The Leveson Inquiry

[Serial_Apologist]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...influence.html

Well, in the words of Christine Keeler, he would say that, wouldn't he!

[amateur51]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...influence.html

I refer you, the hack and the lawyer in question, to Harold Evans' account (Good Times, Bad Times) of his time working with Murdoch during the period that Murdoch was toadying up to Thatcher over getting her to waive the referral of his bid for The Times to the Monopolies & Mergers Commission. The deal was done: Thatcher got Murdoch's newspapers' support and won the election and eventually Murdoch got the referral waiver and got his clutches on The Times, since when it has become a shadow of itself.

Here is Sir Harold's recent piece about Mr Murdoch's disingenuous evidence to Leveson

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/apr/25/rupert-murdoch-leveson-myth-memory-imagination

But Mr Jay is quite capable of looking after himself and Murdoch's dirty tricks campaign, designed to gull those with short memories

[Flosshilde]

Yes, & the Telegraph isn't squeeky clean with regards to ownership, either.

[ahinton]

Yes, & the Telegraph isn't squeeky clean with regards to ownership, either.

Indeed not, but it's not a "leftie" paper, is it? - and, in any case, which paper is "squeaky[sp.] clean with regards to ownership"? The fact that a particular one might be owned by a trust hardly defines it as reliable or corruption-free, does it?

[Beef Oven]

Well, in the words of Christine Keeler, he would say that, wouldn't he!

[Beef Oven]

I seem to get into worse trouble every time I try to... god, Simon, don't be such a boring literalist, I hate RB like I hate Simon Cowell or Carol Vorderman and... well actually no it's more serious than that but... "sworn" is a figure of speech, y'know?

Look, ANY woman who has tried to achieve ANYTHING in a profession where men tend to be more numerous will have been talked over, condescended to, belittled, insulted or simply ignored often in such a casual way it's scarcely noticed. That is what makes you protective, sometimes, of women in the media spotlight when they come under attack - even against your own instincts and judgment. I imagine - I hope - it's better for younger women now. And now saying THAT will get me into trouble.

Great post handsomefortune!

You gentlemen can get back to Leveson, I think I'd better get back to some music...

I am and will always be a PROUD GUARDIAN SUBSCRIBER!

Er... that's it. Bye.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

Well, in the words of Christine Keeler, he would say that, wouldn't he!

Mandy Rice-Davies, actually, S_A; but the sentiments are spot on.

[Serial_Apologist]

Mandy Rice-Davies, actually, S_A; but the sentiments are spot on.

Thanks for that correction, ferney!

At school, I remember, we called her Randy Rice Crispie

[Beef Oven]

Mandy Rice-Davies, actually, S_A; but the sentiments are spot on.

Well, it was a long time ago!!

[Simon]

Originally Posted by Simon

As to hatred, I'm happy that it's an emotion that I don't seem to feel, really, now. I think that, rather as the quality of mercy seems to benefit "him that gives and him that takes", so does hatred eat away at the mental well-being of the person hating.

Ah, wise words from the Alan Partridge of Gestalt Therapy

I'm sorry. I omitted to give credit to WS for the reference to Merchant of Venice as I assumed that most on here would recognise it, but apart from that which part of my post did you disagree with this time?

[Mr Pee]

Originally Posted by Simon

As to hatred, I'm happy that it's an emotion that I don't seem to feel, really, now. I think that, rather as the quality of mercy seems to benefit "him that gives and him that takes", so does hatred eat away at the mental well-being of the person hating.



I'm sorry. I omitted to give credit to WS for the reference to Merchant of Venice as I assumed that most on here would recognise it, but apart from that which part of my post did you disagree with this time?

Don't bother, Simon. You know that amateur's knee-jerk reaction to certain posters is childish abuse, whatever you say.

[Simon]

I think it is the best newspaper around - & a lrge part of its 'bestness' must be down to the fact that it doesn't have an individual owner, but is owned by a trust.

What a very silly comment.

So, you'd support a newspaper owned by a trust of anarchists or fascists, would you? Because it would therefore be a good paper?

No, you approve of it because it supports the ideas, principles and prejudices that you have, just like everybody else does with their own favourite papers.

[ahinton]

Don't bother, Simon. You know that amateur's knee-jerk reaction to certain posters is childish abuse, whatever you say.

Well, be any of that as it may or may not, may I put in a repeat plea for contributors to the thread to get back to the inquiry itself rather than going off on tangents that, like what has so far passed for Mrs Brooks's and others' "answers" to questions put to them, risk diverting attention away from the questions being asked and the information that Jay is seeking to extract by asking them in order that all that needs to be found out gets found out? Is that really too much to ask?

[Simon]

Don't bother, Simon. You know that amateur's knee-jerk reaction to certain posters is childish abuse, whatever you say.

You may be right, but I was hoping that he might try to enlarge upon his reasons for the comment, Mr P. Or at least, get one of his more intelligent friends to help him do so.

[ahinton]

What a very silly comment.

So, you'd support a newspaper owned by a trust of anarchists or fascists, would you? Because it would therefore be a good paper?

No, you approve of it because it supports the ideas, principles and prejudices that you have, just like everybody else does with their own favourite papers.

I agree - as indeed I have already made clear earlier - that the fact of a newspaper's ownership by a trust cannot of itself guarantee either the reliability and trustworthiness of all of its content or the freedom from corrupt practice that might be deployed in gathering it, but at the same time let's not blind ourselves with the assumption that the reportage of the inquiry is all about the political "left"ness or "right"ness of the papers concerned; the Daily Telegraph has not been altogether backward in coming forward from time to time with critical observations of which some might not have seemed out of place in the Guardian, which is perhaps less surprising than it might otherwise seem because the subject matter is a grave as it is. It's not about individual papers deciding what they think about what's under scrutiny in the inquiry but about what's being discovered by it.