Murdoch: Ouf! Is this meltdown?

[Mr Pee]

they realised it couldn't simply be dismissed as anti-Murdoch lefties getting their knickers in a twist.

I beg to differ......:erm:

[Bryn]

I beg to differ......:erm:

Beg away. Short change is all you are likely to get here.

[french frank]

I beg to differ......:erm:

Why?

[eighthobstruction]

I think that may require beyond a sentence....beyond the scope of Peeing....

[amateur51]

Well, as far as I'm concerned, I welcome the fact that he is going to include the BBC and social media in his enquiry. And I'm inviting him to a party at my house.

I quite agree with you, french frank but your concerns will count for nought when sundry ne'er-do-wells get their teeth stuck into Lord Justice Leveson's apparent friendships. I'm not suggesting that he is sacked, merely that he is candid about his relationships, whatever they may be, with Cameron or to whomsoever the Inquiry is reporting.:smiley:

[Flosshilde]

I beg to differ......:erm:

what is it you are differing from - are you disputing that that's what the Times thought, or do you think that it is just anti-Murdoch lefties getting their knickers in a twist?

If the former, that's a perfectly reasonable position to take - it's not really possible for any of us to know exactly why the Times decided (belatedly) to take up the story. If the latter, why do you think that the Times, a Murdoch paper, decided that they couldn't ignore it any longer?

Of course, expecting a coherent, or indeed any, argument from you might be expecting pigs to fly.

[makropulos]

I quite agree with you, french frank but your concerns will count for nought when sundry ne'er-do-wells get their teeth stuck into Lord Justice Leveson's apparent friendships. I'm not suggesting that he is sacked, merely that he is candid about his relationships, whatever they may be, with Cameron or to whomsoever the Inquiry is reporting.:smiley:

My instinct (for what that's worth) is that Leveson is a decent man - and I hope he shows exactly the candour you're suggesting. He seems a sensible man from what I've read. It would be foolish for him to be anything other than completely open about this - and he doesn't strike me as the sort of person to be foolish. Fingers crossed.

[Mr Pee]

what is it you are differing from - are you disputing that that's what the Times thought, or do you think that it is just anti-Murdoch lefties getting their knickers in a twist?

If the former, that's a perfectly reasonable position to take - it's not really possible for any of us to know exactly why the Times decided (belatedly) to take up the story. If the latter, why do you think that the Times, a Murdoch paper, decided that they couldn't ignore it any longer?

Well, on a simple point of fact, both The Times and The Sunday Times have been covering this story from day one, so I don't really understand your use of the word "belatedly". I imagine you don't read either of the papers concerned. I do, and they have both reported it at some length from the very beginning, as has Sky news.

As to the wider point, the Guardian have been awaiting their chance to put the boot into Murdoch for many years, and now they have that opportunity, they're making the most of it. The same goes for much of the Labour party and indeed the Lib Dems, as well as the wider left within Britain. Murdoch represents everything they detest- success, wealth, power and -as they see it- the wrong kind of politics.

And it is not just anti-Murdoch lefties getting their knickers in a twist, although that's a large part of it. It's also the meeja in general, who are caught between jumping on the bandwagon whilst at the same time being fearful that their own underhand skulduggery over the years will soon also be exposed. And of course the media love nothing more than reporting on themselves whilst at the same time seeing a competitor being hauled over the coals.

In short, it's a storm in a teacup that has been blown out of all proportion by the media and the anti-Murdoch brigade. The fact that newspapers sometimes employ underhand tactics has always been a given as far as I'm concerned.

Of course, expecting a coherent, or indeed any, argument from you might be expecting pigs to fly.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_U7KCWFN4wlk/TSZwAby6STI/AAAAAAAAEEA/heVToRYfWDk/s1600/pigs%2Bmight%2Bfly.jpg

[Globaltruth]

Rupe has a bit of trouble Down Under...

http://bit.ly/oZMKpW

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

the final nail in Blair's reputation's coffin [if it needed one] the man is not one of us eh?

[Flosshilde]

Poor child. If Hello's traditional curse on weddings applies to baptisms she'll be a Satanist when she grows up. (would that be more of a handicap than having Blair as her godfather?)

[handsomefortune]

thanks for the article calum da jazbo

> she'll be a Satanist <

:laugh: let's hope so!

funny really, in retrospect it's all so obvious. why didn't we, or the media, guess as much before? i suppose it'd have been branded 'far left twaddle' if anyone did pipe up!

it certainly does explain why the Times curiously has a skitzoid but liberal sprinkling of nu labour left, and old school, right wing journos however.

> Times, a Murdoch paper, decided that they couldn't ignore it any longer? <

yep! well at least, not without looking like total liars, or inatttentive idiots. who'd want to work for that newspaper currently - it must be a minefield of contradictions and compromises?

it's really scarey to think of poor dr kelly's death, and imagine how the phone call might have gone between tony and rupert. in fact, it doesn't bear thinking about, especially for those who remember the tragedy clearly, first time round.

we can only hope that tony and rupert get what's coming, IF justice had anything to do with contemporary politics. (instead, the coalition are making regressive changes to eg abortion ..... how very firmly, unequivocally right wing, nothing skitso about this 'progression' whatsoever, it's a time honoured ploy, guarenteed to distract public attention. what's more, the tabloids will just love it ... even more than 'vogue' loved having a queen, and the child of a corrupt tycoon, baptised in the same place as jesus! float on fashion luvvies - how i loathe their particular fantasies, about as revolting as the mainstream press.... just lashings of extra gloss).

[Serial_Apologist]

it's really scarey to think of poor dr kelly's death, and imagine how the phone call might have gone between tony and rupert.

Don't know if you ever watched the Rory Bremner show on Ch 4, handsome, (you don't have TV, right?), but I imagine it as going much like the made-up sketches depicting No 10 private conversations between Tony B and Alister C - lots of carefully choreographed hesitations, (Blair had 'em down to a fine art for TV interviews), you knows, unfinished sentences (as if the room were bugged). None of those knowing looks of course; but Tone and Rupe would know those knowing looks face-to-face and infer them into their down line conversations.

[Serial_Apologist]

we can only hope that tony and rupert get what's coming, IF justice had anything to do with contemporary politics. (instead, the coalition are making regressive changes to eg abortion ..... how very firmly, unequivocally right wing, nothing skitso about this 'progression' whatsoever, it's a time honoured ploy, guarenteed to distract public attention. what's more, the tabloids will just love it ... even more than 'vogue' loved having a queen, and the child of a corrupt tycoon, baptised in the same place as jesus! float on fashion luvvies - how i loathe their particular fantasies, about as revolting as the mainstream press.... just lashings of extra gloss).

Don't know how much of a :star: you are to blokes like me whose feminism has taken more than enough knocks in 20 years to last our remainder, for reasons both self-evidential but also too personal to tell or probably be believed. How do we maintain our faith in "human nature", I often wonder... :whistle:

[aka Calum Da Jazbo]

the Guardian have been awaiting their chance to put the boot into Murdoch for many years, and now they have that opportunity, they're making the most of it. The same goes for much of the Labour party and indeed the Lib Dems, as well as the wider left within Britain. Murdoch represents everything they detest- success, wealth, power and -as they see it- the wrong kind of politics.

ah i see about half the population then