Murdoch Scum

[snowychap]

Personally I think if we took more notice of the past we might not end up doing them again...

Perhaps we might but I don't think that's putting it in to context.

As I ve argued nothing here is new. I don’t think what we are seeing is some new human behaviour that can be identified with morality breaking down. As I ve said look at the moral behaviour of say William Randolph Hearst, Northcliffe and Rothermere et al

I disagree. I think the tolerance (and even lauding) of unprincipled behaviour, bad practice, wilful transgression and so on throughout life is something (at least slightly) different from the past.

Integrity, it appears to me, has become an obstacle in all walks of life and seems often the first (and most easily chosen) casualty in any quandary.

...its a question of whether one should be principled, or bend one’s morals to gain power to then hope that one can do a better job of the world...

I think you muddy the waters by talking about 'bending' morals.

It is the argument for the expedient where morals are less a thing for reasoned discussion (something which should always accompany morality as it's a difficult subject) and more a fairweather cloak to be cast off when inconvenient.

I think this is called a moral maze.

Again, in my view, generally a defence used by those wishing to excuse their actions (I would have said salve their consciences but that would often require unexpected success in a rigorous search for one).

[snowychap]

News Corp withdraws bid for BSkyB.

Though one quote is:

"We believed that the proposed acquisition of BSkyB by News Corporation would benefit both companies, but it has become clear that it is too difficult to progress in this climate," said News Corp chairman Chase Carey in a statement.

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

Newscorp withdraw bid for BskyB!

here

[Gringo]

News Corp withdraws bid for BSkyB for now.

fixed

Next few years will be used securing the bskyb's position in order to relaunch the takeover bid sometime after the next general election.

[RunRickyRun]

Woohoo!

[PauloBarnesi]

I disagree. I think the tolerance (and even lauding) of unprincipled behaviour, bad practice, wilful transgression and so on throughout life is something (at least slightly) different from the past.

It seems we might be more aware of it, but do not believe its anything new

[Bazdavies79]

Vince Cable will be happy.

[Davkaus]

It's delaying the inevitable. Give it a year or so and the Pop Idol watching elecotorate will have forgotten that they were supposed to be outraged, will still be reading the S*n, and Satan's representative on Earth will get his mits on the rest of Sky anyway.

[RunRickyRun]

It's delaying the inevitable. Give it a year or so and the Pop Idol watching elecotorate will have forgotten that they were supposed to be outraged, will still be reading the S*n, and Satan's representative on Earth will get his mits on the rest of Sky anyway.

Na can't see it myself.

How many judicial inquiries have lasted less than a year? There's no chance of them bidding until the inquiry is over.

This will take years to unravel and Murdoch Snr will probably be deceased before they are able to mount another offer.

I don't think this is the end of it either. His attack dogs have been muzzled and the politicians who used to be his ever willing servants have turned against their master.

Maybe I'm being optimistic but just cannot see how he will ever regain his vice like grip on our affairs.

[snowychap]

I disagree. I think the tolerance (and even lauding) of unprincipled behaviour, bad practice, wilful transgression and so on throughout life is something (at least slightly) different from the past.

It seems we might be more aware of it, but do not believe its anything new

Sorry, Paul, forgive the way that I said that as I really was trying to suggest that the novelty of the situation was the scale of this tolerance - that the tolerance itself was not new but the pervasiveness of this tolerance throughout society was something new.

I'd certainly allow for the possibility that your first comment explains that view; changes in media and the increases audibility of otherwise not immediately accessible voices may well mean it is more of a change in perception than actual opinion. I doubt it but I don't rule it out.

[blandy]

In today's Independent

Mark Steel: How about a TV detective called Yates?

Oh this is such fun. And every few hours it gets better, but always with an announcement there's "still worse to come", leaving us struggling to imagine what they might have done that's worse. Presumably by tomorrow it will turn out they planted a bug in Heather Mills's false leg and hacked into Stephen Hawking's voicebox.

The only thing that tarnishes it slightly is now everyone hates Murdoch. It's like when you follow an obscure band and they become famous. Suddenly politicians who've spent their careers prostrate before him are shocked at how dreadful these revelations are. This astonishment might be reasonable if News International was run by Susan Boyle or Dame Judi Dench, but this was RUPERT BLOODY SODDING BLOODY MURDOCH YOU IDIOT.

The politicians can't be blamed because, as Peter Mandelson said, "We feared him". You can understand this, because the people in Egypt and Syria who stand up to tyrants only face torture and death, but Murdoch could print a picture of you with your head in a lightbulb and no one can be expected to withstand that, especially if you're in a humble job with no power such as Prime Minister. So what else could they do but fly round the world to see him and be photographed laughing and having dinner with him over and over again? After all there's no point in being a martyr.

