Missing Milly Dowler's voicemail "hacked by News of the World"

[smokedout]

from 'no one died' to 'she died' in one easy step

lets say you cunt someone off on these boards, 8 years later they top themselves, is that your fault?

 

[rorymac]

Similarly, I was well fucking irritated listening to Harriet Harman castigating the tories for getting right in there with Murdoch for their own ends....and then suggesting that NL just did much the same because they were scared...AWWWWWWWWWW!


Anyway....I keep meaning to ask about Newscorp's hold in the US but I'm not sure it's appropriate on this thread

I know ymu mentioned that US journailsts are expressly forbidden from accepting hospitality - and also that the press is generally just much better regulated over there.
Well I didn't know that until just recently and I only know (from this thread) that Murdoch owns the Wall Street Journal (I think?) but presume he owns others too (and I know there's Fox, obv, and that this news has now started trickling through even there).

I'm not sure what I'm asking really simple stuff, tbf - is their press effectively regulated already, so just not open to this shite?

So there most likely just wouldn't be anything similar coming from US based Newscorp operations?
So any bother there would almost certainly come from the UK press hacking (for eg) 9/11 victims/families - and the other stuff about journalists not being allowed to bribe international officials (which is big enough on it's own, I know!)......but also how much *influence* Murdoch would be likely to have had, politically, by way of his grip on the media there (which is rather more minimal - again because of set legal limitations)?

Soz for the waffle (am shit at formulating questions) but *out of interest* sort of thing...

 

[ericjarvis]

Have you been eating crack??

Lord knows I love a redhead but that girl has had "nightmare" writ large upon her Gillian McKeith-esque face for years.

Nice hair though. I'll give her that.

One could compare the rest to Thatcher.

Guaranteed bone-drooper.

Actually it's her hair that I find repellant. That and her morals of course.

 

[Pickman's model]

lets say you cunt someone off on these boards, 8 years later they top themselves, is that your fault?

if you're going to top yourself i hope i don't have to wait eight years.

 

[smokedout]

Are you trying to say that the only things that are morally wrong are theft and PHYSICALLY harming someone?

no badly put, what im saying is that if you want to be fucking prime minister or chancellor then you have to expect your private life is in the public domain, if you dont want that dont be fucking prime minister

 

[Pickman's model]

Actually it's her hair that I find repellant. That and her morals of course.

and, i hope, her politics

 

[Pickman's model]

no badly put, what im saying is that if you want to be fucking prime minister or chancellor then you have to expect your private life is in the public domain, if you dont want that dont be fucking prime minister

why? what has the country done, that they should have cameron's private life inflicted on them?

 

[smokedout]

if you're going to top yourself i hope i don't have to wait eight years.

have you got anything to actually say about this

 

[ericjarvis]

No

Am I missing something?

Twenty years of enforced sexual abstinence I suspect.

 

[smokedout]

why? what has the country done, that they should have cameron's private life inflicted on them?

so if cameron is going out picking up prostitutes or shagging his secretary you think it should be a state secret protected by legislation?

 

[Pickman's model]

have you got anything to actually say about this

yes. if you top yourself it won't be my fault. but if you're going to, please don't leave it eight years.

 

[Pickman's model]

so if cameron is going out picking up prostitutes or shagging his secretary you think it should be a state secret protected by legislation?

so you see someone picking up prostitutes and someone shagging their secretary as equivalent. why is this?

 

[smokedout]

so you see someone picking up prostitutes and someone shagging their secretary as equivalent.

says who?

of course not, just two examples of something a prime minister might be doing (perfectly legally) that is in the public interest to be reported

 

[two sheds]

And by setting the agenda, they also act, alongside the state and wider business interests to set the permissible boundaries of public discourse, which is why business, the media and the state make such a toxic triumvirate, especially if you're poor or in a minority.

I thought I remembered Our Noam saying that the 'left-wing' papers like Guardian are as much part of the propaganda model as the others because they set the limits of what can be said - this far and no further sort of thing. The only reference I can find though is for the US:

"In Manufacturing Consent Herman and Chomsky describe the workings of flak within the US press. The so-called ‘liberal’ sectors of the US media, most prominently the New York Times, come under a near constant attack from flak producing institutions for their supposed left-wing extremism. In reality the criticism is largely farcical with the liberal media sticking extraordinarily closely to the cross-party consensus. The effect of flak is to sharply delineate the limits of reasonable debate and to de-legitimise views which are considered more extreme than those presented by the liberal media, the logic being that if the liberal media is indeed extremely leftist and hostile to the government then anything more extreme might reasonably be viewed as being literally insane. "

http://alexdoherty.wordpress.com/2009/01/27/the-bbc-and-the-propaganda-model/

 

[Pickman's model]

says who?

you said that you thought we should be told if cameron was shagging his secretary or picking up prostitutes - the clear suggestion being both activities are equivalent.

