Home > Alex Massie

Tuesday 22 May 2012

Rebekah Brooks: Don't Blame Me, I'm A Victim Too!

Tuesday, 5th July 2011

That, I think, is what we are supposed to take away from the ridiculous statement News International's Chief Executive has issued today. Surely the editor of the News of the World asks the occasional question about the provenance of the stories she chooses to publish? Apparently not. This being so a reasonable person might just be tempted to ask if Ms Brooks is a) telling the truth or b) any good at her job?

It's surely one or the other but her defence appears to be, "It wasn't me; I was just the clueless, hapless, innocent editor". I am not sure how many parsnips this butters.

There are a couple of nice touches in her statement:

It is almost too horrific to believe that a professional journalist or even a freelance inquiry agent working on behalf of a member of the News of the World staff could behave in this way.

If the allegations are proved to be true then I can promise the strongest possible action will be taken as this company will not tolerate such disgraceful behaviour.

I hope that you all realise it is inconceivable that I knew or worse, sanctioned these appalling allegations.

That "almost" is good and so is the faux-shock of that "even a freelance inquiry agent" . But this also seems to be a telling indicator, surely, that these "inquiry agents" (a distinctly decorous term itself!) were not expected to adhere to the standards expected of a "professional journalist" and existed to do the dirty work demanded by the paper while granting the top brass some measure of plausible deniability. If this was not the case then the "even" in Brooks' statement is redundant.

Indeed the "almost" in "almost too horrific" also lends abundant credibility to the allegations since Brooks' own remarks make it clear such behaviour was far from inconceivable and, even, not quite "too horrific" at all. Parsing these matters is a fraught business and of course I take Brooks at her own word that we should "realise" it is "inconceivable" that she knew anything about any of this. Even so, I can't help notice that asking her staff to "realise" all this is "inconceivable" is not actually quite the same thing as denying any and all knowledge of what was going on.

And if this happened in the Dowler case - as, again, has not yet been determined conclusively - then isn't it more likely than not that it happened in other cases too? And if that is so then how likely is it that the News of the World was the only paper behaving in this fashion?

UPDATE: David Allen Green has more, including the observation that Brooks' denial is all rather Clintonian...

Filed under: Britain (738 more articles) , Fleet street (3 more articles) , Newspapers (382 more articles) , Phone hacking (117 more articles)

Previous Back to Alex Massie Next

Blogs: Martin Bright | Susan Hill | Melanie Phillips | Coffee House | Faith Based

Actions: Print this article | Email to a friend | Permalink | Comments (12)

Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit

Post comment

FF

July 5th, 2011 3:15pm Report this comment

I agree, a slightly weird statement. There's something valedictory about it, though, as if she realises she is not long for the world.

It is inconceivable that I knew - In spite of her careful wording that damns her. As a matter of fact it is entirely conceivable she knew.

Colin Beveridge

July 5th, 2011 3:18pm Report this comment

It's inconceivable that she sanctioned the _allegations_. She doesn't say anything about the actions that led to them.

Boo

July 5th, 2011 3:35pm Report this comment

Quite -- rather sloppily worded for a former editor.

FF

July 5th, 2011 4:30pm Report this comment

Another point. She never tells us what these "allegations" are that couldn't conceivably know about.

If she says, "I did not know that the NOTW or anyone we employed accessed Milly Dowler's mobile phone" then that's concrete statement that might eventually be proved to be true or false.

Anne Wotana Kaye 1

July 5th, 2011 6:43pm Report this comment

Yes, she is a victim. A victim of the Youth Culture which places green behind the ears as more important than life experience in work and loiving. She neither acts nor looks like an editor, she is just a 'Slapper'. No, before you run to litigate for slander, I use the term with reference to her bearing up her ex husband Brett Kemp in Las Vegas. That was where she obtained that nickname. Now, she should either become a politician, TV personality, or write her autobiography, which can stand besides those of Jordan, Kate Moss and all the other Bubble Heads.

Simon Stephenson.

July 5th, 2011 8:45pm Report this comment

FF : 4.30pm

"If she says, "I did not know that the NOTW or anyone we employed accessed Milly Dowler's mobile phone" then that's concrete statement that might eventually be proved to be true or false."

Concrete, perhaps, but not enough wriggle-room for a public statement in 2011.

Steve Masters

July 6th, 2011 8:19am Report this comment

If Rebekah Brooks thinks even for one second that anyone believes she had no idea what was going on, she is more foolish than even I think. Let's not forget this is the woman who splashed the photographs of men on her front page calling them paedophiles in a campaign to name and shame bad people. Anyone that zealous would think nothing of listening in to someone else's voicemails.

Pamela Symonds

July 7th, 2011 5:07pm Report this comment

It's the end of the line for the News of the World - last copy will be released on Sunday! No doubt the phoenix will rise from the ashes in another guise .....

ROBINA bull

July 10th, 2011 9:17pm Report this comment

"..I knew or worse, sanctioned these appalling allegations."
is this person literate? How could she have been expected to sanction allegations against herself

michael

July 11th, 2011 10:19am Report this comment

Ultimately blood IS thicker than water, but what this may expose is an inherent weakness within family outfits. In this case. Lad'n'Dad.
the decision making process can be greyed when aides, in a position of undisputed trust, with a remarkable degree of subtlety and a softness of guile, seek to affect the outcome of that process by steathily canvassing the 'other' family member. Effectively manipulating authority.
But Mrs Brooks wouldn't would she...

michael

July 11th, 2011 10:42am Report this comment

RE earlier: clarification: there are two often conflicting authorities within a family firm
The unwritten seniority/authority of parents (particularly founders), and the formalised company structures... Especially difficult if the company has been or is in the process of being handed on.