Cameron ensured continuity, hiring one of Murdoch's closest people and removing a minister in case he got in Rupert's way. He even had Rebekah Brooks round for Christmas dinner, which she explained was because she was one of his constituents. So this Christmas all his constituents should invite themselves there for dinner, and no doubt they'll all be let in to chat about the drains behind Lidl over a glass of port. But now the party leaders are appalled and disgusted and could never have guessed, as convincing as someone who protests, "I've spent 10 years hanging around with a dogfighting gang, but I had no idea they were involved in dogfighting."

The police are shocked too, because how could they know 11,000 pages of documents about phone hacking might contain evidence of phone hacking? There should be a detective series based on Inspector Yates, who led the first investigation. Each week would end with all the suspects together in a room and him saying, "In this box are documents proving which of you is the murderer. But I don't have time to go through that lot so you can all go."

Even Brooks herself is astonished, and is eager to investigate. So the newspaper will investigate itself, the police will investigate themselves and the politicians will be investigated by an inquiry set up by themselves. They are all keen on stringent law and order so maybe this is their plan to speed up the justice system. Instead of costly trials the accused will be told to hold an inquiry into themselves, and come back in three years and let us know if they did anything wrong or not.

But despite this, every day is glorious for those who've watched Murdoch's organisations bend governments, cheer wars, support massacres and smash unions, because he's on the run, stumbling like a dictator whose rule is under threat, bewildered as to why people don't bow to him anymore. And as a bonus it seems every day someone else unpleasant gets dragged into trouble, so by the weekend I expect to see Chris Moyles being asked to resign, and pressure being put on the bloke who cut me up as I was turning into Streatham High Road.

And, like all crumbling despotic regimes, stories now unfold of the madness within, such as the tale of Rebekah Brooks asking a reporter to attend the news conference on the morning after 9/11, dressed as Harry Potter. If only he'd done as he was told, and then turned her into an earwig.

[snowychap]

Is it the Indie or Mark Steel who puts commas before the conjunction 'and' (other than excepted circumstances)? I can't believe it's the latter.

[bickster]

I read that this morning too Pete, very good read

[snowychap]

Sammy Wilson took the honours in the shortened debate today on the Murdoch/media shite.

Good to see, otherwise, that Labour and the Tories seemed to be going for each other. It's the kind of behaviour that suggests some level of impropriety and, perhaps, guilt (though not the feeling of it) on both sides.

Edit: That Stewart bloke has his mouth full of Murdoch cock, surely?

[leviramsey]

but its a question of whether one should be principled, or bend one’s morals to gain power to then hope that one can do a better job of the world.

Is someone willing to bend their own morals (or one whose morals sanction the things typically necessary to gain power, for that matter) to gain power someone we should trust with any power at all?

If one enters the game of politics, one it would seem has to accept it is a popularity contest, and one has to win that to get one’s key points across. This isn’t being so corrupted that one has no morals. I think this is called a moral maze.

The only way out of the maze is not to enter it in the first place (with apologies to War Games)

[snowychap]

The only way out of the maze is not to enter it in the first place (with apologies to War Games)

[leviramsey]

Is it the Indie or Mark Steel who puts commas before the conjunction 'and' (other than excepted circumstances)? I can't believe it's the latter.

It's the Oxford/American way (it is striking how often it is that when there's a difference of linguistic opinion between North American and British English, Oxford sides with the Americans).

[leviramsey]

Some very interesting coverage of the controversy in the WSJ. today... unfortunately I left my copy at work and it's behind a paywall (even the opinion columns... one would have thought that the point of the opinion section was to influence people...).

[snowychap]

Is it the Indie or Mark Steel who puts commas before the conjunction 'and' (other than excepted circumstances)? I can't believe it's the latter.

It's the Oxford/American way (it is striking how often it is that when there's a difference of linguistic opinion between North American and British English, Oxford sides with the Americans).

Hold on - the Oxford comma (as alluded to in my parenthesis) is relevant in a particular situation. It's not got any kind of foothold in simple breaking up of sentences, it's only something which comes in to play in lists.

[leviramsey]

Ah, I just saw your complaint and figured it was about the Oxford comma... I took the "excepted circumstances" as referring to the cases where even anti-Oxford comma style guides often allow its use.

As for sentence joining, I've always been taught to use a comma there, and I blindly assumed, against all better judgment, that British English was similar.