 

[Pickman's model]

I thought I remembered Our Noam saying that the 'left-wing' papers like Guardian are as much part of the propaganda model as the others because they set the limits of what can be said - this far and no further sort of thing. The only reference I can find though is for the US:

"In Manufacturing Consent Herman and Chomsky describe the workings of flak within the US press. The so-called ‘liberal’ sectors of the US media, most prominently the New York Times, come under a near constant attack from flak producing institutions for their supposed left-wing extremism. In reality the criticism is largely farcical with the liberal media sticking extraordinarily closely to the cross-party consensus. The effect of flak is to sharply delineate the limits of reasonable debate and to de-legitimise views which are considered more extreme than those presented by the liberal media, the logic being that if the liberal media is indeed extremely leftist and hostile to the government then anything more extreme might reasonably be viewed as being literally insane. "

http://alexdoherty.wordpress.com/2009/01/27/the-bbc-and-the-propaganda-model/

i thought the consensus was that the guardian was worse than the others because it can get away with so much more.

 

[smokedout]

you said that you thought we should be told if cameron was shagging his secretary or picking up prostitutes - the clear suggestion being both activities are equivalent.

only in your head

 

[Pickman's model]

only in your head

so which is 'worse' - shagging his secretary or picking up prostitutes?

 

[laptop]

In the coming days, as we take further concrete steps to resolve these issues and make amends for the damage they have caused, you will hear more from us.

What can this portend? Another inadequate compensation pot?

He repeated this, unless the Guardian's being naughty with quotes, on leaving his meeting with the Dowlers.

So: some announcement will be made either just before the Select Committee appearance on Tuesday, to sabotage it and change the question; or, if really desperate, during it, to show some respect (or give the appearance of it).

An expanded compensation fund - in the hope of avoiding court cases with the embarassing disclosure bit?

$30M to Disco Dave's Big Society?

What?

 

[smokedout]

so which is 'worse' - shagging his secretary or picking up prostitutes?

i think both would be in the public interest to be reported (im not interested in childish morality traps), but you appear to think it should be a secret

 

[Divisive Cotton]

on Tuesday News International hired Edelman PR company and now they have sacked two key hated figures (sorry, they resigned), the old man has personally apologised to the Dowler family and they have run full page apologies in all the national press

 

[Pickman's model]

i think both would be in the public interest to be reported (im not interested in childish morality traps), but you appear to think it should be a secret

if they're not equivalent - and you've said they're not - you clearly think one is worse than that other. which is it, is cameron shagging a secretary worse than cameron being driven round london picking up prostititutes?

 

[smokedout]

if they're not equivalent - and you've said they're not - you clearly think one is worse than that other. which is it, is cameron shagging a secretary worse than cameron being driven round london picking up prostititutes?

see youve already quantified it, it very much depends on the circumstances of each doesnt it - why dont you write out two examples of how each might happen and then i can give you an opinion

failing that you might want to comment on the issue actually being discussed

 

[ViolentPanda]

I thought I remembered Our Noam saying that the 'left-wing' papers like Guardian are as much part of the propaganda model as the others because they set the limits of what can be said - this far and no further sort of thing. The only reference I can find though is for the US:

"In Manufacturing Consent Herman and Chomsky describe the workings of flak within the US press. The so-called ‘liberal’ sectors of the US media, most prominently the New York Times, come under a near constant attack from flak producing institutions for their supposed left-wing extremism. In reality the criticism is largely farcical with the liberal media sticking extraordinarily closely to the cross-party consensus. The effect of flak is to sharply delineate the limits of reasonable debate and to de-legitimise views which are considered more extreme than those presented by the liberal media, the logic being that if the liberal media is indeed extremely leftist and hostile to the government then anything more extreme might reasonably be viewed as being literally insane. "

http://alexdoherty.wordpress.com/2009/01/27/the-bbc-and-the-propaganda-model/

I think what you're referring to is in one of the later books of conversations with David Barsamian, where he's talking about Norman Podhoretz as a kind of exemplar of this phoney leftism, and then elucidates that far from the US "left" media being unique, the same faux-liberality and boundary-setting is present in every media, across the world.

I'll have a flip through later, see if I can find the exact quote.

 

[Pickman's model]

see youve already quantified it, it very much depends on the circumstances of each doesnt it - why dont you write out two examples of how each might happen and then i can give you an opinion

failing that you might want to comment on the issue actually being discussed

i am commenting on the issue being discussed. i want to explore which of these peccadilloes you find more objectionable. i don't give a fuck about cameron fucking his secretary - they can have a fruity threesome with samantha while the royal family film it for all i care - nor do i fuss too much about cameron picking up prostitutes. which of them do you think should be reported, and why?

 

[smokedout]

i am commenting on the issue being discussed. i want to explore which of these peccadilloes you find more objectionable. i don't give a fuck about cameron fucking his secretary - they can have a fruity threesome with samantha while the royal family film it for all i care - nor do i fuss too much about cameron picking up prostitutes. which of them do you think should be reported, and why?

i think all of them should be able to be reported and i cant fucking believe you dont

 

[Pickman's model]

i think all of them should be able to be reported and i cant fucking believe you dont

where did i say these things shouldn't be able to be reported? you're just making it up like the wanker you are.

 

[smokedout]

so whats your point

 

[Pickman's model]

so whats your point

right now? you're a liar.

 

[smokedout]

why