of private individuals’ calls. Now that IS serious, but I betcha there are government departments doing it too…
    I mean. what about the suspicious death of Dr David Kelly? Doctors and friends pointed out inconsistencies and questions of causes of death. Did the poor man know so much that he had to be silenced?
    We shall probably never know. But for Goodness sake, no one has clean hands, and to focus on this smacks as much of a political bias, as genuine “horror.”

  33. The Parliamentary committee report was united today in its condemnation of Murdoch. It was only divided on the “not fit” conclusion:

    “The report concluded that Mr Murdoch exhibited “wilful blindness” to what was going on at News Corporation, whose UK newspaper arm has admitted widespread malpractice at the now-closed News of the World (NoW). The committee also accused three former News International executives – one-time executive chairman Les Hinton, former NoW editor Colin Myler and former legal manager Tom Crone – of giving misleading evidence to Parliament. But the committee was divided over the decision to include a claim that Mr Murdoch was not “fit” to run a company such as News Corp.”

    Link here

  34. Peter,
    And you don’t think Tony Blair or Gordon Brown, or even Non-Con Cameron; or Alastair Campbell or Peter Mandelson, had no idea of what the Murdochs might be up to? That had they regarded these ruthless oligarchs as a threat to business probity, they couldn’t have exposed them to the people?!

    Now let’s see, what was that phrase that woman used…?

    “This is a good day to bury bad news…”

  35. A

    The hack-gate scandal did not break until 2011. The “lone rogue reporter” lie held sway until then, pumped out by the Murdoch media and their allies in the Met Police at every opportunity.

  36. Peter,
    It’s time for bed.
    We’ll all be chattering about something else tomorrow.
    Some new thing.
    Next week the Murdochs will be passe.
    🙂
    Goodnight.

  37. “The “lone rogue reporter” lie held sway until then”

    Blair & Brown happily accepted this version of events when it suited them.

  38. Blair & Brown happily accepted this version of events when it suited them.

    True.

  39. Peter –

    “Cameron, Hunt, Rebekka Brooks, James Murdoch, Rupert Murdoch, all in cahoots to give Rupert what he wanted.”

    And prior to May 2010 it was Blair, Brown, Campbell, Mandelson, Rebekkah Brooks and James Murdoch in cahoots.