(Jeff Danziger’s website)
H/t commentor PeakVT for the link to Reuter’s report that Rebekah Brooks was not a nice person to work for:
When Brooks became editor, at age 31, she had a brief to broaden the paper’s appeal by intensifying the focus on celebrity and showbusiness news and publishing fewer of the harder stories the paper had been known for…
__
At the same time, the pressure to get exclusive stories was so intense that dubious practices were barely questioned. “They were ‘dodgy business HQ’. I’m not sure if people even realised it was illegal. It was a don’t-get-caught culture,” said the reporter of seven years’ standing. New staff would be given the cold shoulder until they’d proved themselves to be “thoroughly disreputable” so their colleagues could trust them.
__
“It was no place for anyone to pipe up and say: ‘This doesn’t seem ethical to me.’ That would have made you a laughing stock.”
__
Journalists didn’t explicitly ask for private investigators to get involved in their work, but help would be provided if a reporter got stuck on a promising story. “How it arrived on your desk was a bit of a mystery. You didn’t know and you didn’t ask,” said the reporter. “Every week, somebody’s mobile phone records, somebody’s landline records, sometimes even somebody’s medical records. It was common enough not to be notable.”
Much more disreputable detail at the link. Hoocoodanode seems less and less a defensible legal strategy.
If you prefer something inspirational on a Monday morning, Adweek has a nice little piece on “The Ben Bradlee of Phone Hacking:’Guardian’ editor Alan Rusbridger wouldn’t let investigation die”. (Complete with quotes from the NYT‘s Bill Keller sneering that the Guardian ain’t got no dolla-dolla, and should hurry up and die already.)
And another wonderful tidbit via commentor whose name I’ve misplaced JGabriel (thanks, Sharl!):
Sharl
I think I first saw a link to the video from JGabriel.
kdaug
How do you spell “implosion”?
kdaug
Unfair to the turtles.
No one said they were rabid.
Weaselly, perhaps. But they still go all the way down.
Do not question the turtles.
Kane
Give Alan Rusbridger and his determined staff of writers at the Guardian the Pulitzer. We owe them a great deal of thanks for sticking to this story.
PeakVT
I don’t think Keller is a position to sneer. (To me he seems to be consciously be spreading FUD in hopes of keeping people away from a potential Guardian US). While the NYT and its subsidiaries are collectively much bigger than the Guardian/Observer, and NYTCO is a bit more diversified than the Scott Trust, it is still dominated by the newspaper division. Both the NYT and the Guardian have the same problem: how to generate revenue at a time when there are zillions of free sources of news, when print ad revenue is falling, and online ads don’t pay much. If trends continue, the NYT may lumber on longer than the Guardian because of its size, but it will still meet the same fate.
Here’s a rundown of UK national papers and circulation figures.
Calouste
Talking about Ladbrokes…
They now have David Cameron to be replaced as Conservative Leader before the Next General Election at 3/1.
And “David Cameron as the Next Cabinet Member to leave” at 12/1, down from 20/1 yesterday and 150/1 10 days ago.
JPL
The Washington Post has another article on how mean NPR and the NYTimes are to Murdoch. I refuse to link to it because the article omits such words as bribery, corruption and arrests. I can’t figure out the coverage of the Post. Were they hoping to sell the paper to Murdoch?
harlana
Heelarious! Even if I don’t all the “players” — Hugh Grant as David Cameron, Colin Firth as Hugh Grant . . .
arguingwithsignposts
I know it’s probably too late for this, but could we ditch the -gate appendage on this one? I like DougJ’s Rupertdammerung, personally, but there are no doubt other, better terms than -gate.
Time to throw -gate under the bus!
stuckinred
arguingwithsignposts
And take “masters” and “overlords” with it.
Calouste
Right… because you can run a profitable business when you “forget” to send out bills for £12,000. Sounds like Wallis has stopped doing the PR for Purdew.
arguingwithsignposts
Hahaha: objectivist morrissey! Via rumproast
JPL
I decided to include the link to the post article on the media picking on Murdoch because we all know Doug will highlight this later.. link
The Washington Post from Watergate to ……………….
