The Guardian is reporting that John Yates, who was in charge of the Metropolitan Police’s phone hacking investigation, will resign today. That’s two top officials of the most important police force in England gone within two days’ time.
In related news, someone had better call the waahmbulance for the WSJ, because their latest editorial sounds like a teenage girl’s Facebook status update:
We also trust that readers can see through the commercial and ideological motives of our competitor-critics. The Schadenfreude is so thick you can’t cut it with a chainsaw. Especially redolent are lectures about journalistic standards from publications that give Julian Assange and WikiLeaks their moral imprimatur. They want their readers to believe, based on no evidence, that the tabloid excesses of one publication somehow tarnish thousands of other News Corp. journalists across the world.
Here’s a interview from July 5. After watching it, I agree with the Journal: why would we think that News Corp journalists would be tarnished by being associated with an organization as forthright and forthcoming as this one?
That last clip is via Jay Rosen, who has an interesting discussion of how a PR firm can keep its reputation while working for a firm with such a deeply entrenched culture of lying.
Nutella
An excellent response to the ‘hoocoodanode’ in Stephenson’s resignation speech at the Guardian. We rarely see that kind of fact-checking in the US press.
WereBear
And they wonder why no one buys newspapers… or watches the network news.
We had a lovely day with my BIL yesterday, and one of the topics we touched on is how he never watches the news or gets a newspaper any more; it’s pointless. And his 30 and younger co-workers claim they get all their news from The Daily Show.
And we informed him that’s a highly reliable source.
BO_Bill
This is exactly why I get all my news by watching Rachel Maddow on TV.
someguy
WSJ is Murdoch owned. They should be shut down pending completion of a DOJ investigation, until we know how far this went. So too Fox News.
sb
4tehlulz
Therefore, needs more Schadenfreude.
alwhite
I hate the fact that “-gate” has been appended to this thing but the arch of the story line seems so similar. Even as the ship is taking on water faster than it can be pumped the crew is determined to change the subject, throw red herrings and outright lie. Maybe this will be more enjoyable than I thought!
sb
Adding: if our Sunday shows had interviews like the one I just saw in the video clip, I’d watch.
urizon
I have a vague recollection of American reporters, at one time, asking tough questions like this.
MikeBoyScout
Roger Ailes Caught Spying on the Reporters at His Small-Town Newspaper
I need a new chainsaw.
Belafon (formerly anonevent)
urizon
You probably have a recollection of a movie about American reporters, at one time, asking tough questions like this.
arguingwithsignposts
This seems to be how the media overlords want to spin this thing – the second part: that any attempt to reign in the egregious excesses of Murdoch’s slimy influence over British politics is just an attack on press freedoms by those with an ideological or economic axe to grind.
I’m glad to see that quite a few comments on that article are calling them out on their hackery.
rikryah
they are dropping like flies. I’m enjoying it.
Dexter
The question is how long can David Cameron survive?
MikeBoyScout
The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977
“Specifically, the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA prohibit the willful use of the mails or any means of instrumentality of interstate commerce corruptly in furtherance of any offer, payment, promise to pay, or authorization of the payment of money or anything of value to any person, while knowing that all or a portion of such money or thing of value will be offered, given or promised, directly or indirectly, to a foreign official to influence the foreign official in his or her official capacity, induce the foreign official to do or omit to do an act in violation of his or her lawful duty, or to secure any improper advantage in order to assist in obtaining or retaining business for or with, or directing business to, any person.”
“The FCPA also requires companies whose securities are listed in the United States to meet its accounting provisions. See 15 U.S.C. § 78m. These accounting provisions, which were designed to operate in tandem with the anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA, require corporations covered by the provisions to (a) make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and (b) devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls.”
lldoyle
“The Schadenfreude is so thick you can’t cut it with a chainsaw.”
This probably understates my level of enjoyment. It’s all I can do not to yell “Squeal like a pig!” when I read things like the WSJ editorial. Getting to read that kind of thing on their way down is the icing on that Schadenfreudelicious cake.
More squealing. More blows. And more squealing. Let it go on and on. May this remain fresh and full of scornful commentary in early November 2012.
dmsilev
Shorter WSJ: Leave
BritneyMurdoch ALLLLLOOOONNNNEEEE!me
That editorial, IMO, has the unintended effect of completely dispelling the notion so pushed by News Corp before the purchase of Dow Jones that the WSJ would be more independent than Rupert’s other papers.
…and “competitor-critics”, really?
vh
It’s not Schadenfreude when the bullies in question are getting the thrashing they deserve. The feeling is one of long awaited satisfaction that justice is finally being served. In the movies, the audience cheers when the bad guy goes down.
Freddie Mercury captures the moment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rY0WxgSXdEE
daveNYC
Naw, everyone already knew that their opinion page was batshit even before Murdoch bought it. It’s been their late and lazy coverage of this story on their actual news pages that has shown how under the thumb they are.
arguingwithsignposts
It should be noted here that The Guardian has responded to the wsj editorial.
MazeDancer
@Dexter:
At least til Wednesday, when he addresses Parliament. He’s letting the questioning of the Murdoch 3 go first tomorrow.
While I’m not expecting much in the way of answers from the Murdochs and Brooks, their word choices will be interesting PR wise. Also, one will not be able to stop imagining how fast the legal fee meter is spinning.
gocart mozart
I like how he says that you should establish the facts first before you do any investigation. (facepalm)
WaterGirl
mistermix
What a splendid piece of writing!
Carbon Dated
Not cool to compare the whinging septics at the WSJ with teenage girls, Mr M. If you don’t recognize that grrls are pre-womyn who deserve better, you’re obviously just another duped twonk of the patriarchy.
