Murdoch Phone Hacking Story Just Gets Worse And Worse

from the rupert-running-for-cover dept

Thu, Jul 7th 2011 5:58am — Mike Masnick

Following the reports that employees for Rupert Murdoch's UK tabloid "News of the World" hadn't just hacked into the voicemails of politicians and celebrities, but also those of a murdered teenager (in which they supposedly deleted some message, leading to false hope that the girl was still alive), now come reports that News of the World hacked into the voicemails of the families of soldiers who died in Iraq and Afghanistan.

On top of that, it's also come out that the former editor of the paper, Rebekah Brooks was allegedly warned by Scotland Yard about possible illegal spying taking place via the paper's resources. In that case, she was warned that a reporter was helping two murder suspects spy on the detective investigating them. In other words, we're getting way past just hacking into voicemails and into interfering with police investigations.

Not surprisingly, the Murdoch family is in full-on crisis mode. Advertisers are bailing on the paper, the Murdochs' relationships with top politicians in the UK are being scrutinized and it seems likely that this is one scandal that won't be easily brushed under the rug.

Making matters even crazier, to help deal with the crisis, Murdoch has actually hired the (former) prosecutor who originally investigated the hacking allegations back in 2005 & 2006, and knew the extent of them, but didn't do much about them. Apparently, UK politicians are screaming about this being a pretty serious conflict of interest, given that the guy failed to do much about the news of the hacking early on. You would think that the Murdochs would realize just how bad hiring this guy would look, but it's beginning to become clear that they're really not sure at all how to react to this news coming out in public after all these years.

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, milly dowler, news of the world, rupert murdoch, voicemails

58 Comments

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

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 5:32am

It gets better - they';ve been accused of tampering with every high-profile murder investigation in the UK, as well as the Danielle Jones case.

This is bigger than Watergate now, and tarnishes every 'journalist' that ever worked for News International. Even thw WSJ and the NYT have had top acknowledge that this is big. Brooks should fall on her sword, because there are a few angry parents right now who know where she lives.

And as for Murdoch calling it a smear campaign, he has absolutely no right to talk, given the level of damage his so-called news outlet Fox has done to political candidates in the past thirty years.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
herbert, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:03am

and even worse, murdoch is tipped to have camerons support in securing bskyb! if that doesn't lead to one sided and selective reporting, i dont know what will
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Doe, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:19am

What's good for the government is good for the press?
If the government can have full, warrantless, untraceable access to everyone's private data, why shouldn't the press? Or anyone else for that matter? After all, if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have nothing to hide. /sarc
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Simon, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:20am

Advertisers
They don't need to stinking advertisers, they've got a paywall!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
pacelegal, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:20am

what should happen to a newspaper who buys information that they know is stolen?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:35am

Re:
I think not much, maybe even nothing should happen if a newspaper acquires information through another party acting of their own violation. At worst, receiving stolen goods.

It is important to note however, that is NOT what is happening here, and charges should be filed against individual reporters, as well as launching an investigation into the other reporters and the organization as a whole.

Note1: If the reporter/newspaper hired, suggested, or otherwise directed someone to the actions, they should be charged as conspirators.

Note2: If they have their own team of hackers to 'find' and sell the information, they should be charged for the crime itself, and possibly as a criminal enterprise.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ethorad (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:39am

Re:
I was hearing that although the government can't block the merger because of phone hacking, the regulator (Ofcom) apparently has to consider whether people are "fit and proper" to hold broadcase licences in the UK - which could block the takeover bid.

However, it seems that using Ofcom's "fit and proper" test in this manner would be a bit of a stretch:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/law/2011/jul/06/news-corporation-mediabusiness
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Deirdre (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:43am

I was reading a British set mystery this weekend (Elizabeth Corley's Innocent Blood) and thought the reporters portrayed were over the top evil in their actions-- looks like the author had in fact pulled her punches instead.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Overcast (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:43am

Nice knowing you News Corp, this is horrible.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
That Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:45am

Well if your going to buy a prosecutor, you might as well get your moneys worth.

He is going to try and spin this as being blown out of proportion and if there were anything really seriously wrong here he would have prosecuted them when this first came to light. This is all just people upset with Murdoch getting control of another news outlet and not a "real" story.

And even if someone or several someones fall on their swords, it won't matter. Nothing bad will befall Murdoch, he will sit behind his piles of cash safe and clean.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:51am

I find it very difficult, having spoken to journalists and having worked on magazines myself, that the editor of a publication, in this case, Rebekah Brooks or even Coulson couldn't have known about the hacking. The editors job is to know the provenance of stories printed in their publication. If you let the lower rung journalists run free without verifying or at least having a clue as to the source of a story then you're opening your business up for litigation.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
AJBarnes, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:52am

Re:
Another Fox hater. What's with the liberal left that they embrace propaganda outlets like the New York Times, but just go frothing at the mouth when the other side presents (what has been documented as a impartial) view of things? Put your Fox-hate back in the box. Take a deep breath. If crimes were committed by either side, send them to jail.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
abc gum, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:53am

Re: Re:
"acting of their own violation"

Freudian slip?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nelson, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:54am

( tunes harmonica )

Ha - ha
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:59am

Re: Re: Re:
Yikes, it should read "acting of their own volition" ... though I suppose it does still work, considering.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:06am

Re: Re:
Uuh, the NYT and Fox are the same entity.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:07am

Re:
The documentation goes back to 1984.

Ironic.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:09am

Re: Re:
And as for your final point, people should have gone to jail (aside from the investigator and ONE 'journalist') back in 2007. These people make Al-Qa'ida look positively rational. And they blow up people.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Brian Schroth (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:10am

Re: Re:
+1 funny for "(what has been documented as a impartial)"
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Designerfx (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:10am

Re: Re:
wha?

Fox news is not factual. It is entirely crap and biased.

To act like the only other option is to be liberal is also full of shit.

Not everyone is as idiotic as some people in treating everything as "rightist/leftist" and failing to notice that republican/liberal are still both corporatist, which is the real issue.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ninja (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:15am

I am not surprised. News outfits in general have stopped doing good journalism for a while now. Still, I wonder why they'd tamper with murder cases (ie: delete messages) when they had enough material to write their puny articles...

It's surprising how we are getting tons of evidence against the concentration of commercial power (Wall-e style). Buy 'n Large isn't what should be happening. Countries that had their land distributed to smaller producers saw the great benefits it brought instead of having huge properties of single genre crops. Maybe it's about time fusions and bloated companies get stopped?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Liz, 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:17am

Re: Re:
Logical fallacies there, AJ. Hasty Generalization and Straw Man come to mind.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ben (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:20am

It wasn't hacking
They just guess that the default voicemail password of 0000 was unchanged.

Guessing the password /= hacking, but then it makes for a better headline for the press
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:36am

Re: Re: Re:
"Uuh, the NYT and Fox are the same entity."

Aren't Fox News addicts a fun, super-informed bunch?

God this is awesome....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:38am

Re: It wasn't hacking
No, there was actually quite a bit of deception involved, including brute-forcing the voicemail key, as well as pretending to be a member in a phone compnay's store to obtain the key.

And yes, brute-force attacks are hacking - just not very effective or time-safe.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 7:55am

I ask why is it Murdoch?
You can't tell me you have evidence that he was involved in this.
The private dick and the papers he worked for sure.
This just seems to be another get Rupert attack piece.
Is this MSNBC? The Daily KOS, Think Progress, Huffington Post, Moveon.org?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Joe Publius (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:03am

Re: It wasn't hacking
0000?

That's the kind of password an idiot puts on their luggage.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:07am

Well, as you know if you read Dragonlance books, evil always eats its own in the end. It is the natural outcome of such behavior.

This disgusts me on so many levels. I cannot even begin to express the hatred that I have for Murdoch media, but this isn't something I'd expected even from the trash that he publishes. In. Fucking. Credible.

Hopefully this will change the face of English politics for the better.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:10am

Re: Re: Re:
No, it's absolutely true that fox news has been documented as impartial. "Fair and Balanced" is at the top of their website (right under their logo.) I mean, how long can you watch fox news without them repeat "fair and balanced" at you. If they say it enough, it must be true, right?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nicedoggy, 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:12am

Re: Re:
FOX documented as impartial?

LoL

http://www.businessinsider.com/leaked-fox-news-memo-reveals-news-division-told- to-echo-gop-talking-point-2010-12

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/leaked-memos-cast -doubt-on-fox-news-claim-of-neutrality-2162660.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/dec/15/f ox-news-climate-change-email

You can't be serious.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Nicedoggy, 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:23am

Will Glenn Beck cry for Murdoch?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lRVdgoh-4_w
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:27am

Re: Re: It wasn't hacking
*makes note to change luggage combination*
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Greg G (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:32am

Re: Re: Re:
Fox news not factual? wha?

In your opinion, they aren't factual because you apparently believe that the likes of CNN, MSNBC and the NYT are factual. That's a laugher.

I will agree with you on your last sentence. Republicn (conservative)/Democrat (liberal) are corporatist, the thing is, liberals don't admit it and claim to be for "the working man" or "the little guy."

@eejit.. umm, esplain how Fox and NYT are the same entity?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:34am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
Boith are owned by NewsCorp.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:37am

Re:
Because James Murdoch (y'know, Rupert's SON) is the one who signed off on some of the receipts. Which would imply the Rupert knew what was going on and did nothing.

