1. whitewhale

    He seemed trained in how to “spot lies” and amazingly did not blink once in the whole script.

      1. there's a time and a place for everything--it's called college.

        from my experience, certain pills would do the trick ;)

      2. ambrit

        I remember seeing an interview with the sainted Baghwan Rajneesh, (from the aptly named Poona India,) in which I don’t believe he blinked once in five minutes. Indeed, certain ‘medicinal’ compounds will do that trick. The Baghwans folks used to say, “Sex solves everything.” Young Murdoch seems to be saying, “Money solves everything.” I know that Murdock the Elder is fond of saying, “F— everyone!” Of the three, I like the Baghwan the best.

      3. Moopheus

        It’s not quite perfectly blink-free. And it’s cut in a few spots. So he wouldn’t have had to “hold it” for a really unusual amount of time. But the overall effect is still pretty weird.

  2. Psychoanalystus

    The guy projects like a psychopath. In his case it must be genetic…


    1. Yves Smith Post author

      I’m glad to hear you say that. I had a similar reaction but thought it was just prejudice on my part. But if you had cast for that type, I don’t see how you could have gotten a better performance, both the choice of words and the affect.

      1. rps

        Another graduate from the Majesty School Of Etiquette and Mastery of Subliminal Communication. He’s an elitist novitiate versed in the art of speech deliverance with (effective pause)…..the practiced deliberation, pauses, gestures, appearance of concern,…..consistently reiterating –ad nauseum Rebekah Brooks as solely responsible…….Supporting her as he wears a Hazmet Suit to prevent her hazardous waste contaminating him.

        Watching Murdoch gave me…ahem….pause to consider another graduate of the subliminal school of speechifers; Rahm Emmanuel with the practiced pauses, charm-snake indulgent smiles…..sorta like watching a cat playing with its food.

        I always have the same reaction watching these guys (Rahm, Murdoch, Obama…)…..wear garlic around neck and sleep with cross.

    2. jeff


      Remember, Australia is where England’s criminals
      were sent for many generations.

      If you believe in Mendel, Darwin and evolution
      in general, Australia’s the dumping pit for
      the bad ‘uns.

      Combine epigenetics with that mix and you get the
      top predators like…oh, say what? He’s from Scotland.

      1. readerOfTeaLeaves

        I hope that was tongue-in-cheekiness?

        If not, it’s a slander on a nation of second-and-third (and 4th, 5th, and 6th) sons who went far south because they were ambitious, or thought that Australia held the prospect for a better life than where they came from. The old penal colonies were a long, long time ago and some of the people sent out on ships did nothing more than steal a loaf of bread, the way I heard it. In the 1960s, young Brits could buy a cheap passage to emigrate to Oz, b/c the Australian government was attracting skilled workers in that way. Oz has been able to be mighty choosey about who they let in for quite a long time now.

        Some of those convicts back in the late 1700s and early 1800s were ‘transported’ around the time (or somewhat before) Malthus was in UK writing about the problems of overpopulation. Oz was a quick, easy solution to the urbanizing England of the colonial era, which needed to offshore a burgeoning population (this was also after the Scottish enclosure movement). Since then, plenty of people with initiative have emigrated there, not all of them as sleazy as the Murdock tribe. Not by a long shot.

        Murdock gives the place a bad name.

        And FWIW, I’m a Yank, so I’m not special pleading for any cause of my own.


      2. Psychoanalystus

        I was actually thinking about the bad genes he got from his father. But Skippy makes a nice point about Australian history below.

      3. Peter

        Jeff, I think I’d be careful of assigning the whole country the misdeeds of one of its’ sons. Or are you happy to be regarded as having the morals of Richard Nixon or Bernie Madoff, for example?

  3. psychohistorian

    I have seriously not watched TV in 20+ years but am now watching a few things like this online…..slick propaganda

    James believes that what he is doing is good for society. James is a very good example of the reason why we need to take social and economic policy making out of these peoples hands and IMO we need to remove inherited wealth from all of society so that equality of opportunity is closer to a reality.

