Rupert Murdoch & Co. … e-coverage

According to the NYT, Alwaleed bin Talal bin Abdulaziz al-Saud finally pulled the trigger on Brookes over the issue of ethics, something the Saudi Prince cares deeply about.

The story of Brooks resignation is the lead, a chance for the Times to put the boot into NI and their competitor, The Wall St Journal. The byline is John Burns, a brit who has spent the last decade shilling for the wars in the Middle East in the paper and on Charlie Rose’s show. … 64376.html

How the Murdoch owned Fox News is reporting on the Murdoch hacking scandal.

A textbook example of why this scumbag needs to have his media empire taken away from him. :smiling_imp:

Expect them to get some mileage from this. … 10609.html … 22727.html

unfupping believable, a typically stupid Irish response- suppose you’ve no reception, battery or you’re abroad, or at the office and need to check for important messages?

Change the PIN you clowns.

I suggest emailing Deputy Commissioner Gary Davis on and explain who it does serve.

Top Cop Job Drop Shock! … -full.html

Head of the Met Resigns… this is one big fish.

How long until Cameron falls on hsi sword?

Don’t know too much about Murdoch and don’t have much time for his papers or other media interests, but am I the only person who is taken aback at the latent sexism in the reporting/analysis of Rebekah Brooks? A man would not be described in the same manner regardless of how badly they behaved. The BBC referred to her as “the flame haired one” on their 9pm news last week. The Guardian (which I rarely read) reads more like the Sun at times.

I agree that there is a lot of misogyny surrounding the reporting of Brook’s involvement in the scandals, and the left wing don’t complain because they don’t want to be seen defending a senior member of the ‘evil empire’. The double standards need to stop.

I’m more intrigued if it ties back to Blair and the Iraq war votes. A lot of stuff that happened in that period is inexplicable to me.

I agree, I heard the commissioner on the radio and could not believe it.

However, given the general muppetry of the public (I asked at coffee if anyone knew how this hacking was performed, cue blank faces all round, I explained and the general comment was “oh I didn’t know you could access your voicemails from another phone”. Not one of them had changed their default password and these are workers in an IT department) I would suggest one of two things.

  • Instead of a default password of 0000, issue the phones with a random number password and include this printed in the box with the phone.
  • Disable remote access by default but allow users to ring up to get it enabled if they have cause to use it.

The impression I got from the commissioner was he just wanted it gotten rid of period.

I’m curious - does he think the messages are actually left “on your mobile phone”?

It should really be described as voicemail hacking and not phone hacking.

it’s also handy when you’re trying to avoid talking to someone and want to leave a message directly in his voicemail …! :nin

Oh yeah, I get that a lot :open_mouth:

Brought to you by the same people who could find nothing suspicious with Dr David Kellys death :nin

Indeed. Hopefully there will be major oversight on this investigation. You have to wonder why he was happy to talk to the NY Times last week, and state that he would stand over his statements, and then a few days later, commit suicide. Something doesn’t quite add up.

MI5 + SB = RIP + OBE

Simples !

I didn’t want to be so obvious. ECHELON has just trained its eyes and ears on you :stuck_out_tongue: