it does show just quite how ruthless murdoch is that he is prepared to bin his newspapers to claw together more control through full ownership of sky.

And now they went after the medical records of Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. As if the diagnosis isn't awful enough???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118880

And now they went after the medical records of Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. As if the diagnosis isn't awful enough???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118880

Not only am I not interested in the medical records of Gordon Brown's son, nor whether he has cystic fibrosis, I am not interested in whether anyone else is interested either, or the lengths to which anyone else would go to to find out such information.

I suppose I should be, since I suppose I am next. I don't really want Shavers' Weekly running an expose on my credit card statements, nor some interfering busy-body bringing up my bar bills at my next job interview.

However, any muzzle that we put on the press will stop them barking at burglars as well. You can be sure that dishonest politicians will make better use of any privacy laws than will innocents who need protecting. We should be careful what we wish for, lest we receive it...

SC

Indeed.

And as for the PI.........would his defense be, as was hauptman Shulz's at his trial in Nuremburg, that he was only following orders?

(Actually, I made "hauptman Shullz" up in case anyone misses the reference and googles "hauptman Shulz")

Indeed.

And as for the PI.........would his defense be, as was hauptman Shulz's at his trial in Nuremburg, that he was only following orders?

(Actually, I made "hauptman Shullz" up in case anyone misses the reference and googles "hauptman Shulz")

Oh God - poor Hauptman Shultz; now he's just one more statistic...

SC

And now they went after the medical records of Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. As if the diagnosis isn't awful enough???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118880

Not only am I not interested in the medical records of Gordon Brown's son, nor whether he has cystic fibrosis, I am not interested in whether anyone else is interested either, or the lengths to which anyone else would go to to find out such information.

I suppose I should be, since I suppose I am next. I don't really want Shavers' Weekly running an expose on my credit card statements, nor some interfering busy-body bringing up my bar bills at my next job interview.

However, any muzzle that we put on the press will stop them barking at burglars as well. You can be sure that dishonest politicians will make better use of any privacy laws than will innocents who need protecting. We should be careful what we wish for, lest we receive it...

SC

Hmm. Weird. Can't recall anywhere where I said muzzle a free press. Please do point that out to me.

But if this is the UK's idea of investigative journalism and what is important public knowledge than well, I guess I don't think much of their press.

Maybe this boy's medical records are part of some big govt corruption scandal that the public is affected by and has a right to know? No? Then maybe its just some kind of sad and pathetic yellow journalism that has substituted facts and research on important public issues with nosing into peoples private lives and labels that "freedom of the press".

And now they went after the medical records of Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. As if the diagnosis isn't awful enough???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118880

Not only am I not interested in the medical records of Gordon Brown's son, nor whether he has cystic fibrosis, I am not interested in whether anyone else is interested either, or the lengths to which anyone else would go to to find out such information.

I suppose I should be, since I suppose I am next. I don't really want Shavers' Weekly running an expose on my credit card statements, nor some interfering busy-body bringing up my bar bills at my next job interview.

However, any muzzle that we put on the press will stop them barking at burglars as well. You can be sure that dishonest politicians will make better use of any privacy laws than will innocents who need protecting. We should be careful what we wish for, lest we receive it...

SC

Hmm. Weird. Can't recall anywhere where I said muzzle a free press. Please do point that out to me.

But if this is the UK's idea of investigative journalism and what is important public knowledge than well, I guess I don't think much of their press.

Maybe this boy's medical records are part of some big govt corruption scandal that the public is affected by and has a right to know? No? Then maybe its just some kind of sad and pathetic yellow journalism that has substituted facts and research on important public issues with nosing into peoples private lives and labels that "freedom of the press".

When we protect the innocent from the the sad and pathetic prurient prying of the ignorant and foolish, we run the risk of providing a cover for the iniquitous and villainous.

The best thing that we could do would be to demonstrate our maturity and common sense by letting such papers' readership wither and dwindle, but sadly, that seems beyond our ability.

Like drugs, the best way to stamp out prurient and intrusive journalism is not to buy it. I do my bit, as I said before, but its not enough, unfortunately. Fortunately, we have a relatively free press in which such mischief as the NOTW committed comes to light, and the great unwashed can now make their own news-purchasing decisions, with the consequences of their actions before them.

SC

I'm flying a bit blind, as this thread was the first I had read of the whole sorry saga, but whether I read it or not, I still value press freedom.

And now they went after the medical records of Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. As if the diagnosis isn't awful enough???

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14118880

Although I agree with your point, I am a little cautious regarding the Brown's public anguish here, Brooks has stayed the night at Sarah Browns house supposedly after the front page report and allegedly Brown himself went to Brooks wedding.