    May the purge begin.

    1. Yves Smith Post author

      Now I can put my finger on what bothers me…..the utter lack of any contrition (which really means faking contrition) or taking responsibility (as in sounding as if you are taking responsibility).

      The usual formula is to sound apologetic without admitting to much of anything, characterize what happened as mistakes, and promise to Investigate and Do Better In The Future. He doesn’t even make a real stab at it. The one bad decision he admits to he says (basically) was based on bad information, but he comes off sounding more unhappy at being caught out than disturbed or distressed having authorized something that didn’t pass the smell test.

      He can’t even be bothered to work himself up to a plausible act, even with the BSkyB deal and his future at stake.

      1. Psychoanalystus

        You have described the essence of psychopathic behavior and thinking. They never show remorse (and when they do it is faked in order to obtain something), and it is never their fault.

          1. Doug Terpstra

            Although Tony was very, very good, Barack takes the basilisk phenomenon to high art. But the hypnosis was two-way: the narcissistic snake charmed itself in a mirror. In doing God’s work, I suspect the messiah complex takes possession of one’s soul, like a great scAmway convention in which cult leaders drink their own Kool-Aid, their own venomous snake oil. They can then commit hideous crimes without the interference of conscience.

          2. ambrit

            Dear wunsacon;
            Oh, come on now! Cartman is capable of introspection, and he’s a much more nuanced, (dare I say multi-dimensional?) character than Murdoch the Younger.

    2. jeff

      The headline should be rewritten:

      “Would you buy an advertised product from this man’s newspaper?”

      All good people should look up who advertises on Fox and the other Murdoch rags, list the advertisers and begin a
      selective boycott of those product classes that they
      Also, most important, call or email the advertisers and tell they what you are doing and why you are
      doing and refer them to some locally owned independent
      media if any exists where you live.

    3. rps

      Psychohistorian in my humble opinion, I think you give Murdoch too much credence in the assumption that he cares and acts upon ideology. He cares neither for society much less the individual. to him we are sheep to be shorn and penned cattle awaiting our turn. Murdoch serves and obeys one god, one cause; himself. However you are absolutely correct and perhaps a Thomas Paineophilia as myself as you rightly state, “we need to take social and economic policy making out of these peoples hands and IMO we need to remove inherited wealth from all of society so that equality of opportunity is closer to a reality” Hammer meet nail….BAM

      “Men who look upon themselves born to reign, and others to obey, soon grow insolent. Selected from the rest of mankind, their minds are early poisoned by importance; and the world they act in differs so materially from the world at large, that they have but little opportunity of knowing its true interests, and when they succeed in the government are frequently the most ignorant and unfit of any throughout the dominions.” Thomas Paine, Common Sense

  4. Skippy

    All one has to do is look into Rupert’s up bringing, late 17th / 18th century ethos in the 2Oth, breed, born, educated and from the first day on the rag floor, made to understand the history and power of the printing press and to weld it( he held the late John Howard in contempt, to socialist for his liking[s).

    Sons first years, apple, tree, thingy.

    Skippy…we had a rash of bettering fathers gone wrong of late…eh…towers do narrow at the top…pin head?

    1. Psychoanalystus

      Isn’t he Australian? And, wasn’t Australia initially populated with convicts? Maybe he just got a really high dose of those “first settlers” genes…LOL

      1. skippy

        I hear you, although most convicts were petty crims, debtors or orphans, mostly financial refugees exported out of England…cough…over supply of cheep labor…beautify England project. This sound familiar to you, save on the transport (over sea holiday) prison system in America…now.

        Now there were lesser cousins and lowly ranked family types that were quite happy to facilitate the Crowns bidding, too improve their fortunes, twice the stick, some low pockets got.

        Skippy…personally, too me, systems are more responsable for neurosis, pathology, et al than DNA / genetics, been there done that.

        PS. have any good chats in your last VA gig, inquiring minds would like to know.