SiubhanDuinne
JPL: OT, pls check your email.
kay
It’s such nonsense. They’re misrepresenting the facts. Murdoch and Co didn’t hack into the family phones based on lofty free press goals of informing the public. That isn’t what happened. Management ok’ed the crime(s) because they hoped information garnered might be profitable when released and the reporters took orders because they were collecting a paycheck and wanted to continue to collect a paycheck, or, they wanted to advance their careers. The Washington Post also omits who it was that insisted on an investigation after that horror was revealed. It was the public. The public outrage pushed the politicians, not the other way around. Cameron bobbed and weaved for days, hoping to protect his buddy. The resignations and Murdoch’s supposed remorse came only after the public outrage, not before.
If the Washington Post and the WSJ intend to rewrite the facts and sequence of events on what we just saw happen, they better try a little harder. Their beef is with the public. That’s who they’re fighting.
bjacques
Where’s Judge Jeffreys when you need him? Even jail couldn’t keep Andy Coulson down.
“Bloody assizes” has a nice ring to it.
SiubhanDuinne
@arguingwithsignposts: Ooooh, Busgate!
SiubhanDuinne
The cartoon has a lovely touch: the woman’s umbrella has a parrot-head handle. That woman is MARY POPPINS grown old!!
Yevgraf
And yet my Fox watching wingnut mother’s take on it is this, nearly.verbatim:
Of course, this is the same woman who voted Wallace in 68, who thought Archie Bunker was right, who was upset that we learned about My Lai because it made the troops look bad (same with Abu Ghraib), was upset with the focus on Nixon’s crimes (didn’t want to know), and agreed with Ollie North.
Ian Preston
That woman is Grandma – a character from Carl Giles‘ long running cartoon series in the Daily Express.
JPL
Kay, Doug is going to have a field day with that article. I love the headline on the front page In media, allegations of bias and conflict of interest fly
and this line Can Murdoch get a fair shake in the media?
The
journalisthack is touching his toes trying to give Murdoch some credibility. Paul Farhi must be auditioning for a job with the LifeStyle section of the WSJ.Pococurante
@10 stuckinred
I for one look forward to living under our… our…
Curse you, redacted meme!
DZ
Way, way OT, sorry, but I became a grandfather 4 times over this weekend. My twin daughters each delivered twins. Amazing
JPL
DZ, How exciting, congrats to you and your daughters.
stuckinred
DZ –
Holy smokes!
WereBear
Congratulations, DZ. That sounds like some serious Darwinian contention in teh gene pool there.
me
WSJ editorial board: “Leave Rupert alone!” **cries**
cathyx
@DZ: Wow, some twins can’t do anything alone. Even giving birth at the same time to twins.
alwhite
cool DZ! hope everyone is well & happy. Gonna be a few sleepless nights in those households.
BTW – I can’t quit “masters of the universe” it fits them too well, sorry.
OnThread – That Carlson woman on FAUX Friends in the morning graduated from Stanford with honors. There is no way she is nearly as stupid as she plays on teevee. I have asked for years “what dirt does Roger have on her?”. It was only half in jest but now I am pretty certain that the troll of OZ must have something on all those kids besides money.
Ash Can
@DZ: Whee! Congrats to you and to everyone else. Twins do have a tendency to run in families, but wow. Talk about hitting the jackpot!
bjacques
@DZ: Congrats, man! Have a cigar! Er, make that four cigars!
Redshift
alwhite: He pays her a lot. There are plenty of people who play stupid on TV for money.
Ash Can
@me: Naturally, the WSJ will be saying that, because it’s one of Rupert’s papers. But the WaPo? Maybe JPL is right about the owners of the WaPo wanting to sell the paper to Murdoch. Or maybe they have their reporters doing the same things, and are working the refs. Or maybe they’re just friends of Murdoch’s. Regardless, this is making the WaPo look as sleazy as any of Rupert’s trash scandal sheets.
DZ
@cathyx: I can’t figure out how they pulled this off.
@WereBear: Indeed, but each husband has a twin brother so lots of twins in the gene pool. Interesting multi-cultural event also. My daughters are biracial – I’m white and my wife was black. One husband is half black and half Jaoanese. The other husband is half Russian and half Chinese. Going to be some cool looking grandchildren.