Now I got that from a news report, so a fine spread of supposedly and allegedly is a requirement, as I cannot confrm the veracity of the report.

So, whats the info here then? and how does it benefit the public? Is this really investigative journalism? Really???

Screwing with police investigations? tapping celebs phones? prying into medical records? Someone who, near as I can tell, does not hold public office? Oh wait, he's 5. Guess he should expect it?

Come come, what happened to ethics in journalism? I don't condone this kind of illegal and pathetic behavior in the name of freedom of the press. I condemn these individuals for their total lack of ethical standards and their employers for encouraging this kind of thing.

Now, this was investigative journalism that was in the public interest

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6915439/ns/nightly_news/t/reporters-watergate-notes-released/

Not some five year old child's confidential medical records.

The press needs to police themselves and the few decent ones need to stand up and condemn this crap. Its not investigative journalism

So, whats the info here then? and how does it benefit the public? Is this really investigative journalism? Really???

Screwing with police investigations? tapping celebs phones? prying into medical records? Someone who, near as I can tell, does not hold public office? Oh wait, he's 5. Guess he should expect it?

Come come, what happened to ethics in journalism? I don't condone this kind of illegal and pathetic behavior in the name of freedom of the press. I condemn these individuals for their total lack of ethical standards and their employers for encouraging this kind of thing.

Now, this was investigative journalism that was in the public interest

http://www.msnbc.msn...notes-released/

Not some five year old child's confidential medical records.

The press needs to police themselves and the few decent ones need to stand up and condemn this crap. Its not investigative journalism

Aew you suggesting that the press should self-censor, and be our moral guidance?

Are you suggesting that the press should not publish the news that people want to read, and strive to get that news?

Are you suggesting that the public, including small children, the unfortunate, royalty, fame-seekers and corrupt politicians need protection from the press?

I don't condone illegal behaviour, including whateveritis that some journalists are alleged to have done, nor driving too fast, drink driving, evading the tax man nor under-age drinking. BUt I am sure that the full force of the law will be brought on those journalists who, in the course of their duties, have done whateveritis that they are alleged to have done, or driven too fast, or parked on a yellow line, or broken into someone's office to steal the Watergate tapes. And I would not want to only condone those crimes that I have not committed myself... not being a journalist, nor currently obliged to sleep under bridges; but in the future, who knows?

Its great fun to get all in a fluster about other people's mischieviousness, villainry and wickedness, but before we legislate against it, we should consider whether our current legislation is adequate, our part in the affair, and how such shackles will hobble ourselves in the future.

SC

"the road to hell is paved with good intentions"

You know what, never mind. I can see you are intent on twisting whatever I say to suit whatever it is you think I am saying. I don't play these stupid little games.

Enjoy your discussion without me.

You know what, never mind. I can see you are intent on twisting whatever I say to suit whatever it is you think I am saying. I don't play these stupid little games.

Enjoy your discussion without me.

No ofence intended. My point is only that it is easy to react to what we see as wrong with restrictions which are themselves worse.

SC

I can tell you the very day I decided not buy another paper.

I was back in the UK. Diana had just died so I was in my early twenties.

I was sat on a bus going to town and these two old dears sat behind me were nattering on about whatever, I was paying no notice. What I did catch though was one of them saying something along the lines of "Oooh, I know Ethel. The monarchy can't be allowed to carry on after this. It's just not right"

I just knew that what they said was not their own opinion or words, but that of whatever paper they had been reading that morning. Their words were almost identical to the headlines in the tabloids. I felt like asking them what THEY really thought about it and why THEY thought the monarchy should be abolished, in their own words. Of course I didn't ask and doing so would have been pointless anyway because they'd have just recite the latest red top's articles' as though they were their own words, and even believing they were their own words.

I then later grew to become more appalled at those that were buying the papers than those producing them. Murdoch is a complete and utter c**t, that's no secret. But the reason he has so much power is because of the tools who continue to buy his crap.

The press in the UK has huge influence and power in the nation. HUGE. With such power comes responsibility and it is clear the only things these people feel they are responsible for is their own wealth and career progress.

Freedom of speech comes with responsibility and if the responsibility is absent, then the level of freedom should be looked at. Do we allow hate speeches in spite of the fact it is restricting speech of the speakers? Of course we don't and rightly so. Are the Devil's advocates now going to argue that white supremacists, for example, should be allowed to say what they want in the name of freedom of speech?

Freedom of speech is something the UK (and other nations) are very fortunate to have and is something that countless people would LITERALLY die for. Under no circumstances should anybody be allowed to abuse it, even if it does give the public something that will help pass their time with.

The press can shove their right to freedom of speech where the sun don't shine as far as I'm concerned. They have proven that they don't deserve it.

