NEWS: News of the World to close amid hacking scandal

News International announces that its best-selling Sunday tabloid the News of the World will close after Sunday's final edition.

This Sunday's issue of the News of the World will be the last edition of the paper, News International chairman James Murdoch says.

Police investigating allegations of phone hacking by the News of the World have called for patience as they contact almost 4,000 people whose names appear in documents seized in 2005.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14045952

And what say I? Well, those who are friends with me on Facebook may have seen what I posted yesterday on the subject: "I think News of the World should be shut down after all the hacking they've done." I have also been following some of it on Twitter and have responded to a couple of tweets stating that the job losses were inevitable, since the paper would have been crippled both financially and by reputation because of the allegations and any lawsuits.

It should also be pointed out that the NotW has settled out of court with several celebrities about hacking already, and now that families of dead soldiers and murder victims have also been hacked just doomed it.

Incidentally, I never like The News of the World simply because it is full of poor journalism and gutter trash. I never considered it to be a credible paper in the first place, so I am not going to mourn it's demise. I will therefore congratulate Murdoch on this decision.

I heard about this, and I was surprised that they closed the business down themselves... one would expect the government to.

What did thy hack and why?

They did hone hacking.

A suspected 4,000 people have either been hacked or were considered to be hacked, I am not using the word allegedly since they have admitted guilt against several celebrities and MPs (they settled out of court, one or two went to court before the settling was done). More recently, a couple of stories caused Ford, Sainsbury's and Boots to pull out their advertising revenue to the paper. These were allegations that the parents of the m,urder Soham girls were hacked and that the families of military personnel in Afghanistan and Iraq were hacked.

I hope closing down does not mean those that are guilty will not be pursued by the law.

How low.

I caught an interview from This Morning (on YouTube) with one of NotW's former full-time and now freelance journalists who justified hacking a politician or otherwise public figure's phone or email account reasoning that whatever shady business they do should be exposed no matter what. I do agree they should be exposed when the suspicion is arisen but preempting the case by hacking their private numbers and emails goes against moral and lawful rules.

And who cares about cheating idiots, don't justify their actions by celebrating their case. That only makes it worse and is unfair to the persons most affected, public or otherwise.

I couldn't finish the watching the interview because the journalist couldn't focus, kept looking down and was pretty much weaseling his way out of the guilt pile. You could just read his shame all over him.

Also, this: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14077405

Phone Hacking: Highly Illegal.
Police Bribery: Just as Illegal.

I heard about this on the news too. I thought it was incredibly dumb because the guy who covered it actually flat out said how to do it.

"Did you know that its incredibly easy to hack a voice mail account..." Now I'm going to be a big idiot and show you how right now on live television. Now you can all go hack voice mail accounts!

Ha, yes Vago they tend to do that alot... Its so stupid. On one of the reports over here they showed you what you needed to hack a computer through an unsecure wireless network!

Well, personally I am glad that its shutting down. I agree with Vek it was never a reputable paper in the first place and because of this it makes it even worse that they were hacking in the name of public interest.

When it was celebrities I thought it was pretty bad, but the whole thing with those girls is just outrageous. Im pleased they are shutting down, the whole thing has brought shame on what it is to be a journalist and the importance of free media.

Red-Indigo wrote:Well, personally I am glad that its shutting down. I agree with Vek it was never a reputable paper in the first place and because of this it makes it even worse that they were hacking in the name of public interest

Public Interest? I fail to see any public interest in their intentions.

Yes, I agree, that was my point Vek

They defended the first bout of hacking (paticularly politicians) as the right to free media and public interest. They said that certain things should be known and aparantly phone hacking was the most reputable method of doing that :/

When stuff like that is said I think it damages what the majority of reputable journalists stand for.

Andeavor wrote:How low.

I caught an interview from This Morning (on YouTube) with one of NotW's former full-time and now freelance journalists who justified hacking a politician or otherwise public figure's phone or email account reasoning that whatever shady business they do should be exposed no matter what. I do agree they should be exposed when the suspicion is arisen but preempting the case by hacking their private numbers and emails goes against moral and lawful rules.