        1. ambrit

          Dear skippy;
          The same applies to Georgia, here in the Deep South. Oglethorpe and all that. Then the buggers started moving to the west. People here in Mississippi, when asked about the whereabouts of a person ‘wanted by the law’ will say, with a straight face mind you, “Gone to Texas.” We all know what evil later arose from that region! (There’s an old joke to the effect that the Devil himself wouldn’t live in Texas. That, unfortunately, lets Dubwa off the hook as regards the Antichrist Stakes. Drat.)

        2. Psychoanalystus

          I’m sure the Australians are grateful to England for shipping them out of that hell hole called Britain. Even today the brits are emigrating to places like Australia like theee’s no tomorrow.

          VA work is with elderly vets from America’s Greatest Generation. Very special and honorable people. But I’m not much into this career thing, so in a few weeks I’m going back to my life of frappe and souflaki on the beach far from this crazyness around here. The American ratrace is a waste of time at this point.

  5. MIWill

    Reminds me of Geithner, not as smart though.

    I wonder what Rebekah Brooks has on these players.

    1. /L

      Some psychologists say that when people wrinkle their forehead they lie. When little Timmy was tested on his homework by maestro Elizabeth Warren one sometimes wondered how there could be any skin left to the rest of little Timmy’s honest face with so much forehead wrinkling.

      1. Psychoanalystus

        True. I noticed that the more mentally impaired some of my patients are, the more prominent the “omega” sign on their foreheads becomes.

      2. Dave of Maryland

        Wrinkled foreheads while lying is interesting.

        In acting, that’s one of the major things to overcome. Actors do it the hard way. Actresses grow bangs. Next time you’re in front of the idiot tube, look for it.

    2. blunt

      I think what she “has on these players” is every evil-sounding plot they’ve made over the past 15 years. She’s the “daughter” Rupert never had. She’s been doted on and promoted and taught the same psychopathic mannerisms and thoughts that James has been imbued with.

      If she’s betrayed she’ll bring the others down with her. One of the interesting things about the clip yesterday on Guardian was her reaction when she was treated like a woman is treated by Andy Coulson during the questioning.

      The look was enough; he was meat and she was the predator. James and Rupert will not wish to see that look from her. They will protect her with their lives. For to do otherwise would be to risk their entire empire coming down on their heads.

  6. appointmetotheboard

    Its a nicely framed title!

    I did have one thought that troubles me. Big ‘if’ but *if* the UK Govt does decide that the purchase of BskyB can go ahead, this episode will have worked well for NewsCorp – tens if not hundreds of millions has been wiped off the share price of BskyB making it something of a bargain for Murdoch.

  7. notabanker


    How would you like to be a staffer busting your hump 12 hours a day for 40K GBP and come into work reading this on your BB?

    These people are so out of touch with reality. No remorse, no accountability, certainly no empathy towards their employees. Ethics? puhleeze…..

    Under her leadership, a scandal grew so out of control they had to close the largest UK newspaper in one week. The message to the staff is; sorry for the actions of a few unscrupulous people, I knew nothing, look at all the other great things we have done and I’ll do my best to get you another job or a nice check for a few months.

    1. wunsacon

      Yeah, maybe Rupert’s strategy is “hit them with the stick first and make them beg for a carrot”.

      We’ll soon learn whether anyone wants to break ranks and make a name for themselves.

  8. jake chase

    Although they can be quite useful for stuffing wet shoes, lining bird cages, keeping warm in a pinch, etc., I often wonder these days why anyone ever reads a newspaper.

    Of course, the other day I actually watched a man wearing a tie deposit $1 into a USA Today vending machine. What do you suppose he was hoping to learn?

    Does anyone with an IQ above 100 really read this drek?

    1. sayer

      Good question Jake. Personally I haven’t read a newspaper front-to-back in, oh, let’s say ten years. Today, whenever I attempt to do so, I find the experience unpleasant, almost painful. The fury of the lover scorned maybe. Anyways, I never get past the headlines, and never ever bother to open one up.

