Politics needs to respond to the changed phone hacking terrain

DavidDP

I agree the government shouldn't be scared of NewsCorp, but at the moment suggestions tend to lean towards asking the government to act beyond the law with respect to the Sky merger. The government should similarly not be afraid of the mob.

Simon Stephenson.

"If this allegation is true, it shows just how out of control and unrestrained the culture of phone hacking was."

Was?

"At the very least, I think we will now end up with a public inquiry into the matter once the police and legal aspects of the matter have concluded."

Public inquiry? Is the grass long enough yet?

Maggie

These are the same unsubstantiated allegations we've heard countless times before. The only thing that's changed is that the name "Millie Dowler" has been added to the mix in the hope that the public will come over all emotional and blind to reason. The people making these allegations should provide some hard evidence for their guesses and suppositions - or stop hiding behind weasel words like "allegations".

starfish

Note how this is apparently the top BBC story (more important that the death of a British soldier, Greece imploding, 1400 job losses in Derby)

Reporting on allegations by its house newspaper (Grauniad) against a competitor that is owned by NewsCorp - a company it has been activiely campaigning against over the Sky News issue

Note the only political quote in the BBC
headlines is by Ed Milliband

BBC impartiality - it is what they do....

Michael

Has it actually been demonstrated in law yet that guessing someone's voicemail box PIN or trying different ones a number of times, is actually 'hacking'? It's certainly a lot different from the normally accepted definition of the word.

TrevorsDen

What we seen to have are the activities of a private detective. At some time on some occasions he was hired by the NotW.
Was he knowingly employed to break the law? Was he knowingly employed to investigate the Dowlers? Who if anyone employed him.

These are questions. The rest at the moment is speculation.

strapworld

Trevors Den, you really make the most ridiculous statements. It is not speculation.

News International have already paid out many thousands of pounds in settlement after accepting they have hacked phones.
A private detective and a former Royal reporter of the News of the World have been in jail. News International have accepted that hacking took place. So there is no speculation.

This latest revelation shows that no 'story' is immune from this method of information gathering. Police, never forget, have to get specific authority to tap people's phones.

I called, yesterday, for a public enquiry, under oath. I still believe this to be the way forward. But I find the unholy trinity of the Guardian, Mail and BBC pushing this quite concerning. They are trying to stop News International from getting control of Sky.

Yesterday I suggested that Murdoch close down the News of the World. I think he should for a six month period. He should also sack the then editor and now Chief executive of News International. That way he would show that he, too, is disgusted by the antics of his newspaper.

I also say, as a former police officer, that I am extremely concerned over the actions of some police officers in the earlier investigation of these allegations of hacking. Far too cosy. (Although people have to understand that in many investigations police rely on the press to publicise the cases and through that publicity witnesses come forward.)

I also suggested, yesterday, that Fraser Nelson should resign as a columnist from the News of the World. Why no comment from the editor? HE repeats his column here every Sunday.

Occasional Ostrich

@TrevorsDen

Yup, but were said terms and conditions fixed, or allowed to vary depending on what his investigations turned up? Were they written down? If not, I'm afraid we're very much into the area where something is so only because someone said it is so.

RCE

If true, this is clearly beyond despicable.

On a tangent, I am the only one who finds the BBC's (BBC, Guardian... Hmm...) hysterical enthusiasm in lumping this into the BSkyB issue shamelessly and immorally opportunistic?

HampsteadOwl

@Maggie

You are going to make a royal fool of yourself as the last person on earth who seriously believes that there is nothing in the NotW phone hacking scandal and that it is all insinuation and allegation got up by the Guardian to do down Rupert Murdoch. Consider this, if nothing else: (a) two men have already been found guilty in a court of law and have been to prison for one aspect of what went on; and (b) the News of the World has started paying out damages to those its people hacked. If the paper itself, and its corporate parent, are no longer denying the substance of the charges, why are you?

OK, so the alleged hacking of Milly Dowler's phone is a new development, and not proven yet, but you don't have to be a bean-eating liberal to think that it's probably more likely than not to have happened. News Corp's official reaction has been that it is "very concerned" about the revelation - which I think we can take as meaning that it assumes the allegations are true and its concern is about a further shattering impact on reputation - especially at a time when the Sky buy-up could still be derailed. As James says in his piece, the Dowler angle takes this story into a different dimension altogether.

For what it's worth, I don't think that this act, however heinous, should stand in the way of News Corp buying-up the rest of Sky. But I do think that those directly accountable at the NotW at the time should pay the price. Andy Coulson has already resigned twice over phone-hacking; Rebekah Brooks not once. Time for some evening up there I feel.

Simon Stephenson.

strapworld : 12.12pm

"Yesterday I suggested that Murdoch close down the News of the World. I think he should for a six month period. He should also sack the then editor and now Chief executive of News International. That way he would show that he, too, is disgusted by the antics of his newspaper."

Regrettably, I don't think it would show anything of the sort. If Murdoch was uninvolved in every sense, to the extent of the hacking being carried out in the knowledge that discovery would be subject to his severe disapproval, then he's had plenty of time to rectify the position. He hasn't done this - in fact the evidence is that at every stage News International, controlled by the man himself, has done everything in its power to prevent rectification from having to take place.

You'll find insider assertions that for the NI tabloids, Murdoch acts as editor-in-chief. And he had no idea how they were getting their stories? Pull the other one!

JohnOfEnfield

The reaction to this scam must also take into account how easy it is to hack someone's 'phone unless you are a government minister who presumably ought to use highly secure encryption technology (i.e Blair & Prescott).

The key to getting into your voice mail messages is only 4 numbers. This access no. is pre-set to a standard value of , say, 0000 or 1234. Many users do not bother to change it. I don't. Those that do often set it to something they can remember - say their birthday or their partner's birthday. Almost anyone can break these access codes.

I have no sympathy therefore for mature adults in highly responsible jobs who allow their voice mail accounts to be broken into. Being a technophobe (Blair) or intellectually challenged (guess who) is no excuse.

Perhaps it is time for the networks to provide a security warning: -

"VOICE MAIL ON OUR NETWORK HAS NO ROBUST SECURITY and IT IS EVEN LESS IF YOU DON'T USE A RANDOM NUMBER"

None of this excuses the actions on the NoW in the Milly Dowler case.

david

I am so not intrested in these stories to date as it's been all hot air from a few labour people,left newspapers who hate NOTW and the BBC who just think this is the most important thing in the world.Take tom watson all he seems to talk about is phone hacking.

This story is a new level as it affected the family whoes daughter died and it is wrong.

Holly ......

Whatever.
People will still read the garbage thrown at them by the British press, whether in print or online.

Maybe the public should up their game and hit them in the pocket.

Most of us do not approve of, or believe what they print anyway, so why do we keep them in business?

All the fake outrage will be forgotten when people go out & buy their NOTW fix on Sunday.

Chris lancashire

I sincerely hope that the Government does not respond to the knee-jerk calls for "more regulation" of the Press which have already begun. We need to be very careful of "more regulation" anywhere but particularly of the Press.
There are already enough tools in the criminal law to combat this sort of behaviour.

We should even be wary of calls for a "public inquiry" into what seems to be a straightforward criminal matter.

michael

Where did the 7.8 billion come from?
...And can our -'anything for a good press'- politicians be shown to have -'turn a blind eye'- complicity?
How much - 'don't care what it takes' - pressure did the foreign owners put on the editorial staff to get results (big scoops).

Maggie

strapworld
What proof do you have that Journalists employed by News International hacked into Millie Dowler's phone? I'm sure all those people who for legal reasons are having to refer to the claims as "allegations" would be pleased to hear from you.

Santorum

"Note how this is apparently the top BBC story "

Not everything is about the BBC you know.

It's the lead for sky and ITN too.

strapworld

Maggie. Please read people's contributions before writing. I said Revelations. That is what the Guardians report is!

Simon Stephenson. You are correct in so much as Murdoch is Editor in Chief. As Cameron is Prime Minister but neither can be held to account for the failings of their subordinates.

But I do agree with RCE about the unholy trinity of the BBC. Guardian and The Mail.

Simon Stephenson.

strapworld : 4.59pm

"You are correct in so much as Murdoch is Editor in Chief. As Cameron is Prime Minister but neither can be held to account for the failings of their subordinates."

Mmmm. How moveable is this feast? I'd certainly agree that there are certain actions of subordinates for which their superiors cannot reasonably be held responsible. On the other hand, the superiors are responsible for ensuring that they do as much as is reasonable to prevent wrongs from being done by their subordinates. And, as an example, if the culture was "go and get your story, and it's neither necessary, nor a good idea that you tell me how you got it" then I would say that this is outrageously short of being "reasonable", because it is no more than a deliberate attempt to divert responsibility from where it really lies.

Baron

why all the fuss, it's more than obvious, the BBC led coalition will do everything to prevent Murdoch taking over Sky, am surprised they haven't yet alleged every single TV license payer's mobile has been hacked.

somebody somewhere will know if the freelance allegedly doing the hacking for the NoW may have done abit on the side for the BBC, the Guardian, too. Worth looking into it, I reckon.