I think a few mistakes have been made regarding the “News of the World” scandal:
- News of the World are being confused with an actual newspaper, which is expected to adhere to standards of journalist integrity.
- The Parliament committee that had the hearing is being confused with an actual lawmaking body qualified to protect a people’s privacy.
- The Murdochs were being confused with people who need and care about tabloid print. They explained that it was such a tiny fraction of their business that they could have relieved themselves of it years ago and prevented the whole ordeal.
What if a malicious visitor to the House of Commons was armed with more than whipped cream?
Why was there no such stunt against Bernard Madoff?
I’m sure I’m not the only one to bring this up, but it’s worth mention. What credibility did UK politicians gain in those hearings?
- Rupert Murdoch’s humble pie as legend crumbles (menmedia.co.uk)
- Photos: Rupert Murdoch Attacked With Shaving Cream Pie During Hearing (sfist.com)
- Murdoch humble, but saved the spectacle of being forced to eat pie… (blogs.journalism.co.uk)