News of The World to stop printing! (Murdoch merge)

Standard Toaster

'News of the World' was never a particularly accurate title anyway, unless The World is located up Cheryl Cole's minge.

anto2

Why are people glad about PW loosing his job ? Has he not exposed the big drug dealers etc ? ( i am a few years out of Ireland and not up with the latest news )

ejmaztec

Standard Toaster wrote: »

'News of the World' was never a particularly accurate title anyway, unless The World is located up Cheryl Cole's minge.

That would be Jordan's, with enough room left over to park a pink Airbus.

ottostreet

Yep, shame on you!

FloatingVoter

David Cameron just said that he would have accepted Rebekah Brooks' resignation. A possible hint to Murdoch regarding the BSkyB takeover bid, I'd imagine.
Back on topic, most of the offending journalists will walk into new jobs inside a month (if they don't wind up in an open prison writing their prison memoirs, to be published by a Murdoch imprint). The "little people" on NOTW will not be so lucky. So the closure to me is bittersweet at best.

Biggins

I can only say what I have said already in parts - but here it is again entirety:

It is only a cynical, window dressing exercise by Murdoch to protect his takeover over BSkyB. The space will only be filled by The Sun On Sunday, which will be more of the same rubbish, as bad as NOTW. This closure is only a stunt additionally to get the advertisers who had left the NOTW, to move in a few weeks, to the “Sun On Sunday”. The last thing the public should do, is reward Murdoch by allowing his takeover of BSkyB and more control of British media. Talk about rewarding the devil! As bad as he is now, he’d be much worse if he got his way – and treating 200 to 400 workers as fodder for his manoeuvres is not the actions of someone honourable.

…And for that alone, he should be sent packing – never mind still backing and employing Rebekah Brooks who was head at the time of the paper and who has been allegedly named by a phone hacker as being allegedly complicit with the phone hacker, allegedly present at meetings discussing the hacking and materials gained from said activities, etc.

I don’t think the closure of the NOTW all that much great news to be honest – and I’ll say why.

1. Its a ploy so that Murdoch can go a head now with his takeover in time, when this PR exercise is over.
2. 200 staff (from printers to factory floor staff) are now out of work. None of the present lot (getting sacked) are/were involved in the hacking.
3. There was going to be cuts anyway in the NOTW production lines anyway too according to the Financial Times.
4. Rebeka Brooks is STILL employed – even after being named by the hacker allegedly involved as also being in on the hacking.
5. Those that are/were going to sue the paper, will be effected now more so in their case in regard to limits of liabilities, seeing as the paper will now be closed come Monday. (There was reports that there may be 4,000 victims, with a total settlement cost of £120 million (€133.5 million ) – see: http://tinyurl.com/6zxxdcx.)
6. There WILL be a Murdoch newspaper replacement. Its already in the works – so nothing there will change. Murdoch will still eventually produce more of the same.

As for Murdoch saying the paper was doomed when advertisers pulled out – cobblers!
HE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS DOING

Those pulling out of advertising would be doing so for the long foreseeable future while LONG investigations continue (by two inquiries alone).
The loss financially would run into hundreds of millions, if not more.

So now as its emerged to the world, in a short while there will be an alternative new Murdoch Sunday paper with a different name.
Whats the betting those advertisers that pulled out of the tainted NOTW, will now instead advertise with the new Murdoch paper right away? Murdoch would know this – and thus we also get a partial PR exercise…
One large loss for a LONG time – versus – one shorter loss then back to normal with a ‘new’ alternative version with a different name…

Murdoch is a businessman. He’s not a fool by any means.
For the sake of a MUCH smaller loss and he gets the PR of supposedly closing a bad imaged paper, he gets to be allowed to continue his BILLION worth takeover.
Would any of us rather lose a few million in the short term (with another paper on the way anyhow to take up the slack!) – or Billions in the long run?

As regards those that was going to sue the paper, the limits of their financial exposure might be limited now and/or seeing at officially the company will be closed, they cannot be sued directly – more so their insurers will have to pay out and not Murdoch’s company itself.