WereBear
I certainly agree with you. Hybrid Vigor for the win!
aimai
DZ, please, please, please post pictures. I love babies and somehow the notion of these four incredible babies kind of bumps the whole vicarious baby love experience to an exponential degree. My congratulations to the new parents/aunts and uncles. I have twin nieces and the fun never stops.
aimai
aimai
Oh, what I meant to post, on topic, was that if you look at what NoW was actually publishing its largely phenomenally boring. The Jude law phone hacking consisted of the fascinating fact that Law didn’t want to be photographed getting off the plane and so he lingered at baggage claim to avoid papparazi and then the name of his hotel and his room number. This isn’t even interesting information. NoW like all these tabloids (except for News of the World “Talking Skull Dances and Sings!” “90 year old Nun gives birth to own sister!”) don’t even give you a good story line. In effect the rely on the reader’s overidentification with the general notion of celebrity to make basic celebrity itineraries seem interesting.
aimai
Montysano
@ stuckinred: Sorry, but “Galtian Overlords” and “masters of teh universe” are simply too apt to abandon.
The Reuters article left me a bit queasy. Our current era is truly the Age Of The Asshole.
kay
I don’t really understand the WSJ editorial. The defense on ethics charges is that Murdoch put money into the newspaper? Yay! Good for the WSJ!
Even if that’s true, what does it have to do with anything? Is it supposed to indicate his inherent noble intentions as a media mogul, or something? Investing a lot of money may be an indication of good character in conservative circles, but I don’t think that’s the accepted societal norm.
The rest of it is basically: “we know these people personally, they’re just like us, all good people“. Okey-doke. Sorry to bother you with pesky questions. Of course you’re deeply ethical and serious people. You say you are, and you’re the WSJ!
Constance
I will happily pay for the digital Guardian. I pay for the NYT just so I can read Krugman’s blog and Gail Collin’s columns (if she ever comes back from book leave).
alwhite
Redshift: well that certainly is one explanation but she carries it to a point of humiliating herself. It would take more than money to get most people to make that bid a fool of themselves . . . I hope.
suzanne
DZ, damn! Congratulations!
How’d they synchronize that?
I need to not ask all the questions that are running through my head right now. LOL.
MazeDancer
@DZ:
Congratulations, Congratulations, Congratulations, Congratulations!
Shifting to other thread topic:
Wonder if TMZ and all the papparazzi scum are finding this hacking situation a cautionary tale or simply instructive.
AlanM
I am loving the Giles quote in that cartoon.
Hawes
I am having a crisis here. Can I still watch Justified, Rescue Me and Archer on FX and still keep my soul?
I mean, I can toss Wilfred overboard if I need to, but there are limits.
Seriously, I think this whole thing shows that the Rich aren’t just “different than you and me”, they are a different nation.
Bleg here: http://zombieland-nowbrainfree.blogspot.com/2011/07/passion-of-rupert.html
Origuy
@kay: So are they all, all honourable men!
kay
Hah! Nothing like a completely unsupported yet belligerent and defensive assertion from a newspaper that is at the same time insisting they have a rigorous and independent fact-finding and ethical process, huh?
That guy that resigned? He was a good man. So there, Leftists! Take that.
I don’t know. I’m not feeling my confidence in commercial media surging back. Maybe if they berate us some more?
“Okay, okay, you’re ALL GREAT. Can I go now? I think someone else is resigning”
pete
@arguingwithsignposts (9): So this is Gategate?
Trollenschlongen
I’m wondering if all these reporters who knew something fishy and quite probably illegal was going on will also be held to account at some point. ?
JGabriel
@Sharl: Thanks for remembering me, Sharl! And thanks for the crediting, Anne Laurie.
.
maya
arguingwithsignposts@9
How about a Euro-centric Rupertloo?
Brachiator
One thing I find interesting is how the Reuter’s article talks about the “macho culture” at the paper, with its quaint suggestion that had Brooks been a proper young lady, she might not have been as vile as she turned out to be. But the larger truth is that Murdoch looks for people to do his will without respect to gender, and women are not angels but mere mortals who can be just as ruthless as anyone.
opie jeanne
@SiubhanDuinne
it’s one of Terry Pratchett’s Agony Aunts, Dotsie and Sadie. Sadie had the umbrella with the parrot’s head, Dotsie carried a bag that was unnaturally heavy. You don’t want to meet them when you are annoying a Seamstress.
ETA: I just noticed the Giles Grandma cartoon reference above. The character fits all three.
Sophie Miller
I was wondering if Ms Brooks demise might be somewhat similar to Lily Weatherwax’s, in Witches Abroad.
href=”http://transremaxculver.wordpress.com/2011/07/18/1193/”>
Some surprising similarities I thought.