Rebekah Brooks is working again. That's good!
Link to the Grauniad:-
tinyurl.com/oe4ke32
I am a little surprised that no one has picked this up - or have I not been paying attention? Again!
|
You should read The Sun Duncan, it was announced in there on Wednesday!
Pat
|
FT reported it on Fri 28 Aug... :-)
search.ft.com/search?queryText=brooks (need a sub to read the article)
Last edited by: smokie on Sun 6 Sep 15 at 08:23
|
>> I am a little surprised that no one has picked this up
In what way is it of any real interest?
|
|
He probably has a thing about redheads.
|
|
...that cost him £500m...
|
>> In what way is it of any real interest?
Two ways I think. One is the (professional) relationship of Brooks to Murdoch allied to her social etc links to the PM - Murdoch influencing the establishment again?. Second is that former News International security chief Mark Hanna is threatening to 'spill the beans' in a way that might re-ignite the hacking saga.
Also, IIRC there another module of Leveson in the wings looking at unlawful and improper conduct by the press and corrupt relationships with the police. That is waiting for the criminal proceedings to finish so as to avoid any prejudice to trials. More explosive revelations?
Although it was the Guardian's reporting of hacking of Millie Dowler's phone that finally caused hacking to blow the issue had been rumbling in the background for years. Part of that story was a raid by the Information Commissioner's office on private investigators and looking into press surveillance. The raid, known as Operation Motorman, found evidence of intrusive illegal activities carried out on behalf of a wide segment of the UK press. The paperwork seized named dozens of journalists who have not been named.
Last month the Upper Tribunal, hearing an appeal on a Freedom of Information request, ruled that the journalist's names could be disclosed. It'll probably go all the way to the Supreme Court but if/when that stuff is published there is prospect of a collosal excrement/ventilation scenario.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 6 Sep 15 at 09:06
|
|
The press will never be trusted by Joe Soap again, they've blown that. I can't understand why Brooks has been re-instated - she cost NI a fortune either by collusion or by complete lack of control on her staff and ignorance of what they were doing.
|
|
Yes but in what way is Brookes different in any other way fro the rest of the press? She didn't first initiate hacking, nothing she has done had made it it worse or better, Why in particular, apart from her impressive tresses, is there a fanfair about her reinstatement?
|
"fanfair about her reinstatement"
Funfair or fanfare shorely. Either fits though :-)
|
>> The press will never be trusted by Joe Soap again,
They were never ever trusted by Joe Soap. However Joe still continues to read the tittle tattle these bottom feeders grub up, so they will continue to grub it up.
|
>> >> The press will never be trusted by Joe Soap again,
>> They were never ever trusted by Joe Soap. However Joe still continues to read the tittle tattle these bottom feeders grub up, so they will continue to grub it up.
Doesn't that make Joe Soap the real bottom feeder? Frankly, the geezer's an idiot who never knows which way is up, and often disbelieves things that are true, being steeped in vulgar cynicism.
Journalism is an honourable profession. They want tittle-tattle? We give them tittle-tattle.
|
>>Journalism is an [cough] profession. They want tittle-tattle? We give them tittle-tattle.
Absolutely correct.
Newspapers want to sell as much content as they can and therefore will pay journalists who produce content that the readers value.
Punter wants & pays, journalist writes, newspaper owner sells - A plank and 2 capitalists.
|
Missed the edit:
>> carried out on behalf of a wide segment of the UK press. The paperwork seized
>> named dozens of journalists who have not been named but their identities have not, so far, been publicised.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Sun 6 Sep 15 at 09:15
|
THE HACK'S LAMENT
It's fairly invidious
- But not really hideous -
To excavate scandals and (usually hastily)
Write them up tastily.
It's those smug tasteless bleeders
The bulging-eyed readers
Who are the true and numberless
Bottom feeders.
|
|
Very good Sire. Would that be from your own quill I wonder. I had to look up 'invidious' of course.
|
|
The clerihew is an easy form for idle versifiers Perro.
|
|
The press are not a problem that will be around for ever. Working in a newsagents I can tell you that nobody - and I do mean NOBODY - under 40 ever buys a newspaper. The daily papers will die with their readers.
|
>>NOBODY - under 40 ever buys a newspaper
Really? That's interesting.
I wonder what the reading age range is for their online sites.
The trouble is that no other "news" outlet or media is any better.
|
>> The press are not a problem that will be around for ever. Working in a
>> newsagents I can tell you that nobody - and I do mean NOBODY - under
>> 40 ever buys a newspaper. The daily papers will die with their readers.
An interesting demographic for your area. I'd have said younger folks commuting form Northampton or MK were still buying when I was in/out of London daily up to November 13.
Smartphones and 3G or 4G data coverage while on the train may be a game changer though.
|
>> Some interesting statistics here.
>>
>> www.themediabriefing.com/article/youth-audiences-newspaper-old-demographics-advertising
An interesting insight - thanks. At 55 I'm older than average Guardian reader!!
|
The FT is a good paper but being pink it is carried for cosmetic reasons by many and little read.