      And yet I’m still a big reader of magazines and books. These, if carefully selected, can still provide useful information and glimpses of that endangered species called TRUTH. Newspapers? Not so much anymore I’m afraid.

  9. sadness

    you just have to look at these people and listen, i suppose if you can, for a few seconds –

    no doubt he’s morally bankrupt, but wonderfully rich and comfortable within the wonderfully rich and comfortable set –

    and they are the press, broadcasting and programming that is subtly suggesting to us all what to do – how can everyone be so blind for all these years – unbelievable – but then maybe it’s easy to be a sheep when you’re programmed to believe –

    so no, never have never will buy their line, sorry rup/james/lachlan and family please go away

    1. aletheia33

      failure to educate people, probably deliberate, is my best guess why people are so addicted to the propaganda. thom hartmann has pointed out that civics stopped being taught in u.s. public high schools at the beginning of the reagan era under william bennett.

      also, the propaganda is intentionally addictive. smart people are as prone as other humans to the psychological weaknesses that allow compulsions to take hold like internet pornography, overeating, smoking, and watching mindless cute propaganda between dinner and bed every night.

      also, uneducated people are overworked, underemployed with suffocating brains from their work, exhausted while raising kids and/or doing heavy manual work, apathetic due to despair, overweight due to stress eating and hence physically sluggish and inclined to prefer couch potatoship in the evenings, etc.

      how about some more nuanced and careful attention to why people are so “taken in.” what do we really know about this phenomenon? not as much as we need to.

      some guesses/stabs: the liberal middle-class people who may have had private school educations, follow npr, read the nyt and the like are not hurting enough yet as a group to fully recognize the threats coming to the basic security they have always felt entitled to. the concept of denial seems useful here. (psychoanalystus, can you expound on it?) also they simply haven’t noticed the relatively subtle corruption over recent years of these information sources. this is human nature, not to see what’s going down. they will have to be deprived of a lot more before they wake up en masse to the reality of their situation. and there’s nothing like the belief that if one tries hard enough, sacrifices enough of one’s dignity and income, and behaves sufficiently soldierly, one might get a job again like the one one has lost, or at least still retain some of what one considers a decent lifestyle after age 65, to make a person afraid to step out and take action. one is still in the mindset that the neighbors must not know one is going into default on one’s mortgage. not enough people have crossed the line where they stop feeling any shame over bankruptcy, default, being unemployed, having to work at the supermarket etc. to make a difference yet. for now, once they cross that line, they become badly dressed, angry victims who can be made to look crazy on a tv screen without even trying.

      most of the people who lost their gumption for living due to the Great Depression have passed on, and many of their children as well. i imagine we still have a long way to go now before we regain our collective dignity (if we ever do) to the point where being unemployed and destitute does not deprive one of basic respect in our society.

      1. aletheia33

        for “compulsion” above please substitute “habits”.

        also this post was meant to as joining in the general discussion up to this point, not just a reply to the preceding post from reader “sadness.”

    1. craazyman

      I think he’s OD’d on Piety.

      Despite all today’s deeply felt and well intended comments, I have to be honest. Yes. I would still buy a newspaper from him . . .

      . . . if I need something to read at lunch or on the subway and especially if there’s a good scandal with photos of the woman in question, in a bikini. I do not approve of topless pics in a newspaper. I’m actually quite prude in real life.

      And there is a talent for writing front page headlines. The immortal “Headless Body in Topless Bar” reaches back to the days of my youth. But until Junior tops that, he’s got nothing on his Dad.

  10. Schofield

    I like this excellent bit of British black humor from one of their newspapers. “Have you heard that Rupert Murdoch turned down a knighthood because he already had a KGB.”

  11. scraping_by

    I notice one of the ‘regrets’ he has is the earlier settlement. 100K to a starlet, who needed the publicity anyway.

    However, from a business perspective, News has done a great thing. The number has established a relatively low price point for all future settlements. That is, if someone demands enough money to make them seriously reconsider their lawbreaking newsgathering policy, their it will be a groan and eye roll moment.

