Jump to content




Latest Festivals News

Festival Search

eFestivals Camping Store

Recent Topics

Photo

Rupert Murdoch


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
129 replies to this topic

#1 Kowalski

Kowalski

    lives in a field

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,718 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 10:53 AM

I'm not having much luck with the search facility so apologies for a new thread...

http://www.bbc.co.uk...siness-17908839

"If at all relevant times, Rupert Murdoch did not take steps to become fully informed about phone-hacking, he turned a blind eye and exhibited wilful blindess to what was going on in his companies and publications.

"This culture, we consider, permeated from the top throughout the organisation and speaks volumes about the lack of effective corporate governance at News Corporation and News International.

We conclude therefore that Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company".

Ouch!

#2 Yoghurt on a Stick

Yoghurt on a Stick

    lives in a field

  • GOLD member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,045 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:10 AM

I doubt if he'll lose any sleep over bad things being said about him. If he's forced to shell out money if there is a subsequent trial then that will smart more.

#3 tonyblair

tonyblair

    lives in a field

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,031 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:13 AM

I think that conclusion is a bit more than just "a bad thing being said about him"

#4 russycarps

russycarps

    Grinderman to headline 2011 please

  • GOLD member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,986 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:25 AM

I imagine the only thing he cares about is the opinion of new corp's shareholders (who also hate him :lol:) rather than the bleatings of a country which has minimal influence on the world state, and which is governed by people who have a massively inflated sense of their own worth.

if and when he does leave new corp, his replacement will be equally odious

#5 eFestivals

eFestivals

    the value of your god may go down as well as up

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,246 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:35 AM

So Murdoch isn't fit to run a company, no shit sherlock.

When are they going to address the fact that successive govts have allowed him to run those companies for 40 years, with their blessing and help?

When is someone in power going to raise the fact that Dave Moron had Rupert round to Downing Street before he'd even appointed his cabinet?

#6 The Nal

The Nal

    Hoo Dawgies!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,309 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:41 AM

He irrelevant now anyway. Hes 81. Its like when they claim its a "success" when they catch 80 year old Nazi war criminals. No its not. They've gotten away with it and lived their lives.

#7 eFestivals

eFestivals

    the value of your god may go down as well as up

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,246 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 11:55 AM

He irrelevant now anyway. Hes 81. Its like when they claim its a "success" when they catch 80 year old Nazi war criminals. No its not. They've gotten away with it and lived their lives.

Nope.

He only becomes irrelevant once he's stopped pulling the strings of govt - and he's still very definitely doing that. It's because he's still doing that that Dave Moron is trying his best to hide behind Jeremy c**t.

He went into Downing Street to give Dave Moron his orders for how to run the country FFS.

The scandal is not Murdoch; businessmen will always try to corrupt govts to their wants. The scandal is the fact that govts were corrupted and are still being corrupted.

#8 Yoghurt on a Stick

Yoghurt on a Stick

    lives in a field

  • GOLD member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,045 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 12:22 PM

I think that conclusion is a bit more than just "a bad thing being said about him"


Yes, I couldn't be arsed trying to think of more suitable words. Worth pointing out though.

#9 sifi

sifi

    That's the worst beating I've seen since Rodney.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,036 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 04:50 PM

Cancer has Murdoch etc.

#10 grumpyhack

grumpyhack

    lives in a field

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,767 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 06:44 PM

The committee report was split along party lines with the Tories dissenting from the 'not fit' paragraph. Well there's a surprise.

#11 lost

lost

    Indifferent

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,326 posts

Posted 01 May 2012 - 08:00 PM

Think everyone knew what Murdoch is, What we didn't know is what a massive c**t Tom Watson is.Obviously needed to publish the findings of the report early in his own book to boost sales now he can no longer fiddle his MP's expenses. Can the next hearings decide who are fit and proper people to be MP's please?

#12 Barry Fish

Barry Fish

    lives in a field

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,099 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 05:53 AM

The committee report was split along party lines with the Tories dissenting from the 'not fit' paragraph. Well there's a surprise.


And that should hurt them further at the polls hopefully... Well if there is any justice in the world...

#13 Purple Monkey

Purple Monkey

    Ah herro prease.

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,515 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:02 AM

http://www.thedailym...s-201205025183/

:lol:

Edited by Purple Monkey, 02 May 2012 - 09:02 AM.