Also: “a interview”?
shortstop
I enjoy the way that big media seems to be under the impression that its only readers/critics are components of other big media. It’s as though these people are completely unaware that there are millions of subjects/citizens out here who can’t fucking believe what NewsCorp did and want to see it go down. No, it’s only the Guardian grinding its little axe.
TBogg
I kept expecting the PR flack to explain that Rebekah Brooks “goes up to eleven”.
AlanM
I have been a Guardian reader since I was 12. I have never been prouder to be a Guardian reader.
I think its quality can be guaged by the enemies it gathers. It can be risky becoming an item of investigation by the Guardian if you really have something to hide.
Unlike the Met, they always get their man.
MikeBoyScout
Yet…
In 2009, a federal case in New Jersey brought by a company called Floorgraphics went to trial, accusing News America of, wait for it, hacking its way into Floorgraphics’s password protected computer system.
Jane2
Wow, the interviewer doesn’t take the bs at face value and keeps at the interviewee…kind of like a real journalist! Perhaps the cable sycophants could take a page from this….nah, won’t happen.
Violet
Oh, that WSJ editorial is a thing of beauty. What a bunch of whingers. Can’t wait to see what Stewart and Colbert do with the story this week.
Roger Moore
@AlanM:
FTFY.
GregB
Surely there would be no news reportage from Fox or the WSJ if a news outfit associated with George Soros were to have been caught wire-tapping the voice mails of dead children and families of war dead.
Surely they would not find such trifling matters newsworthy.
ChrisNYC
nevermind
Xenocrates
Way to come up with a great false equivalency, WSJ editorial writers! Because, y’know, Julian Assange’s behavior was just as rotten as that of Murdoch’s gang, right? How many private citizens did he “hack” again? None, you say?? I am shocked, shocked, I tell you! Oh, and go screw yourselves, too. Too late!
aimai
Go Jon Snow!
But, aside from that, one of the most interestig things in the WSJ editorial and the commentary from the cheap seats after is the open attack on capitalism. When Murdoch and Fox are riding high then competition, attacking the competition, trying to get a better market share by embarassing the competition are not only fair goals, they are lauded as the best way to get things done. A positive virtue. But now that Murdoch’s empire is going down because of the exposure of its own criminal dealings suddenly its not the crime and its not the coverup its unfair competition from the Guardian and from DailyKOs (yes, dailykos and the liberals and leftists come up quite frequently in the comments to that piece.) Talk about the Waambulance. These MOTU are absolutely astonished to find out that they aren’t totally protected from competition.
aimai
Jay C
arguingwithsignposts @ #21:
Why not all four?
ABL
i can’t eat anymore popcorn. i simply can’t.
ABL
I recently watched the interview with Paul whatshistoes and Coogan. I thought Coogan was going to reach across the table and punch Paul in the face. What a sanctimonious dickwiggler. (Not Coogan. Coogan is the business.)
piratedan
@BO_Bill: if only you paid attention to it…..
Yurpean
This isn’t the first time that the Guardian have wielded the sword of truth against the powerful. In 1995 they reported on Tory minister Jonathan Aitken’s connections with Saudi arms dealers. He launched libel proceedings, however the libel case collapsed and Aitken was subsequently jailed for perjury.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jonathan_Aitken#Libel.2C_arrest_and_prison
Yurpean
And at the risk of sounding like a broken record, some front pager really should use this cartoon tomorrow if they post on Murdoch’s appearance before the culture, media & sport select committee.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cartoon/2011/jul/14/cartoon-steve-bell-murdoch-bskyb
Yurpean
(I’m not going to post that link again after this, as I risk coming across as monomaniacal as M_C or fred.)
Yurpean
I’m personally hoping that Michael Wolff’s prediction for Murdoch R’s performance comes true tomorrow: “It is very likely he will get angry. He will say things that people should not say in public.”
gocart mozart
Poor shiftless moochers and their endless thirst for the latest juicy celebrity gossip caused this. There is nothing about these unfortunate incidences that can’t be fixed by greater media consolidation and another round of tax cuts.
MikeBoyScout
More totally unpredictable news – from the Guardian
Janeane The Acerbic Goblin
@Jane2…
Absolutely. It’s refreshing to see the British reporter actually ask follow up questions and not simply accept the spin as fact. But, of course, the reporter/news reader is British, not an American sycophant, a very important distinction.
Cris (without an H)
Interviews like this always make me think of Martin Short as Nathan Thurm.
LanceThruster
As if the synchronicity of media conglomerates wasn’t clear enough; just last week on the drive home, I heard on “progressive” LA radio 1150 KTLK a message that for some reason surprised me.
On THE DAILY WRAP with Michael Castner, who breaks down the major news from the Wall Street Journal every weekday from 3pm-6pm, he had this to say in his closing remarks.
He said that any speculation about malfeasance by the WSJ is unfounded and that people claiming or insinuating such need to just stop.
OIC. Move along. Nothing to see here.
Nellcote
News of the World phone-hacking whistleblower found dead
Death of Sean Hoare – who was first named journalist to allege Andy Coulson knew of hacking – not being treated as suspicious
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/18/news-of-the-world-sean-hoare
kmeyerthelurker
Ok. Here’s my totally non fact based hunch (like anyone asked for it but I’m +4 so hey): Somebody (cough Koch cough) is getting tired of stoopid ol roopert being king-maker. After all, this has been under investigation in England for a couple years. The sudden movement now strikes me as a F-U to Ailes, Murdoch etc. on how the Republicans have been slightly too retarded. The paranoid part of my brain thinks this was all orchestrated to shove plugzilla into Roger Ailes’ butt.