    I’ve often wondered who finances News Inc. I’ve heard rumors about Arabs and Russians, but no one seems to give it a good investigation. Curious.

    1. readerOfTeaLeaves

      Now that’s a mighty tasty morsel you’ve gone and tossed into the thread.

      Because we do have information that Murdock is a TaxHavenMaven.
      And if one wanted to underwrite a ‘newz’ outfit that was full of global warming deniers, and forever keeping US politics in a nasty, shouty, sneering catfight, then what better way for an oiligarch of Russian origin, or an Arab relying on oil wealth to underwrite global warming denial propaganda to the biggest oil consumers on the planet: the US gas guzzling public.

      My, oh, my….what a can of worms, snakes, and vipers you to point out…

      Then your question, ‘Why does this not get investigated?” takes on a whole new resonance. My goodness.

  12. ScottW

    Having represented a newspaper company for 25 years I can guarantee you that everyone in the newsroom knew the wiretapping was taking place–especially the executives and managing editors. Reporters internally brag about their sources, and are constantly asked by those reading their articles (i.e., editors, lawyers, etc.), “how did you get that information?” “What is your source for that information?” The transparent cover provided in Murdoch’s comments for Rebekah Brooks indicates she has the ability to assign culpability for these criminal actions to people in very high places. It is unbelievable to think executives with a journalistic background would remain in the dark about the criminal behavior their employees are engaging in. Unless there is a massive cover up, Ms. Brooks will come tumbling down with the rest.

  13. Dan Duncan

    A hypothetical:

    Would DSK, The Rogue, get to be DSK, The Head of IMF and Presidential Hopeful, in a culture that reveled in the tabloid “sensibility”, like the U.K. (or U.S.), as opposed to the hush-hush sensibility of France?

    And no, this isn’t a backdoor defense of the scumbags at NOTW. They deserve prosecution. Vigorously.

    It’s just that over the past few weeks we’ve witnessed media failings (a redundancy, I know) in both cultures. [The UK/US failure is more repugnant, so I’m not implying equivalence.]

    In the future (because it will happen again), should the government step in and shut down an outfit like NOTW?

    If so, there is obviously great potential for the government to over-reach and kill free speech. How do we guard against this?

    If not and these Scumbag Gossip Rags are simply left to the free market…will the market actually impose discipline the next go-round?

    This time, we are shocked by the NOTW actions. Next time, not as much. Will the market simply “get used” to these deplorable actions? Are you comfortable with the Lack of Standard…ie the Relatavistic Sensibility of an ever-changing Market?

    And what about Wikileaks? Any overlap here? Again, I am not implying equivalence. The point is…How far is too far? When is “private”, not really private?

    What if someone sets up WikiGossip? Remember, in the NOTW case, it’s easy: We are talking about the invasion of the privacy of fallen heroes. What if, instead, the invasion occurred on the private correspondence of the Casey Anthony jurors? A WikiGossip site would do just fine…even though the transgression of hacking jurors emails is also very troubling.

    Yeah, yeah, yeah…I know. Waaayyy too many questions. But at this point I’m desperate. Maybe…just maybe…it will elicit something more interesting the self-congratulatory tripe of fools announcing their TV viewing habits while theorizing about the inverse relationship between the number of blinks and the tendency toward psychopathic behavior.

    And as I await further commentary…I’ll be slamming my refresh button, blinking with the intense, twitchy furiosity of Charlie Sheen on a seven day coke-bender.

    1. Anonymous Jones

      OK, this will be somewhat fun:

      Q1, DSK: A bit like “when did you stop beating your wife?” Premise underlying question is somewhat questionable. This is from all your long experience in France reading French newspapers?

      Q2, gov’t shutdown: When was this suggested (other than in your comment)? I don’t even know where this comes from. When has a gov’t from a developed country just “shut down” a major newspaper? This is an immediate concern?

      Q3, free speech, overreach: How about continuing to enforce the first amendment? Without vigilance, all our “rights” would disappear, regardless of what a piece of paper says. Paraphrasing the NRA, contracts don’t force people to do things, people do.