I can tell you the very day I decided not buy another paper.

I was back in the UK. Diana had just died so I was in my early twenties.

And they still won't let her rest. When Kate & Willy got married all the papers were banging on about how she's like Diana. Can't they leave the poor woman alone?

I'm sure I sure her face in my toast this morning

Funny how a lot of those howling for freedom of the press are the same ones who were outraged over the WikiLeaks.

You know what, never mind. I can see you are intent on twisting whatever I say to suit whatever it is you think I am saying. I don't play these stupid little games.

Enjoy your discussion without me.

My apologies. I was mis-ascribing to you the sentiments and opinions so clearly put forth by Moonrakers

My apologies again for any ofence or irritation caused

SC

555 Consider yourself 'whiplashed'.

Phone-hacking whistleblower found dead: Former News of the World reporter accused Coulson of lying about his role

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016132/Sean-Hoare-News-World-phone-hacking-whistleblower-dead.html#ixzz1SVvWOVKa

Phone-hacking whistleblower found dead: Former News of the World reporter accused Coulson of lying about his role

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016132/Sean-Hoare-News-World-phone-hacking-whistleblower-dead.html#ixzz1SVvWOVKa

Had a similar report in the Telegraph.

In the posted comments below the article about 200 conspiracy theorists were airing their views. There's more nutters in the world than I ever expected.

This guy was fortyish, a bit overweight, heart flutter, but no reason to drop dead.

Phone-hacking whistleblower found dead: Former News of the World reporter accused Coulson of lying about his role

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2016132/Sean-Hoare-News-World-phone-hacking-whistleblower-dead.html#ixzz1SVvWOVKa

Had a similar report in the Telegraph.

In the posted comments below the article about 200 conspiracy theorists were airing their views. There's more nutters in the world than I ever expected.

This guy was fortyish, a bit overweight, heart flutter, but no reason to drop dead.

You've lead a sheltered life then Humphrey.

You've lead a sheltered life then Humphrey.

Well, I spent half my childhood in an air-raid shelter, if that helps.

But although I am used to the weird tales that are to be found in Bedlam and OTB, the people who write in to newspapers are really off the planet.

Strange thing is, I've just been looking in 'The Sun' after Boater's nipple tipple, and the comments there are not nearly as far out as those in the Telegraph. (Or is it because 'Sun' readers have difficulty in putting together a coherent sentence? I see that with the reporters)

Reading the Sun can lead to hair growing on the palms of your hands. (So can too much time spent in air raid shelters as a child).

I know what you mean about the sun's readers putting together a coherent sentence as well..

Reading the Sun can lead to hair growing on the palms of your hands. (So can too much time spent in air raid shelters as a child).

I know what you mean about the sun's readers putting together a coherent sentence as well..

All Sun readers should get a sentence ( a very long one )

the s*n has gone out of its way to be incredibly offensive again today it seems. headline about the norway massacre being the work of al qu'aeda and 'norway's 9/11'. despicable, filthy rag.

Back to the News of the Screws

It seems that News International, the proud owners of the defunct newspaper, have been lying to Parliament and everyone else.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/phone-hacking/8705570/Phone-hacking-orchestrated-cover-up-of-hacking-at-News-of-the-World.html

A copy of the Goodman letter previously provided to a parliamentary committee was altered to remove the key paragraphs on the secret deal and the suggestion that Mr Coulson was aware of phone hacking, MPs disclosed.

News International sources said that the offending paragraphs had been removed following discussions with detectives investigating phone hacking at the tabloid.

However, Harbottle & Lewis said in a letter to MPs that comments made about its work by Rupert Murdoch and other senior executives had been “misleading” and “inaccurate”.

In a statement, News International said: “We recognise the seriousness of materials disclosed to the police and Parliament and are committed to working in a constructive and open way with all the relevant authorities.”

Whoops

Rupert's in trouble again

Staff at The Sun tabloid arrested in UK bribe inquiry

FIVE staff at Britain's largest selling tabloid The Sun have been arrested along with three other people over alleged bribes paid to police and defence officials.

Rupert Murdoch's News Corp said police had also searched the homes of the five staff and the group's London offices, potentially deepening the scandal over British tabloid wrongdoing.

A 39-year-old female employee at Britain's Ministry of Defence, a 36-year-old male member of the armed forces and a 39-year-old serving police officer with Surrey Police, were also arrested in an early morning swoop yesterday, police said.

Read more: http://www.news.com.au/business/staff-at-the-sun-tabloid-arrested-in-bribe-inquiry/story-e6frfm1i-1226268762353#ixzz1m7rytooQ

OMG, getting like Thailand and Philippines.

Wonder how much more to be uncovered.

Obviously the tip of the iceburg.