Skip to main content

Has Murdoch junior closed the NoTW too soon?

Well, the Murdoch scandal is becoming the gift that just keeps giving.

The announcement by James Murdoch that the News of the World will close after Sunday's edition was one of several ideas that have been running round the blogosphere- after all the idea of separate Sunday titles has been unpopular with newspaper managements for some time. At one extreme is the steady death of the Observer as a separate title, at the other the increasingly full integration of the two Independent titles. So the closure of the NoTW has probably been discussed by News International in various contexts long before now. However it was probably not discussed in the context of the kind of scandal explosion that has now taken place.

However, while it may be good business for Murdoch to take the opportunity to do what he may have wanted to do anyway, it may not- yet- get News International off the hook. By taking such a drastic step at what is still a relatively early stage in the crisis, it may refocus public anger away from the NoTW and onto the wider Murdoch business. There has already been some criticism of the rather hypocritical editorials in the Times, while it may yet be the case that the phone hacking also embraced journalists on The Sun as well as the NoTW.

Has James Murdoch acted too soon? Public anger is still building, and by offering up a sacrificial lamb Mr. Murdoch may find that he is fanning the flames rather than quenching them. One of the key points of this scandal is that The Sun and the NoTW, while nominally functionally independent, were in fact integrated-at least to a degree. It is certainly the case that The Sun printed stories that involved phone hacking- and we do not yet know what degree of culpability the Sun may or may not have had. If it turns out that The Sun is implicated, will James Murdoch close that Paper too?

It seems hardly likely.

On the other hand the closure of the News of the World seemed hardly likely even as early as this morning.
Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Waiting for the Barbarians

What are we waiting for, assembled in the forum? The barbarians are due here today. Why isn’t anything going on in the senate? Why are the senators sitting there without legislating? Because the barbarians are coming today. What’s the point of senators making laws now? Once the barbarians are here, they’ll do the legislating. Why did our emperor get up so early, and why is he sitting enthroned at the city’s main gate, in state, wearing the crown? Because the barbarians are coming today and the emperor’s waiting to receive their leader. He’s even got a scroll to give him, loaded with titles, with imposing names. Why have our two consuls and praetors come out today wearing their embroidered, their scarlet togas? Why have they put on bracelets with so many amethysts, rings sparkling with magnificent emeralds? Why are they carrying elegant canes beautifully worked in silver and gold? Because the barbarians are coming today and things like that dazzle the barbarians. Why don’t our distingui...
Post a Comment
Read more

Liberal Democrats v Conservatives: the battle in the blogosphere

It is probably fair to say that the advent of Nick Clegg, the new leader of the Liberal Democrats, has not been greeted with unalloyed joy by our Conservative opponents. Indeed, it would hardly be wrong to say that the past few weeks has seen some "pretty robust" debate between Conservative and Liberal Democrat bloggers. Even the Queen Mum of blogging, the generally genial Iain Dale seems to have been featuring as many stories as he can to try to show Liberal Democrats in as poor a light as possible. Neither, to be fair, has the traffic been all one way: I have "fisked' Mr. Cameron's rather half-baked proposals on health, and attacked several of the Conservative positions that have emerged from the fog of their policy making process. Most Liberal Democrats have attacked the Conservatives probably with more vigour even than the distrusted, discredited Labour government. So what lies behind this sharper debate, this emerging war in the blogosphere? Partly- in my ...
20 comments
Read more

Lib Dem v. Tory (Round 2)

The Liberal Democrats stand for a distinct political ideology. It is an ideology built around both socially and economically liberal precepts. In as far as our ruling Labour government can be said to have an ideology at all, it coincides with Liberalism only incidentally. Labour stands for pragmatism, and where it does not there is still a core of values that are collectivist and not individual. Sometimes people are prepared to claim the moral high ground for policies of social solidarity and redistribution of wealth. Liberals may argue in favour of equality of opportunity, we can not argue in favour- as Socialists do- of "and equal society". The reason is simple: Socialism does not work. If one places equality above freedom, then eventually we get tyranny. This is why, while we may argue in favour of a more equal society as being a stronger society, the tools that we may use to gain -in our view- socially desirable outcomes must rest upon freedom above all else. As PJ O'...
14 comments
Read more