do this, don't do that - media edition

[veronica_rich]

So I'm far from fully knowledgeable on either of these, but a couple of media things from the week on which I'm allowed an expert opinion ...

1. My initial, gut reaction to News of the World in the UK being shut down was probably like a lot of people's - "If you're going to practice that kind of 'journalism,' good riddance." Five seconds later, though, you realize the truth of the matter: Lots of people who had nothing to do with the phone hacking are going to be losing their jobs so Murdoch can suck up to the British government enough to be allowed to take over yet more media outlets.

All I can say is, Rebekah Brooks must've sucked a LOT of wrinkly old-man cock.

2. Jurors in the Casey Anthony case are talking about their deliberations, how they couldn't convict on the evidence as presented. And, they're likely correct. I find these interviews interesting as a reader and a journalist - unlike what the News of the World reporters did to get their information and their judgment, these are valid stories in the public interest. It's telling to see how and why 12 people could go against overwhelming public opinion.



..... And my opinion two minutes later is still that that (bad swear word for someone pretending to be in the same profession as me) redhead sucked a lot of cock. (This of course, has nothing to do with her gender - it's all about her ethics.)

Comments

[golden-helikaon.livejournal.com]

That phone hacking thing is awful, but I don't think they should have shut down News of the World. As you say, there are a lot of people who had nothing to do with it that are going to lose their jobs now.

[pir8fancier.livejournal.com]

I wouldn't worry too much about their jobs. Murdoch has at least two other tabloids operating in Britain. The Sun only publishes five days a week, and they are now going to seven to pick up the slack left by News of the World.

Personally, I think that this is so profoundly disgusting that I don't care if Murdoch kisses Charles backside on national television. He shouldn't be considered for any other media outlets in Britain. Public opinion is so vehement right now, I'd be surprised if they awarded him the contract.

you realize the truth of the matter

Sorry, the truth of the matter is that you have a thoroughly corrupt media outlet that is not only flagrantly abusing standard journalistic ethics, but ANY sort of ethics by ANY standard. That is the truth. The fallout is that some people are going to lose their jobs. To me this is a little like saying well, we just killed a gang lynch pin now how are all those poor drug runners going to put food on the table? I think they SHOULD be out of business. I'm curious exactly how many advertizers are going to stick with his other outlets.

Other Murdoch execs are being arrested. I hope Ms. Brooks is next. It was under HER watch that they hacked in to the phone records of that poor dead child. Not to mention all those dead service men whose phones were also hacked into. These people are the lowest of the bottom feeders.

Anthony: Yes, everything that I have read blames the prosecutors. Of course now they can't retry her, however, I think that someone like that will get their just rewards. Look at OJ. Basically, if you are a sociopath, because you are truly a moral bankrupt, at some point the law will catch up with you.

[gobsmacked.livejournal.com]

Yes, to this.
NOTW also hacked into the phones of the families of two other murdered children: Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman. And in addition to families of soldiers killed in Afghanistan, they also hacked the phones of families of victims of terrorist attacks in London. And the royal family's phones, of course. And, as many 4000 other people.

They've also bribed police and who knows how they managed to get "top-ranking officials" (according to one news report) to collude the suppression of evidence that they were hacking into the phones of celebrities and politicians, including the PM and Deputy PM. (Well, I say "who knows how" but I suspect that blackmail or bribery may have entered into it).

Previous articles in various publications like the NY Times said that knowledge of the practice was widespread in the newsroom. The sheer scale of the hacking and bribery means that more than a few employees were involved. While I agree that the mailroom staff and so on shouldn't be held culpable and punished, they may not be. Murdoch is publishing one of his other rags a couple of extra days a week IIRC and looking to buy another media/news outlet. Maybe he'll re-hire them. I'm sure he's planning to re-hire any reporters not in jail.

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

To me this is a little like saying well, we just killed a gang lynch pin now how are all those poor drug runners going to put food on the table?

Problem is, you're treating everyone at this paper as though they all participated in the hacking. There were numerous typists, receptionists, assistants, press runners, ad salespeople and other non-editorial types who didn't do any hacking or hire it done. A secretary isn't anywhere comparable to a drug runner, because the former isn't doing anything illegal in the first place. These are not the kinds of jobs a person dreams of aspiring to in their careers; they are a way to make money to live in a hard economy, just like what you do or what I used to do a few years ago. (And no, there are not going to be enough positions to absorb these people - what's happening in publishing extends to physical newspapers, too.)

Sorry, I have strong opinions on the media industry and blame and fault, and I can tell you that even the majority of reporters/editorial wouldn't knowingly do something like this just to get a story. Some, yes, but this is something the higher-ups usually carry out, or select the more unethical reporters to do.

[pir8fancier.livejournal.com]

No, I'm not blaming all these people. I feel sorry for them. The fact that all these people are going to lose their jobs because Murdoch is an amoral asshole only contributes to my utter disgust.

Sorry, I have strong opinions on the media industry and blame and fault, and I can tell you that even the majority of reporters/editorial wouldn't knowingly do something like this just to get a story.