I am far too old for that sort of thing now. I like the spraunce and right-wing vulgarity of my chosen comic, which has good cartoons and witty columnists. Of course the others are good too in much the same way, especially the Grauniad. But you like what you're used to without swallowing what it says hook line and sinker.
A huge amount of accumulated work and talent and professionalism go into every edition of a paper, even a disgraceful tabloid. Not a lot of people really understand that. You have to have tried to do it to have any idea.
Best not to give a damn. But I was always feeble at that. 'You'll never make it as a journalist, Coussine,' blared my dear Belgian Reuters-man friend. 'You don't kiss enough ***.'
He was being polite of course. What he meant was that I was too dumb to know which *** to kiss at any given moment. Honestly, these cats don't know what it's like being 'freelance'.
|
|
Interesting link, I'm surprised how old the age profile of the telegraph is, i thought it would be high but not that high. The guardian seems to be quite impressive to get a near equal split across the age groups.
|
>>>>
>> An interesting demographic for your area. I'd have said younger folks commuting form Northampton or
>> MK were still buying when I was in/out of London daily up to November 13.
>>
>>
>>
Perhaps it is a regional thing, but I notice in the mornings that the delivery boys and girls don't even glance at the front page while they are waiting for their rounds to be marked up. As for general circulation we are now the only shop in the area that do morning deliveries and they are only viable because we picked up the residue as all the other shops gradually stopped because their rounds were running at a loss.
It's very rare to get new business in. Sales diminish as existing readers die off and they are not replaced.
Last edited by: Robin O'Reliant on Sun 6 Sep 15 at 20:54
|
>> As for general circulation we are now the only
>> shop in the area that do morning deliveries
I don't think we have paper boys/girls delivering round here now, least not on weekdays. There was a hiatus in the village store a few years ago when it closed for a month or so and deliveries stopped never to resume.
Delivery was never early enough or me as I needed to be on London train by 07:30. Station newsagent did a good trade though and our new station in Northampton has a massive WH Smiths. It's a franchise though run by SSP and does sarnies, and drinks as well as newsagent fae.
|
|
There's two newsagents in the village, neither deliver papers and i don't think they have for quite a while. Our old place did but was quite heavy with retired folk, this is much younger lots of school age children and younger people. I don't see many people buying them. No idea when i bought one last, more than 10 years i would say. I can't say i know of a single person that gets a paper delivered now.
|
>> There's two newsagents in the village, neither deliver papers
I don't think we have a milkman any more either.
|
|
I got the weekend Times a few months back on some special offer for three months. Quite enjoyed them, there is plenty of reading there, but didn't like them enough to consider paying full price.
|
|
we used to get papers delivered, but the cost and availability of news online more or less scuppered them here. 'Er indoors still gets sometimes the Times at the weekend.
|
We get paper and milk (and eggs and orange juice) delivered by the same person. But they won't brave our potholed 350-odd yards of drive, and leave it behind a tree near the road.
A 600-yard walk sets one up for coffee, but it still seems a nuisance, an unnecessary delay. It's slobbish and wasteful to drive though unless it's pelting with rain.
|
>> As for general circulation we are now the only
>> shop in the area that do morning deliveries >>
>> It's very rare to get new business in. Sales diminish as existing readers die off
>> and they are not replaced.
I have been toying with the idea of having my Torygraph delivered. Upon enquiring at the only shop locally which - so far as I know - does daily deliveries, I was told that they had one customer in my road, some 30 properties. The charge would be £3 per week.
I used to do an occasional evening paper round in my yoof. When did they stop?
Last edited by: Duncan on Mon 7 Sep 15 at 06:58
|
Having just paid the paper bill for my aged ma on Saturday, as she can't easily get to the shop anymore, and having just done the sums, it looks like she's paying a princely 2.50 a week delivery for six deliveries. That seems to be astonishingly good value for an old person to keep in touch.
However, it's the Daily Mail, which she says herself is a load of old drongo, but she does like doing all the daily puzzles, and she gets the tv pullout weekly as well of course. If that keeps her fading 87 year old brain ticking over then that seems like good value too.
Mrs C likes the DT of a Saturday, the only day she has time to read it. Not so much for the news, though, but more for the reviews, letters and obits, which take her a day or three to trawl through happily. Also good value and she'd miss that.
|
I used to be a 6 day a week Telegraph reader.... now it's definitely a Saturday, with the occasional extra week day thrown in, but less than once a week average.
For some reason I've never really liked the Sunday edition.
Time mostly is the problem.
|
|
We've always had newspapers delivered to the door, although I've never worked out how much we're charged for the privilege. Also, one or the other of us will pick up a free Telegraph on Saturday, and usually two or three days in the week, while shopping at Waitrose.
|
We charge £2.75 for six days. Mark up on sales has reduced by a fair amount over what it used to be.
For the record the most popular papers in this neck of the woods are, in order;
D Mail
Western Mail
Sun
Mirror
Telegraph
Express
Times
I Daily
Guardian
Independent
Star
|
Rebekah Brooks is Back! - Pat