#14 worm

worm

    In all matters of opinion our adversaries are insane

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,748 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:13 AM

Nope.

I disagree. It's no single person. That's just scapegoating. Nazism wasn't Hitler. Thatcherism wasn't Thatcher. He's just an icon, albeit a powerful one.

#15 The Nal

The Nal

    Hoo Dawgies!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 17,309 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:25 AM

Nope.

He only becomes irrelevant once he's stopped pulling the strings of govt - and he's still very definitely doing that. It's because he's still doing that that Dave Moron is trying his best to hide behind Jeremy c**t.

He went into Downing Street to give Dave Moron his orders for how to run the country FFS.

The scandal is not Murdoch; businessmen will always try to corrupt govts to their wants. The scandal is the fact that govts were corrupted and are still being corrupted.

Of course theres a bigger picture but my point still stands. Punishing him now really proves nothing. Especially when the corruption of government, as you said, still exists. Much like the global financial set up, its a systemic issue.

#16 eFestivals

eFestivals

    the value of your god may go down as well as up

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,246 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:32 AM

He irrelevant now anyway. Hes 81. Its like when they claim its a "success" when they catch 80 year old Nazi war criminals. No its not. They've gotten away with it and lived their lives.

Nope.

I disagree. It's no single person. That's just scapegoating. Nazism wasn't Hitler. Thatcherism wasn't Thatcher. He's just an icon, albeit a powerful one.

so not an irrelevance then, as I said. :rolleyes:

And neither can the guilty be scapegoated; the guilty are correctly identified and labelled, and there's absolutely no doubt about Murdoch's guilt in the whole scenario. It's something he fully accepts of himself, of himself having failed to properly manage the companies he's responsible for.
(It's only the extent of his guilt and the consequences that should come from that that he disputes).

Just because there's others involved in the whole thing doesn't change anything about Murdoch's own responsibilities ... otherwise we might as well be saying that Hitler has no guilt for the crimes of Nazism as it was never him who flipped the switch on any gas chamber. :lol:

#17 eFestivals

eFestivals

    the value of your god may go down as well as up

  • Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 45,246 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:44 AM

Punishing him now really proves nothing.

it might prove nothing but it very definitely achieves something .... or are people now going to start claiming that there's no such thing as deterrence? :lol:



Especially when the corruption of government, as you said, still exists. Much like the global financial set up, its a systemic issue.

That's a different side to the same coin, something that needs dealing with away from a focus on purely Murdoch. After all, a corrupt official is open to corruption from anyone and not just a single individual.

In the same way that media companies need to be deterred from exorcising their power corruptly by making an example of Murdoch, those in a position of power within govt need to be deterred from being corrupted by making an example of those who have been corrupted.

Sadly, that still looks a very long way off. Most MPs have been proven as thieves including Dave Moron and yet they are being permitted to continue in their roles. Dave Moron keeps saying there should be no reward for failure in 'the city', and yet meanwhile he's been rewarded with a higher public office despite his thieving.

It's sickening, but no wonder the whole fucking world is fucked beyond belief. Until such time as the people of this country get some moral backbone we're just going deeper and deeper into the shit.

#18 russycarps

russycarps

    Grinderman to headline 2011 please

  • GOLD member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,986 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 09:47 AM

The committee report was split along party lines with the Tories dissenting from the 'not fit' paragraph. Well there's a surprise.



you could see that entirely in reverse of course

#19 LondonTom

LondonTom

    Raging Alcoholic

  • GOLD member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 13,302 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 10:22 AM

All I see from all this is the latest power struggle from the rich and powerful, while Murdoch is wrong they do seem to be making him a bit of a sacrificial lamb. If he goes, someone else will just take his place.

It's the Labour MPs acting like their party hasn't ever tried to get in bed with him before now that gets me the most :lol:

#20 tonyblair

tonyblair

    lives in a field

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,031 posts

Posted 02 May 2012 - 10:54 AM

It's the Labour MPs acting like their party hasn't ever tried to get in bed with him before now that gets me the most :lol:

while they might be acting more than slightly hypocritically, I haven't heard any of them try to deny their association with the Murdochs..

"yea, well you did it first" is a hopeless argument (and anyway, it was Fatcher wot started it ...)

Edited by tonyblair, 02 May 2012 - 11:27 AM.