Of course not. However, I can't say that I'm sorry that Murdoch's media empire is taking a serious hit, nor am I sorry that his bid to buy BSkyB has been scuttled. For the last ten years Fox has been grotesquely unethical in reporting stories. They don't even pretend to present a balanced POV. So while Fox News might not be guilty of similar deeply unethical breeches, every single show, every single commentary is, IMO, unethical.

I know this hits too close to home. But a newspaper has nothing to offer but its integrity, right? That's why newspaper print retractions, yes? Because if they get it wrong then they don't want their integrity to be compromised. I do feel sorry for all those people, but I don't think that's the largest issue. What is the larger issue is that Murdoch finally crossed an ethical line of no return. Of course, I think he crossed a line about seven years ago, but obviously most people felt differently.

I think that considering the enormous scope and breadth of his empire, the larger consideration is the issue of ethics, even as I feel sorry for those who are losing their jobs. The fewer venues Murdoch has to spew his hate and warped POV the better. IMO.

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

Actually, the problem I was addressing was that this publication was being shut down by Murdoch the asshole in an attempt to save his own bacon, and he's throwing these little people to the wolves when he has no intention of changing his overall business practices. I have no problem with NewsCorp being put out of business and Murdoch being stripped of every penny he has; it's just a shame his properties can't revert to being individually-owned and be able to stay in business with the unethical leadership being ousted, so most people can keep their jobs. It's not a disagreement with your overall opinion, just picking at the details.

Which was the whole point of my post, come to think of it - what an amoral opportunist Murdoch is (and his son apparently is no better). There's absolutely no interest in his part on news and quality entertainment, it's all a cash grab and that's all it's ever been. He's tainted so many news and publishing (including books) outlets over the past couple or so decades, it's sickening.

[finding-neo.livejournal.com]

I have no opinion about the News of the World thing, only to say if they had used their evil powers for good, well, we might have had a 1 term Pres. Shrub Jr.

As for the Casey Anthony verdict, I'm just tired of reading it on people's Facebook walls. I get it - yes, someone should pay with jail time for the fact that that little girl's body was left to rot without a proper burial. But I guess that wasn't part of the charges. I will say this - a jury of 12 of her peers was presented with the evidence and they listened to the judge's instructions and decided they could not convict her without a reasonable doubt. That is all we should ask of any jury. I'm glad they've decided to explain their decisions, but many people are never going to accept that maybe our justice system got it right for once.

I blame the media for that too. Maybe we should fire some more media people. How about starting with Nancy Grace? And the Entertainment "news" shows. What really makes me sick is that these kinds of trials are apparently considered "entertainment."

[gobsmacked.livejournal.com]

Yes. No more Nancy Grace!

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

I blame our baby-worshiping culture that shames any woman for being able to make a reasonable decision to terminate a pregnancy if they have no interest in being a parent, or can't afford it, or it would interfere with their lifestyle. I don't know if that would have helped in THIS case, but you cannot tell me there wouldn't be a lower incidence of humans killing their young if pregnancy was treated as a medical condition, and becoming a parent as a responsible life choice, rather than some religious, hallowed institution everybody should aspire to participate in.

[janamelie.livejournal.com]

Rupert Murdoch is a truly vile individual. The power he has (had?) is frightening. When his Sun newspaper switched support to the Tories last year, it was one of the final nails in the Labour government's coffin. And he's not even a British citizen!

At least he's been forced to withdraw his bid to take over BSkyB:

http://www.google.co.uk/url?url=http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-14142307&rct=j&sa=X&ei=UjAeTsudGc628QOq34S0CA&sqi=2&ved=0CC0QgBAoADAA&q=news&usg=AFQjCNF7e6o_sCMrCREw0KIt6A527shX0Q

(I hope this link isn't "suspicious" - it's the BBC News website, so it should be OK.)

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

Not suspicious here for a change! I just can't say much because events keep developing every day and I'm waiting to see what the conclusion of all of this ends up being ...

[janamelie.livejournal.com]

(I think the link I put in my previous post may have got it labelled as "suspicious", so I won't put any in this one.)

If you haven't had time to follow the developments of this story, Rebekah Brooks has been forced to resign after all. Also, she's been summoned to appear before a Parlimentary Committee next Tuesday along with Rupert and James Murdoch, who initially claimed to be unavailable then caved in when pressured by the Government.

In a damage limitation exercise, Murdoch met Milly Dowler's family yesterday to apologise in person, but they're still suing him. :D

It does seem as though this may be a mess even Murdoch can't get out of. I suppose time will tell.

[veronica-rich.livejournal.com]

Yep. And the publisher of his Wall Street Journal resigned yesterday because he was once involved with the corporate structure of NewsCorp. I hear the FBI is going to initiate an investigation of NewsCorp's American media practices now. If this shuts down Fox News, I will be happy; I would be far MORE happy if it forced Congress to reinstitute media antitrust measures Reagan got rid of back in the 1980s (that Roosevelt had put in place almost 50 years earlier, for good reasons).