I'm feeling very left out of things - as far as I know, no-one has tried to hack into my Voicemail. There are so many 'celebs' and politicians popping out of the woodwork claiming that they've been victims, that I feel like Billy No-Mates. What started supposedly as a single NotW 'rogue reporter' has grown and grown, and threatens to engulf more than just News Corp.
The Guardian, fresh from its Wikileaks triumphs, has led the charge on this business from the start, and today it wheeled out its big guns: as well as extensive coverage in the paper, Simon Jenkins was on the case, as was former Rupert Murdoch editor Bruce Guthrie. Guthrie may be a former employee with an axe to grind, but that doesn't stop his attack being as effective as it is fascinating, saying that assurances from Murdoch '...should be taken with a pinch of salt - actually a whole shaker of the stuff'!. Most interesting though was a Leader Comment in the paper, asking why there had been so little coverage of the employment tribunal decision back on November 2009 that awarded £800,000in damages against the NotW over 'a consistent pattern of bullying behaviour' while Andy Coulson was its editor - Coulson is, of course, the man who has now resigned from two jobs on account of his innocence. I'd missed that judgement, and it seems that it wasn't widely reported, other than in the Guardian and a couple of other papers, because of the omerta that seemingly existed where papers don't write about other papers. What? If such a 'gentlemen's agreement' ever existed, it sure as hell is dying a spectacular death!
Vince Cable, the standing joke of the cabinet, might have blurted out that he had declared war on Rupert Murdoch, but he was seemingly only doing it to impress a couple of young female reporters - the Guardian, however, seems to mean it. The paper talks about the 'element of fear' that exists around News International, claiming that MPs eased off on investigating the Coulson affair for fear of having their own personal lives 'turned over', that a Commons select committee 'meekly deferred' when the Chief Exec of News International declined to appear in front of them, and that the Met shied away from doing a proper job of investigating the matter.
Today's attacks on Murdoch's empire are the most vitriolic I can recall, and I don't see any sign that the Guardian intends to ease off. It will be fascinating to see the ABC figures over the coming months - will the Guardian's campaigning stance win it more readers, and in particular, will it be at the expense of the Murdoch-owned Times?
No comments:
Post a Comment