(Its a legal way of passing the buck – For example: Land of Furniture in Ireland/England did this it seems when they became liable for toxic sofas they were selling – so they closed down and all of a sudden on the same properties weeks later “Cost Plus Sofa’s” appeared – possibly with the same staff, properties and same stock and suppliers! Anyone now suing the previous legal entity for damage done – has to take on their insurance company, not the company itself.)

How can this be done? …Because as the saying goes “The law can be an ass.”

---

Add to the previous, one report in Reuters added the following aspect:

Here’s some News of the World news to spin the heads of American lawyers. According to British media law star Mark Stephens of Finers Stephens Innocent (whom The Times of London has dubbed “Mr Media”), Rupert Murdoch’s soon-to-be shuttered tabloid may not be obliged to retain documents that could be relevant to civil and criminal claims against the newspaper—even in cases that are already under way. That could mean that dozens of sports, media, and political celebrities who claim News of the World hacked into their telephone accounts won’t be able to find out exactly what the tabloid knew and how it got the information.

If News of the World is to be liquidated, Stephens told Reuters, it “is a stroke of genius—perhaps evil genius.”
Under British law, Stephens explained, all of the assets of the shuttered newspaper, including its records, will be transferred to a professional liquidator (such as a global accounting firm). The liquidator’s obligation is to maximize the estate’s assets and minimize its liabilities.
So the liquidator could be well within its discretion to decide News of the World would be best served by defaulting on pending claims rather than defending them. That way, the paper could simply destroy its documents to avoid the cost of warehousing them—and to preclude any other time bombs contained in News of the World’s records from exploding.

“Why would the liquidator want to keep [the records]?” Stephens said. “Minimizing liability is the liquidator’s job.”
That’s a very different scenario, Stephens said, from what would happen if a newspaper in the U.S. went into bankruptcy. In the U.S., a plaintiff (or, for that matter, a criminal investigator) could obtain a court order barring that kind of document destruction.

In the U.K., there’s no requirement that the estate retain its records, nor any law granting plaintiffs a right to stop the liquidator from getting rid of them.

Source: http://tinyurl.com/6eatynu

—————————————————-


Murdoch is NO fool.
Anything he has done – is going to do – is with long term profit in mind and nothing less.
People and countries are just fodder for him to play around with!

THE BSKYB TAKEOVER SHOULD BE CANCELLED! – DO NOT BUY THE SUN ON SUNDAY

kfallon

Biggins wrote: »

I can only say what I have said already in parts - but here it is again entirety:

It is only a cynical, window dressing exercise by Murdoch to protect his takeover over BSkyB. The space will only be filled by The Sun On Sunday, which will be more of the same rubbish, as bad as NOTW. This closure is only a stunt additionally to get the advertisers who had left the NOTW, to move in a few weeks, to the “Sun On Sunday”. The last thing the public should do, is reward Murdoch by allowing his takeover of BSkyB and more control of British media. Talk about rewarding the devil! As bad as he is now, he’d be much worse if he got his way – and treating 200 to 400 workers as fodder for his manoeuvres is not the actions of someone honourable.

…And for that alone, he should be sent packing – never mind still backing and employing Rebekah Brooks who was head at the time of the paper and who has been allegedly named by a phone hacker as being allegedly complicit with the phone hacker, allegedly present at meetings discussing the hacking and materials gained from said activities, etc.

I don’t think the closure of the NOTW all that much great news to be honest – and I’ll say why.

1. Its a ploy so that Murdoch can go a head now with his takeover in time, when this PR exercise is over.
2. 200 staff (from printers to factory floor staff) are now out of work. None of the present lot (getting sacked) are/were involved in the hacking.
3. There was going to be cuts anyway in the NOTW production lines anyway too according to the Financial Times.
4. Rebeka Brooks is STILL employed – even after being named by the hacker allegedly involved as also being in on the hacking.
5. Those that are/were going to sue the paper, will be effected now more so in their case in regard to limits of liabilities, seeing as the paper will now be closed come Monday. (There was reports that there may be 4,000 victims, with a total settlement cost of £120 million (€133.5 million ) – see: http://tinyurl.com/6zxxdcx.)
6. There WILL be a Murdoch newspaper replacement. Its already in the works – so nothing there will change. Murdoch will still eventually produce more of the same.

