Phone Hacking Row Builds Up

Well the power of the people appear to be speaking. Good job too, the NOTW has always been a rubbishy rag, and if it goes out of business I shall raise a glass (or two) :-)

Phone Hack 1

Phone Hack 2

Although it is raising a lot of moral questions...

The News of the World has already started paying compensation for phone-hacking. Now it's facing another financial penalty - a loss of advertising.

Following the Milly Dowler allegations, Ford has suspended its advertisements, saying "it cares about the standards of behaviour of those it deals with externally".

Halifax and Npower say they are reviewing their options. Tesco and Virgin Media say they're awaiting the outcome of the police investigations.

Many will applaud Ford's action. But should advertisers use their financial muscle to try to influence the behaviour of the media? It is not usually regarded as a good thing for big business to threaten newspapers and broadcasters, particularly over editorial issues.

There have been exceptions. Carphone Warehouse stopped sponsoring Channel 4's Big Brother, following allegations of racism towards Shilpa Shetty. It's the advertisers' money - but are they the right people to tell the media how to behave?

As I speak I am listening to an Emergency Debate in the House of Commons about this very issue. Rupert Murdoch has been named and shamed as a "not a fit and proper person to be granted a licence run a newspaper"

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14042764

Damn censor pig. Just arrest the guilty and jail them for the crime. Don't make censoring legal!

____________

Damn censor pig. Just arrest the guilty and jail them for the crime. Don't make censoring legal!

I could be missing something, though I don't see any references to censorship in the articles linked nor in the thread (except the above).

not a fit and proper person to be granted a licence run a newspaper

any paper that got caught doing that should be taken off the rack and not permitted to sell

Laying aside the arguments about censorship there are legal and moral lines that are alleged to have been crossed by the NoW.
Is it morally right to tap the phones of those that have been bereaved?
Is it legal to tap ANY phone without the appropriate authority?

While some may see a "moral" argument for tapping a celebrity's phone there can be no moral justification for tapping the phone of one who has lost a loved one in violent circumstances. I can see no moral justification for tapping the victim's phone on the off-chance that a paper may gain some "nice tittle-tattle" about the victim or their family.
But without the appropriate legal authority then any phone tapping (in the UK) is an illegal act, and so the NoW, if proven guilty should face the appropriate legal punishment.

Let us see what comes out of the various investigations that are being carried out, which may, or may not, lead to prosecution if there is evidence that a crime has been committed.
____________
Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

Bobby, Apology Accepted.

____________

Tapping is what the press is calling this to sensationalize it. What it is likely is the default PIN number to the voice mail was never changed. Don't know over there if that is 0000 or the last 4 digits of the phone number. I doubt they find that the PI has a person inside the phone company who read out the PIN number, if they can even do that. I also doubt the PI tried 0000, 0001, 0002 ...

In California the PI would be guilty of Penal Code 502, unauthorized access and could do Felony time. Anyone who conspired with him also guilty. Should be a simple slam dunk with the phone company logs.

____________

THis getting more involved and nastier by the day.

Military evidence

BREAKING NEWS - NEWS OF THE WORLD IS BEING SHUT DOWN AND CLOSED

Paper dead

However it has just been reported that there is a new URL registered just two days ago. www.sundaysun.co.uk

This is now being seen a simply a re-branding exercise. They couldn't save the NOTW but they will continue in another format.

Shows how a few bad apples can completely smear and destroy a corporation. And you wonder why your supervisor hovers over you ...
____________

Nick Robinson BBC Political editor writes:

It was clear that something had to give but I had assumed that something would be the chief executive of News International, Rebekah Brooks.

Rupert Murdoch has, instead, sacrificed the News of the World - or, at least, its title. I assume he will produce another Sunday paper - perhaps, as Robert Peston has suggested on his blog, The Sunday Sun.

Team Murdoch must have realised that the name News of the World would be referred to again and again over the next few months in connection with the alleged phone-hacking of a murdered girl, grieving parents and war widows.

The question now is whether this will make the government's dilemma about the takeover of BSkyB easier or harder?

My guess is that the Murdochs have sacrificed the News of the World in order to salvage their television ambitions.