      Q4, market discipline: Surely, you jest? IBGYBG. Market constraints have continued to diminish rapidly as global and sector mobility has grown over the last few centuries, especially with the massive conglomerates and agency problems. These “constraint fairies” are not coming back.

      Q5, “comfortability”: There is a choice? No one has control of the world. We can choose to try to shape it in small ways; sometimes people succeed far beyond what is normal, but that is rare. Again, I question the presumption that there is no “shock.” They had to shut down the f’ing paper there was so much shock. We’re talking about this shutdown in the US…enough said.

      Q6, privacy: It depends on what your definition of “is” is. I love how everyone went after Clinton for this. Hey, it *was* weeny-like, but he was *right*. “Is” can mean a number of things, including descriptions of recent past, “present” and future. Trust me, “privacy” is far more complicated than “is” and as much as you decry relativism, the semantics of any complicated concept is *always* relative to one’s own place in, and perspective on, the world.

      Q7, Wikigossip: Please tell me the name Casey Anthony didn’t show up on this site. I’m going to be ill, but first…


  14. ScottS

    He shrugs at 00:30 when he says that Rebekah Brooks’ ethics “are very good.”

    I think this is all James’ doing. He’s trying to get her out of the way. Why else would he bother with this half-hearted defense? He’s damning her with faint praise.

    Is it fratricide when the one being killed is your father’s daughter he never had?

    1. LJR

      I somehow doubt that one’s “ethics being very good” gains a seat at Murdoch’s table. It’s not the sort of phrase they would privately use to praise each other, au contraire. Such noxious words probably caught in his throat – hence the uneasy shrug. He’ll apologize to her later for having said them, I’m sure, and assure her that there’s not a shred of evidence that damns her so.

  15. ambrit

    Has anyone considered that the behaviour ‘alleged’ (clearing the message box on the girls cell phone, in the middle of a criminal investigation,) can be charged to someone as “obstruction of justice?” A felony charge in every jurisdiction. Knowing about and enabling such behaviour is “acessory to the fact.” Keeping quiet about it is “acessory after the fact.” If the UK governmant is pushed hard enough, someone is going to Dartmoor, not just Wormwood Scrubs.

    1. readerOfTeaLeaves

      And just to clarify: Murdock clan to family of girl viciously murdered, “You know, if this horror drags out a few more days, we can eke out a bit more drama, emotion, and maybe profit from the sale of a few extra issues – or web updates.” The worse it was for that family, arguably the more profitable it was for the Murdock group of ‘assets’ that were ‘deployed’ so surreptitiously.

      And I’m not even going to touch on widows of the war dead (!).

      If my profits were built on the emotional agonies of people that I didn’t even know, perhaps I’d be disassociated as young James.

      Meanwhile, the Guardian.uk and Financial Times are sure looking like adults, and remind me never to play poker with Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger…nor with their reporter Nick Hayes.

  16. dearieme

    As a writer in The Times (also Murdoch-owned) remarked, the Telegraph has made great play of this story, but its own best scoop in years came from buying a stolen CD. The Guardian’s best story in years had come from forging a letter on House of Commons writing paper. The Independent’s star columnist has recently been exposed as being, shall we say, cavalier with the truth. All the rags are a bit crooked. What’s unforgiveable with this story is not that the misbehaviour was illegal, it’s that it recognised no bounds of decency. If you hack the voicemail of celebs or politicians – the public’s not much bothered. But the murdered girl’s – intolerable. These people make their living by entertaining the great unwashed with smut; for them to fail to foresee this sentiment was not just a crime, it was a blunder. Another blunder was the failure to see that when they swapped their political support from Labour to Conservative for the last election, they would no longer be protected by the same clannishness in the media. I weep no tears for the Murdochs and their lackeys: the public may be being too excitable for my tastes, but I too would draw the line (I hope) at what these people did to Milly Dowler’s phone. Sod ’em; let ’em retreat to the US or back to Oz after a spell in chokey. I only hope before they go they can release some good dirt on some more media figures: a good clear-out at the Guardian and the Beeb is probably overdue too. I only hope that we don’t get lumbered with political action that makes it harder for journalists to investigate politicians.