As for Murdoch saying the paper was doomed when advertisers pulled out – cobblers!
HE KNEW EXACTLY WHAT HE WAS DOING

Those pulling out of advertising would be doing so for the long foreseeable future while LONG investigations continue (by two inquiries alone).
The loss financially would run into hundreds of millions, if not more.

So now as its emerged to the world, in a short while there will be an alternative new Murdoch Sunday paper with a different name.
Whats the betting those advertisers that pulled out of the tainted NOTW, will now instead advertise with the new Murdoch paper right away? Murdoch would know this – and thus we also get a partial PR exercise…
One large loss for a LONG time – versus – one shorter loss then back to normal with a ‘new’ alternative version with a different name…

Murdoch is a businessman. He’s not a fool by any means.
For the sake of a MUCH smaller loss and he gets the PR of supposedly closing a bad imaged paper, he gets to be allowed to continue his BILLION worth takeover.
Would any of us rather lose a few million in the short term (with another paper on the way anyhow to take up the slack!) – or Billions in the long run?

As regards those that was going to sue the paper, the limits of their financial exposure might be limited now and/or seeing at officially the company will be closed, they cannot be sued directly – more so their insurers will have to pay out and not Murdoch’s company itself.

(Its a legal way of passing the buck – For example: Land of Furniture in Ireland/England did this it seems when they became liable for toxic sofas they were selling – so they closed down and all of a sudden on the same properties weeks later “Cost Plus Sofa’s” appeared – possibly with the same staff, properties and same stock and suppliers! Anyone now suing the previous legal entity for damage done – has to take on their insurance company, not the company itself.)

How can this be done? …Because as the saying goes “The law can be an ass.”

---

Add to the previous, one report in Reuters added the following aspect:



Source: http://tinyurl.com/6eatynu

—————————————————-

Murdoch is NO fool.
Anything he has done – is going to do – is with long term profit in mind and nothing less.
People and countries are just fodder for him to play around with!

THE BSKYB TAKEOVER SHOULD BE CANCELLED! – DO NOT BUY THE SUN ON SUNDAY

I wouldn't buy the Scum any day of the week and especially not on the Sabbath

Did your hand hurt after all that typing Biggy-smalls? :pac:

Mr.Micro

The association of gaff prone Cameron with the ex editor of NOTW Andy Coulson could have even deeper political ramifications. How far will any investigation into the hacking be allowed to go .....it looks like Tory sleaze all over again? What else has the NOWT hacked into.....?

bigneacy

Pighead wrote: »

Great news for News of the World haters. Not so great news for NOTW employees.

My OH's uncle worked for them in London. Not in the scumbag section, was a background employee (no, not a PI either!!)

Pity about the innocent people losing their jobs. Good to see an evil spewing newspaper gone however.

Biggins

Mr.Micro wrote: »

The association of gaff prone Cameron with the ex editor of NOTW Andy Coulson could have even deeper political ramifications. How far will any investigation into the hacking be allowed to go .....it looks like Tory sleaze all over again? What else has the NOWT hacked into.....?

More importantly - how many other papers have done similar?
(As its been previous said that other papers were to some degree, doing the same tactics.)

I note that ALL Murdoch's media empires (including Sky News) are trying to just concentrate on the Cameron aspect - they are staying away where possible from the actual Rebecka Brooks aspect and the allegations/implications for the BSkyB takeover.
Murdoch's media empire is trying now to pull a slight of hand, distract the public with one issue - so that he can slip away on another.

Don't be fooled. The Cameron issue is small fry to the larger issues.

As John Prescott implied last night on Prime Time - what has happened in the last 24 hours, is just a stunt for the benefit long term for the Murdoch empire - and the sheep of this world will fall for it.

---

I wish people would stop saying the likes of "Good to see the newspaper gone."
Its NOT gone - its going to be similar back under a new name very shortly - and still under the Murdoch business umbrella - and same method/mentality of operation - with Brookes yet again at the helm!

Phill Ewinn

well put Biggins. Would never sub to SKY or buy that rag on Sunday anyhow. Hope all those dopes get jail time.

kraggy

Murdoch will get his BskyB. No doubt about it.