And who cares about cheating idiots, don't justify their actions by celebrating their case. That only makes it worse and is unfair to the persons most affected, public or otherwise.

I couldn't finish the watching the interview because the journalist couldn't focus, kept looking down and was pretty much weaseling his way out of the guilt pile. You could just read his shame all over him.

Thats a terrible justification.

Also it doesn't explain why they thought it was okay to hack the phone messages of a murdered teenager.



While most journalists would do almost anything to get a good story, you'd think there would be a level a journalist wouldn't stoop to. I had heard that they didn't only hack to listen in on the messages, but they also tampered with messages help with there stories (something related to tampering with phone messages of a murder victim). Thats just horrible.

Good riddance to them being gone. Anyone "journalist" who participated in that activity does not deserve the right to call them self a journalist.

Oh dear.

The Times, Sunday Times and The Sun are all in trouble now as allegations are being thrown at them. And yes, before you ask, owned by News International who also owned News of the World.

Seems former Prime Ministers and Royalty were targeted too.

Now Gordon Brown is accusing the Sun for having acquired information on his son's illness through whatever means. The information, however, came from a father of another sick child who felt it would only help raise awareness. On top of that the Sun said they contacted the Browns before printing the story to get their approval.

*sigh*

Shouldn't we draw the line on medical information (which is not to be shared anyway without the patient's content) as well as personal information of private persons in other cases such as murders, rapes or other tragic events?

I dunno, I've given up on the media in general quite a few years back, I feel there's almost no way we can go back to proper journalism á la Walter Cronkite. It's all about the scandalous front-page story.

A Major long term enquiry has been outlined by the Perime Minister ion a statement given after PMQ's.

Just heard that Jude Law is suing both the News of the World and The Sun over hacking.

Also, an update.

Call for a full investigation of News International / News Corp in both the USA and Australia (and not by the Brits, but by US and Aussie politicians) - interesting note is that Fox News is not covering the story That sounds like Denial to me.

Rupert Murdoch publish an apology in 7 national newspapers in teh UK, basically an admission of guilt. He is also being summoned to the Parliamentary enquiry - which by law as an Aussie he does not have to attend. Only British Citizens have to attend them by law. i think if he fails to atend he is admitting guilt as well.

And with any luck Murdock will have to watch his empire crash down around him (i'm being optimistic here)

It's turning into Citizen Kane, isn't it?

Rosebud...

bmpalmann wrote:And with any luck Murdock will have to watch his empire crash down around him (i'm being optimistic here)

May not be such an optimistic, but realistic viewpoint now. The board members of News Corp have asked that he stand down as head of the company if I heard correctly. Basically they said that the era or the Murdocks has come to a close.

Both Rupert Murdoch and his son as well as Ms Brooks have denied any involvment in the scandal... I may not know much about the Murdoch empire let alone know how to run one myself, but when you reach a point where a scandal as such threatens your very integrity, you've not only been unable to run the empire, your career is pretty much over.

This scandal is just the story that keeps on giving.

I have heard in the last two days the number of people willing to contradict each over this increasing. Senior editors and reporters willing to say James Murdoch lied to Parliament - an offence by the way. Rupert Murdoch looking fragile, and no-one willing to point out that Rebekah Brooks "tried" to resign twice before she actually did - I read that piece of info on the BBC website a few days ago.

I am shocked no-one has mentioned that News International is responsible for the "Fake Sheik" stuff that I believe was highly unethical. It did reveal Pakistanis Cheating at Cricket and Fergie selling access to her ex-husband, Prince Andrew. But it also targeted Sven-Goran Eriksson and Lawrence Dallaglio just when they needed the nation's support.

Andeavor wrote:Both Rupert Murdoch and his son as well as Ms Brooks have denied any involvment in the scandal... I may not know much about the Murdoch empire let alone know how to run one myself, but when you reach a point where a scandal as such threatens your very integrity, you've not only been unable to run the empire, your career is pretty much over.

Indeed. One thing though. I get that that guy was obviously angry at Rupert (as most people are), but pieing an 80 year old?

The Thlot Pickens: http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/28/phone-hacking-sarah-payne

Just another example of trust being destroyed. You don't break the trust of a campaign you are backing.