Murdoch's Reporters Allegedly Listened To The Voicemails Of Hundreds

from the the-sort-of-journalism-that-needs-protectionism? dept

Fri, Sep 3rd 2010 2:02pm — Mike Masnick

While there had been earlier reports of how some reporters for Rupert Murdoch's News of the World had spied on members of the royal family by listening to their voicemails, new reports suggest this activity was endemic, impacted hundreds -- and that Scotland Yard failed to let many who were victims of such spying know about it (and even focused their investigation on just one reporter, rather than looking into whether or not it was a widespread practice, as it apparently was).

Although Coulson has long insisted he knew nothing about the illegal activity, sources who worked at the tabloid told the Times Coulson not only knew about it, he actively encouraged it. A dozen former reporters said the hacking was so pervasive at News of the World that everyone knew about it. "The office cat knew," one longtime reporter said.

This is the kind of "reporting" that needs to be protected?

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: eavesdropping, rupert murdoch, voicemails

21 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

out_of_the_blue, 3 Sep 2010 @ 2:18pm

This *is* the kind of reporting that needs to be protected.
People who call themselves "royal" and believe that they're inherently superior deserve to be treated with the contempt that *they* have for "commoners", as serfs without rights. So too The Rich in general, or those who advocate torture, or to burn heretics at the stake, deserve to be the only ones treated as they advocate, in a simple application of the Golden Rule. The principle is that they've *voluntarily* removed themselves from the common law. -- But in practice, they're the first to claim to have rights.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 3 Sep 2010 @ 2:21pm

Re: This *is* the kind of reporting that needs to be protected.
Er, no, my friend. You never defeat evil by being evil, else you've simply imbibed of evil yourself. Try again....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 2:52pm

Re: This *is* the kind of reporting that needs to be protected.
Uh, part of the point of the story is that Scotland Yard apparently investigated quite extensively in the cases of voicemail hacking of the princes, but failed to really follow up on leads with regard to all the other reporters hacking into the voicemail of the assorted "lesser" public figures.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Eugene (profile), 3 Sep 2010 @ 2:55pm

Re: This *is* the kind of reporting that needs to be protected.
Just trying to keep up here...you're talking about "the royal family", yeah? The group with zero political power or influence whatsoever, who serve no purpose in England except to keep tabloids running?

Why the hell should they be treated with anything other than complete and utter indifference?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 2:56pm

Re: This *is* the kind of reporting that needs to be protected.
Right, just to get back at the rich and powerful a little bit, you sacrifice the general population. Good job.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
PaulT (profile), 3 Sep 2010 @ 4:00pm

Of course, none of this is surprising in any way. It's one of the reasons why I tend to automatically reject any higher moral ground claims by right-wing rags like The Times, The Sun, Daily Mail, etc. on the assumption that they are hypocrites and have no moral values whatsoever.

So far, that assumption has always been proven correct, and I'd hope that the rest of the world tries to do the same - especially with anything associated with Murdoch. Sadly, judging by certain political factions in the US, some people are falling for their tricks.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 4:16pm

"new reports suggest "

and were these new reports a result of people illegally spying on Murdoch's staff as well?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ron Rezendes (profile), 3 Sep 2010 @ 4:36pm

Re:
And does that matter?

I do know "Two wrongs don't make a right" (but three lefts make a right!) and "A hypocrite is ALWAYS wrong AT LEAST half the time!", but does it really matter that the guy who steals from others while touting his companies' practically religious moral standards has no ground to stand on and has invaded the privacy of countless numbers of citizens and you are questioning those who brought this to light? Really?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 4:48pm

Re: Re:
"but three lefts make a right!"

Someone is illegally spying on someone who is illegally spying on someone who hopes that they can catch the person being spied on do something illegal.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 3 Sep 2010 @ 5:41pm

Re: This *is* the kind of reporting that needs to be protected.
I guess you missed the part of the story where there were hundreds of people (not royalty) affected by this.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 3 Sep 2010 @ 5:43pm

Re:
"judging by certain political factions in the US, some people are falling for their tricks."

And hopefully they keep on falling ... a long long way.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 3 Sep 2010 @ 5:44pm

Re:
You did not read the story did you?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 6:00pm

Re: Re:
Your irony meter needs adjusting.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 6:50pm

@13
++++++YOU
+------+
+------+
+------+
++++++

facing north
you turn left
then you turn left again
then left again where are you?
NOT as the one poster said "3 lefts are a right"
but behind your original self those you could
say "3 lefts leave you behind yourself"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 3 Sep 2010 @ 10:38pm

Re: Re: Re:
Your irony meter needs adjusting.

You need to check a dictionary on the difference between irony and sarcasm.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Sep 2010 @ 1:38am

So...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 4 Sep 2010 @ 4:28pm

Re: Re: Re: Re:
"an objectively or humorously sardonic utterance, disposition, quality, etc. "

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/irony?jss=0
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 5 Sep 2010 @ 2:58am

Hope Murdoch gets a really hard slap.

However with all the power he has, judges seem unwilling to actually harm him. Sued skype for looking like "sky" and he won. He was sued later for giving away music illegally with a newspaper and he paid a few pence every CD, nothing when individuals are charged hundreds of thousands per CD.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DS, 6 Sep 2010 @ 3:49am

Re:
Ah, but the moral-high ground from the left-wing rags is a-ok though?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 6 Sep 2010 @ 7:21am

Anybody out there want to buy a newspaper now?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
chris (profile), 7 Sep 2010 @ 6:59am

Re: Re: Re:
yo dawg, heard you like illegal spying, so we put illegal spying in yo illegal spying so you can illegally spy while you illegally spy.
[ link to this | view in thread ]