Cameron is well in with the Murdochs and vice versa. Also, Rebekah Brooks and Cameron are good mates. They even live near each other and call around to each other's for tea.

Just like Ireland, the people at the top are a small, tight-knit bunch.

Aidric

A smile came across my face when I heard this shitpiece was closing down.

carveone

I don't get it. How is putting in a default PIN hacking? I have an O2 phone - the voicemail was already setup with a PIN of 0000 which are you are never prompted for if you access your voicemail from your own phone. I've been in computer software for 20 years and this is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. It's like hacking a Windows 98 machine. Oooooh.

This is hardly news to most of you, and hey, maybe they've changed this policy already and I don't know it, but I don't see the media pointing fingers at the mobile companies. In fact most of them are keeping their heads down. I wonder why.

if (PIN = 0000) and (access=external) then return deny_access;

Wow. One line of code.

Biggins

carveone wrote: »

...Wow. One line of code.

Be it one line of code or five hundred lines, its still the same under a definition.
...And a 'hack' is done by someone unauthorised to do such a technique - whereas a person who is authorised to do it, is legally accessing their data.

carveone

Biggins wrote: »

Be it one line of code or five hundred lines, its still the same under a definition.
...And a 'hack' is done by someone unauthorised to do such a technique - whereas a person who is authorised to do it, is legally accessing their data.

Oh I understand, and it doesn't make it any the less sickening especially since a major question is: how did they get their mobile numbers.

But I remember boards.ie members going nuts because the Eircom WiFi passwords were a hash of the default SSID. Plus they were on WEP. Only shouting at Eircom made them change a dumbass policy which put many people at risk.

My point is: When you allow external voicemail access, by default, with a PIN of 0000, which everyone knows, then you should take the blame for the result. And making you set a PIN isn't much better if you allow multiple retries.

If all bank cards were sent in the mail with a default PIN, whose fault would it be when people lost money? The old granny? The kid? The billion dollar corporation who couldn't give a crap?

Edit: I'll add that Orange and TMobile in the UK have it as right as you can expect - you have to set a passcode to allow remote voicemail access, which is OFF by default. This reduces the attack to one of caller ID spoofing through a VoIP service, which is probably only easy in the US (I mention this because Kevin Mitnick just demonstrated that attack today).

EggsAckley

kraggy wrote: »

Murdoch will get his BskyB. No doubt about it.

I dunno - Investors are dumping BSkyB shares

• Richard Wachman
• guardian.co.uk, Friday 8 July 2011 13.45 BST
• Article history

Rupert Murdoch's plan to take full control of BSkyB has been scuppered by the political fallout from the News of the World phone-hacking scandal, the City believes.
Investors piled out of BSkyB shares on Friday after the prime minister promised an independent inquiry into what went wrong at the newspaper.
Sam Hart, media analyst at broker Charles Stanley said: "Murdoch's plan to bid for the satellite operator has been kicked into touch.
"Shareholders are discounting the possibility that this bid won't happen for the foreseeable future. Some people wonder if it will happen at all. It could take years before the various inquiries have wound up, so the deal has been pushed much further back than anyone would have guessed a week ago."
Several institutional investors agreed with Hart that the prospect of a deal happening anytime soon was fading. One said: "As things stand, it would be inconceivable for such a deal to receive political clearance. There would be a huge uproar."
BSkyB's shares were down around 5% at 776p on Friday morning after culture secretary Jeremy Hunt admitted the volume of responses to a public consultation meant the decision about whether to allow a Murdoch takeover would take "some time". His view was echoed by Cameron at a morning press conference.
Hunt said all factors would be taken into account, "including whether the announcement regarding the News of the World's closure has any impact on the question of media plurality".
News Corporation, where Murdoch is chairman, said over a year ago it wanted to buy the 61% of BSkyB it did not own, but its putative offer of 700p a share was turned down by the satellite company's independent directors.
Hart said: "Without a bid, BSkyB's shares could fall to around 725p, which I believe is what they are roughly worth in the absence of a bid by Murdoch.
"Don't forget the fundamentals are strong, with BSkyB profits for the year to 30 June 2011 expected to rise from £779m to £970m."
Brokers said it would be a blow if Murdoch cannot take control of BSkyB, which is viewed as a "cash machine" that is worth far more than the soon-to-be defunct NoW.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/jul/08/bskyb-deal-political-fallout