    1. readerOfTeaLeaves

      Well, I wondered when ‘Paddy Pantsdown’ would speak up. And it appears there are more ghastly threads emerging; one person leads to another, who leads to…. a murderer… looks like shutting NoTW was probably something that seemed like ‘strategic decisiveness’ to James, but the leakage is spreading.

      It has also emerged that Nick Clegg, the deputy prime minister, received similar briefings to those given to Ashdown before the election, which he raised with Cameron only to be rebuffed by the prime minister who insisted it was right to give Coulson a “second chance”. Senior Whitehall sources say that Clegg was stunned by what he was told but concluded, after the coalition deal was struck, that he was powerless to change Cameron’s mind. “Clegg said: ‘It is not up to me to tell the prime minister who to appoint as his director of communications’,” said a source.


      (I actually happen to agree with what appears to be Clegg’s assessment that he could not go to the mat on Coulson, but what I find more than interesting is that Cameron wooed Murdock so aptly, then Murdock shifted his support to the Conservatives. Clegg came on like gangbusters out of nowhere, and topsy-turvy went Cameron’s plans, no doubt. Since Clegg is one of the few potentially ‘green’ PM or Vice PM leaders on the globe, I’m quite intrigued in what happens here. And since he’s a bit ‘green’, no doubt all the Murdock allies thought they could keep him completely powerless and tied up. This shifts that box of cards.)

  17. dearieme

    P.S. It’s just occurred to me: a friend would dearly like to see a few journalists from the Mail disgraced too. So I’ll add them to my list.

  18. Anon

    James Murdoch is a little Christian Bale-y, it has to be said. His eyes are kind of black (which may be the lighting, of course), suggestive of enormous reserves of anger.

    But what fun is to be had, watching Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan shred News Corpse journos on telly!

    1) http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYunTPBWqgw

    At 4:04, watch the loathsome Jon Gaunt of the Sun taunt the lovely Hugh re: BSkyB with “Who are you to say what people should and shouldn’t watch?”, while Hugh, with studied insouciance, replies, “Who is Murdoch to say who we should and shouldn’t vote for through news?”, which gets a big round of applause.

    2) Then there’s Steve Coogan on BBC Newsnight, talking about how he’s delighted the “mysognist, xenophobic” NoTW is closing (at 2:34).


    3) Later, in the same segment, Coogan de-bollocks Paul McMullen, ex-NoTW, repeating several times, “You’re morally bankrupt.”


    Steve and Hugh are much smarter, prettier, and richer than the jealous, preening thickos who pass for journalists chez Murdoch. And much more importantly, they’re in the right. I’m glad they’ve come out swinging.

    (I wonder if the Guardian helped Hugh at all with his undercover work? He was at school with two senior Guardian journalists, Edward Pilkington and Julian Borger.)

  19. Sauron

    I made a point of counting his blinks: three and a sort of double eye squeeze. He reminded me of Paul Reiser’s character in Aliens. Pretty clear he’s throwing Brooks under the bus.

  20. spark

    He reminds me of the frat boys where I went to college. Always getting into scrapes with the university honor system or the local constabulary and then explaining themselves out of it with the same bogus “never happen again, sir” sincerity.

  21. boycott murdoch

    Here’s an idea – why not boycott his papers then?

    And stop linking to any articles in any of them.

    Or do you wish to support such people?

  22. Great Patriot

    Murdoch exemplifies that ol’ adage ‘the state giveth, and taketh away’ . We focus on a magnate, yet state power allowed and encouraged his unsavory survelliance.
    One can hardly forget the last decade in ‘Murica – business’ obligatory requirements to display FOX on lobby displays; billowing American flags, death and war crimes, and yes, you’ll own a home for 15 minutes too.

Comments are closed.