Sad Rupert Murdoch

Feigning total ignorance may have seemed like a reasonable tactic for Rupert Murdoch to take in the ongoing hearings about widespread phone hacking at his Newscorp publications, but as a result, an extensive report by British lawmakers has found the Australian tycoon "not a fit person" to run his own media conglomerate. From the report:

"On the basis of the facts and evidence before the committee, we conclude that, if at all relevant times Rupert Murdoch did not take steps to become fully informed about phone-hacking, he turned a blind eye and exhibited willful blindness to what was going on in his companies and publications." 

The statement was protested by conservative members of the hearing committee, who stated that the charges against Murdoch's competence as a leader were included "on the basis of no evidence presented to the committee whatsoever."  And, though the report claims that as a company Newscorp "misled" the committee, the findings are ultimately pretty positive for Murdoch and his son, James: the only likely alternative outcome of the hearing would have been a ruling that the two worked to actively cover up the illegal hacking, which would have far worse ramifications than being ruled "unfit." 

Since the report's release, Murdoch has issued a memo to his staff, saying, "We certainly should have acted more quickly and aggressively to uncover wrongdoing. We deeply regret what took place and have taken our share of responsibility for not rectifying the situation sooner."  

With two of his former top editors still awaiting possible criminal charges, it remains to be seen how much of a dent this will ultimately make it Murdoch's empire, but something tells me he'll still be chugging along, raking in billions and quietly funding arch-conservatives for many happy years to come.

Illustration by Dave Herr.

Commentarium (8 Comments)

May 01 12 - 10:13pm
True Patriot

He may not be fit now, but a little jogging, some more fiber in his diet, and I'm sure he'll be right as rain.

May 01 12 - 10:21pm
profrobert

It's interesting to see the differences between the US and the UK on something like this. In the US, Murdoch and his cronies would be indicted for perjury. In the UK, they're supposed to go apologize to Parliament, which apparently carries some huge moral force. In the US, if Congress demanded, say, an apology from Roger Clemens, he'd just double-down and give them the finger.

I did read that British regulators are taking a look at BSkyB's license because of News Corp's part ownership. If BSkyB loses its license (which effectively is a license to print money), then News Corp really does take a substantial financial penalty. One can only hope.

May 01 12 - 10:40pm
Greg

Ahh yes, typical Liberal, looking to suppress viewpoints he doesn't disagree with.
Funny, nobody seems to have problems with Julian Assange's ethics. And Daniel Ellsberg is regarded as a Saint for stealing secret documents.

May 02 12 - 9:16am
profrobert

Ahh, yes, typical troll, introducing irrelevancies and false equivalences into a discussion. Not for you, but for those who actually care about such distinctions: Britain has its equivalent of our FCC, which licenses who may use the limited resources available to broadcast. One of the major owners of BSkyB has used its position to perform criminal acts and then lied to cover them up. In a choice between a criminal enterprise and a non-criminal one, it's a pretty easy choice to give the license to the latter (or would be if the criminal enterprise didn't have so much power already that it has cowed the plurality political party into doing its bidding). As for Assange, I don't like him or his ethics, though I don't know that he's broken any laws in connection with his publication of secret documents. If he has, I'd like to see him in prison. As for Ellsberg, if the Nixon Administration hadn't criminally violated *his* rights, he may very well have gone to prison. So if you have complaints about Ellsberg, point them at convicted felon Chuck Colson and his henchmen. (And, to be clear, I wouldn't give Assange, Ellsberg or Colson, were he alive, a broadcast license, anymore than I would give one to News Corp).

May 02 12 - 10:19am
Greg

Well then, I expect you to call for the NYTimes corp to be suitable banned from broadcast media for its Criminal acts in publishing the illegally recorded cell phone calls of Newt Gingrich. Perhaps David Obey should also be put in jail for pushing on the tapes.

Face it, you are just rationalized your own desire to suppress viewpoints that you disagree with, in this case the liberal Boogie men of Fox News.

May 02 12 - 4:12pm
Kel

Keep in mind that Fox News has never been a legitimate news organization; instead, it's a propaganda disseminator with a far-right conservative agenda. The Fox ""viewpoint" is already predetermined, and facts that get in the way are discarded. To compare Fox News with the New York Times is ridiculous.

May 03 12 - 1:36am
Greg

Ha, HA! You really need to do some research on the NY Times.
Start with Walter Duranty, their Pultzer Prize winning propagandist ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Duranty

May 04 12 - 11:04pm
Hey, Kel

Tell us again how the Kingston Trio didn't record Early Morning Rain. We love it when you pretend to be so authoritative when you have your head up your ass. Very entertaining.

Are you trying to be a walking, talking example of the left wing obtuseness reported by the Pew Research poll?