There's a lot of p!ssed off ex-NOW hacks who know who knows what about all sorts a lot of whom would be willing, I assume, to sell this information to rival media outlets who are salivating at the prospect of NC/NI crumbling. Whatever about Coulsen, Goodman - the previously convicted royal correspondent, has been rearrested. Is he going to go down again without taking any of his previous bosses with him? Brooks must have some sh!t on someone big - either a Murdoch or someone Murdoch has by the balls but someone may well have something on her.

amacachi

Feeling sorry for the "journalists" who will lose their "jobs" is like feeling sorry for the accounting department of a terrorist organisation that gets rounded up.

Biggins

EggsAckley wrote: »

I dunno - Investors are dumping BSkyB shares

There's a lot of p!ssed off ex-NOW hacks who know who knows what about all sorts a lot of whom would be willing, I assume, to sell this information to rival media outlets who are salivating at the prospect of NC/NI crumbling. Whatever about Coulsen, Goodman - the previously convicted royal correspondent, has been rearrested. Is he going to go down again without taking any of his previous bosses with him? Brooks must have some sh!t on someone big - either a Murdoch or someone Murdoch has by the balls but someone may well have something on her.

There is two further aspects.
1. Share price dropping will help Murdoch - rather than hinder him. He will be able thus to buy his needed takeover shares cheaper! (what irony!) - once he gets permission to continue onwards with his takeover bid.

2. Those that will want to (hope) be re-hired by Murdoch, will to some extent keep their mouths shut - while a few will (hopefully) inform the police more so due to their fired position, incorporating anger.
Murdoch having also a good assessment of who might know something that might be damaging to him, will in return quietly re-hire some NOTW staffers on the basis, that they are better kept within his fold than lose upon the world to tell all!
He will need a few of them indeed for the NOTW replacement, The Sun On Sunday.

Biggins

Just an update - its confirmed that English police are now looking at another newspaper as regards hacking.

* Also Renault is the first company to confirm that it is extending its NOTW ad boycott to all News International newspapers.

http://www.thejournal.ie/uk-phone-hacking-investigation-extended-to-second-publication-173185-Jul2011/

KyussBishop

Btw the Guardian liveblog on this is quite good:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/blog/2011/jul/08/news-of-the-world-phone-hacking-scandal

EggsAckley

Biggins wrote: »

There is two further aspects.
1. Share price dropping will help Murdoch - rather than hinder him. He will be able thus to buy his needed takeover shares cheaper! (what irony!) - once he gets permission to continue onwards with his takeover bid.

2. Those that will want to (hope) be re-hired by Murdoch, will to some extent keep their mouths shut - while a few will (hopefully) inform the police more so due to their fired position, incorporating anger.
Murdoch having also a good assessment of who might know something that might be damaging to him, will in return quietly re-hire some NOTW staffers on the basis, that they are better kept within his fold than lose upon the world to tell all!
He will need a few of them indeed for the NOTW replacement, The Sun On Sunday.

The share price dropping is of no benefit at this stage to Murdoch - as stated in Guardian

Sam Hart, media analyst at broker Charles Stanley said: "Murdoch's plan to bid for the satellite operator has been kicked into touch.
"Shareholders are discounting the possibility that this bid won't happen for the foreseeable future. Some people wonder if it will happen at all. It could take years before the various inquiries have wound up, so the deal has been pushed much further back than anyone would have guessed a week ago."

Indeed it means the 41% stake NC already holds is losing value so this is lose/lose. Murdoch wants to takeover BSkyB, he can't just sneak around buying up shares on the cheap
I take your second point though

Biggins

EggsAckley wrote: »

...Murdoch wants to takeover BSkyB, he can't just sneak around buying up shares on the cheap
I take your second point though

I wouldn't put it past him to try to be honest - once he gets official permission of course.
Not that he would do anything illegal and on the quiet... :pac:

As for those he sacked with 169 days left to Christmas, one little girl might have something to say to Murdoch on hearing that their Christmas might be ruined!
Something like... http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/696/funnymorningphotos13.jpg :pac:

ejmaztec

I wonder if anyone's hacked into News Corporation's systems to find out what the Lizard of Oz is up to?:pac:

steve9859

amacachi wrote: »

Feeling sorry for the "journalists" who will lose their "jobs" is like feeling sorry for the accounting department of a terrorist organisation that gets rounded up.

Or the cashiers at the banks, right??? Nonsense!

Spread

Biggins wrote: »

Just an update - its confirmed that English police are now looking at another newspaper as regards hacking.

* Also Renault is the first company to confirm that it is extending its NOTW ad boycott to ALL News International newspapers.

http://www.thejournal.ie/uk-phone-hacking-investigation-extended-to-second-publication-173185-Jul2011/

This is good news indeed. That'll stop the fcuker in his tracks. Hopefully other firms will follow. By sinking the NOTW he thought his noble deed would reap benefit with a phoenix-like emergance of a new SUNdayorsomething. Of course there will be lay offs ........ just as there are when the local big link in the drugs empire gets put away. But that's not the end of the world (pun not intended).
Vive la France!

Spread

giles lynchwood wrote: »

Maybe. The Sunday Hacker

Or of GRAUNIAD fame ........ The Sunday Nacker

amacachi

steve9859 wrote: »

Or the cashiers at the banks, right??? Nonsense!

Cashiers in banks did fcuk all wrong whereas just about any NotW/Sun etc. article I've ever read is innuendo, double-talk, speculation, manipulation, sensationalisation or outright lies. I've no sympathy for any "journalist" who would take a job working at those places.

Thargor

Why does Murdoch even care at this stage? He's eighty-something, he'll be dead in a short while.

Run_to_da_hills

The news of the world just received a massive scoop;

And they are going to need it this Sunday. to fill their paper full of sh*t

steve9859

One thing is for sure though. Politicians are going to sleep sounder in their beds tonight (Cameron excepted) and there will be more brown bags of cash being passed around Westminster than any time in the last decade. Investigative journalists have crossed the line here, but we need them to carry on what they are doing, and they work in a grey world. The MP expenses scandal was uncovered when the Telegraph paid for stolen data. That is hardly particularly ethical, but it served the public good.

OK the current unethical activities have not served the public good and need to be punished, but I think the investigative activities of the rags, particularly the Sunday ones, are vital. It is a bad day for our freedoms if the government use this as an excuse to rein in the press

Run_to_da_hills

The final edition of the News of the World this Sunday is going to have the biggest pair of tits ever on page 3.

David Cameron and Andy Coulson.

th3 s1aught3r

El Weirdo wrote: »

Now to get rid of the Sun, Daily Fail, Star, Mirror and Sunday World.

Best of luck with that !

Tipsy McSwagger

Thargor wrote: »

Why does Murdoch even care at this stage? He's eighty-something, he'll be dead in a short while.

You know I was watching Chinatown the other day and Jack Nicholsons character asked this evil old rich guy a similar question about hurting people to make money.

Jake Gittes: Why are you doing it? How much better can you eat? What could you buy that you can't already afford?

Noah Cross: The future, Mr. Gittes! The future.

Run_to_da_hills

El Weirdo wrote:

Now to get rid of the Sun, Daily Fail, Star, Mirror and Sunday World.

Where would Boards posters get their quotes without them?

Spread

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Where would Boards posters get their quotes without them?

Up to the balls in the Daily Express and Daily Sport. Presumably

Green Back

Did anyone watch Newsnights, BBC TWO, earlier tonight?
Absolutely brilliant viewing.
They had Steve Coogan on and Paul McMullen, who was Deputy Features editor at the News of the World from 1994 to 2001, he's the only guy that's been on the (many) news programmes this week supporting privacy intrusions. McMullan looked worse for ware, perhaps he had been drowning his sorrows ealier..
Coogan let rip against him, thought it was gonna come to blows. Towards the end Coogan told him: "You're not a journalist. You know you are not."

Standard Toaster

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SkeSJLgzG8k

Venom

Sometimes I hope there really is a god so scum like Paul McMullen and his ilk have a spot in hell waiting for them

Biggins

Thargor wrote: »

Why does Murdoch even care at this stage? He's eighty-something, he'll be dead in a short while.

He obviously might care about any legacy he might be leaving behind, he wants to leave something of substantiation for his offspring (the bigger the better maybe is his thinking), he wants to leave the biggest 'mark' possible upon the world as he clocks out... etc. It could be partly ego!
There are many reasons.

Green Back wrote: »

Did anyone watch Newsnights, BBC TWO, earlier tonight?
Absolutely brilliant viewing.
They had Steve Coogan on and Paul McMullen, who was Deputy Features editor at the News of the World from 1994 to 2001, he's the only guy that's been on the (many) news programmes this week supporting privacy intrusions. McMullan looked worse for ware, perhaps he had been drowning his sorrows ealier..
Coogan let rip against him, thought it was gonna come to blows. Towards the end Coogan told him: "You're not a journalist. You know you are not."

Fair play to Coogan - that Paul McMullen came across and actually looked like a piece of schite didn't he!
He's not the image one would have of a professional journalist - and I have met real professionals ones many a time.
He just looks like something that crawled out of a gutter, having fallen into it after leaving a bar!

Green Back

Biggins wrote: »

Fair play to Coogan - that Paul McMullen came across and actually looked like a piece of schite didn't he!

McMullen's so bad he's almost a caricature.
Later in the programme another contributor raferred to his rat like appearance.

cml387

I don't know if anyone read Marina Hyde in The Guardian yesterday (Lost In Showbiz..highly recommended).

She pointed out how a previous Screws investigation showed up no further evidence of phone hacking.
Marina did some basic research and came up with:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/lostinshowbiz/2011/jul/07/news-of-world-amanda-holden

OPENROAD

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Where would Boards posters get their quotes without them?

AH I suppose

Standard Toaster

I thought Coogan was gonna lunge over the table at that shitebag, I know I would have in Steve's position.
Just goes to show you what these shites get away with in the name of journalism. Journalist my arse.

"A small victory for decency and humanity." - Steve Coogan

gbee

I liked his honesty, arrogance and professionalism in that interview, he was outnumber 3:1

Then the presenter came around to his side, the other journalist called a truce and that left the actor wondering how he'd spend his damages ....

Impressed.

ziggy

This post has been deleted.

Biggins

Reports state now that Rupert Murdoch is coming to England himself. The PR exercises is not going as planned so the big man has to come over himself and do more stunts, PR interviews, brown-nose politicians and spin more crap, to make sure that he (sooner or later) gets his takeover approved.

http://www.thejournal.ie/murdoch-jets-in-to-handle-hacking-crisis-as-mp-suggests-his-son-could-be-prosecuted-173517-Jul2011/?new_comment=1#comment-52589

Bradidup

cuppa wrote: »

All Sunday papers should go. They seem to just repeat the weeks news .

Thats what the people want, most if not all Sunday papers are nothing but rags.

ejmaztec

Biggins wrote: »

Reports state now that Rupert Murdoch is coming to England himself. The PR exercises is not going as planned so the big man has to come over himself and do more stunts, PR interviews, brown-nose politicians and spin more crap, to make sure that he (sooner or later) gets his takeover approved.

http://www.thejournal.ie/murdoch-jets-in-to-handle-hacking-crisis-as-mp-suggests-his-son-could-be-prosecuted-173517-Jul2011/?new_comment=1#comment-52589

It'll be a private meeting between Cameron and the Lizard of Oz, and the latter will say: "If you want the Sun readers to vote you in again, you'd better do as I tell you, Dave, or you'll be as fucked as the News of The World."

Biggins

ejmaztec wrote: »

It'll be a private meeting between Cameron and the Lizard of Oz, and the latter will say: "If you want the Sun readers to vote you in again, you'd better do as I tell you, Dave, or you'll be as fucked as the News of The World."

I've no doubt words to that effect will be insinuated/hinted towards the government department heads besides quietly conveyed to those in power or want to get there.

Murdoch is a known bully and will use any means/methods to get what he wants.