In a death case where you were involved, that would be the 'depraved heart' manslaughter standard.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
harbingerofdoom (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 8:55am

Re: Re: Re: Re:
um.. me thinks you have confused NYT and NY post?
the post is owned by news corp... nyt is owned by new york times corp which is a publicly traded company.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
harbingerofdoom (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:02am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
which by the way... a side point that is irrelevant to who owns what:

murdoch is dumb... but he isnt an idiot. if he can own two organizations that are going to feed opposing interests in order to capture 100% of a given market (the market demographics in this case being those who like to be counted by those trying to fall asleep) he will do so. thats just smart business.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:30am

NEWS OF THE WORLD
CLOSED FOR BUSINESS
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Mike, 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:31am

spin
Murdoch is used to just being able to use his signifigant media resources to spin or bury anything he doesn't want heard... these stories were buried deep in the Business News section of the Fox news website... I don't think he'll be able to bury this one though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:42am

Re:
Yep. Closing after this Sunday's edition:

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2011/07/07/news-of-the-world-shutting-down-after-sunday-editio n
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:43am

Re: Re:
Fox credits themselves as being "Not Liberal Propaganda" and "The only trustworthy major news outlet."
Does it really not occur to you sheep that the opposite of left is right, and that you're just trading one idiotic polar extreme for another?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:49am

Mike,

For someone who is always complaining about misapplied third-party liability, you sure are quick to place blame squarely on Rupert Murdoch for the actions of a handful of the many, many, many employees of his various companies.

The Murdoch name appears 6 times in the article/headline, and the names of the actual hackers do not appear at all.

I'm not a particular fan of Murdoch, but I don't get why we are focusing on him in particular for the actions of one paper and its employees.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
The eejit (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 9:50am

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ah, my bad. Living up to my name, i see :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 10:33am

Re: spin
Not with lines like this:

"I know I have brought the vilification I am experiencing upon myself, but I do ask the media to leave my family and my children, who are all blameless, alone."

This statement was made by Glenn Mulcaire...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 10:59am

Re:
A CEO is responsible for things that happen at his company. There are also serious allegations that he was aware that this was happening and covered it up.

An ISP is not responsible for its user's actions. Google is not responsible for what a user uploads to Youtube. Rupert Murdoch is not responsible because a reader of one of his websites writes a defamatory comment.

Comparing those completely different organizational structures is just pitiful.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
FM Hilton, 7 Jul 2011 @ 11:08am

I'm just enjoying the fact that the game is over for this tabloid, one of many that Murdoch owns. I'm sure that he will enjoy being prosecuted personally and sued by many, many people-at last estimate about 4,000 people's accounts may have been hacked.
There are reports that the police in London were paid off to look the other way when the hacking took place..and so it goes on and on.
I just hope and pray that this will affect 'Faux" News-you can never say it couldn't be possible that NoTW is the only media outlet that's done wrong in the Murdoch empire.
Murdoch just reached his tipping point in his quest for world domination of the news. Now he can say bye-bye to the BSky deal. That one's a goner for sure.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Burton, 7 Jul 2011 @ 11:16am

The dramatic announcement that the NotW is closing is a total smokescreen.

The paper is the de facto Sunday edition of that other bastion of journalistic integrity, The Sun. Expect to see 'The Sun on Sunday' launch shortly. They grabbed the domain names on Tuesday.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 11:28am

Re: Re:
If Murdoch know something and covered it up, that's one thing.

But using "Murdoch" as a synonym all his companies/divisions/employees is not something I've seen Mike (or really anyone that I can recall) do for other companies.

Nobody says "Page hires X attorney" or "Bezos hires X attorney" when Google or Amazon hire a law firm for a particular matter (or when some Amazon division/subsidiary like Zappos hires a firm independently).
[ link to this | view in thread ]
DannyB (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 11:35am

Re: Closed
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2011/07/07/notw_to_close/
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 11:50am

Re:
I just hope and pray that this will affect [Fox] News...

I suppose that the big news about all this is that there is a Rupert Murdoch organization that actually relies on news gathering...

I'll suggest that one of his holdings here in the US really relies more on their opinion than being a provider of news.

Checking into the news gathering techniques used by other parts of the Rupert Murdoch organization is a legitimate question. But I have my doubts this will affect Fox News-- their ratings and therefore profits don't stem from aggressive news gathering.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 7 Jul 2011 @ 12:24pm

Re: Re:
Then again it might very well effect News Corp. The BBC is reporting that News of the World is shutting down on Sunday: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14070733
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mike allen (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 2:06pm

Re: Re: Closed
Anyone care to lay money on a new sunday paper soon titled er SUN ON SUNDAY.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
mike allen (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 2:07pm

Re: Re: Re:
The general discussion this evening was Murdoch in public condemed the reporters but in private said job well done.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
BeeAitch (profile), 7 Jul 2011 @ 3:06pm

Re: Re:
Marked as funny for using "Fox" and "impartial" in the same comment.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lawrence D'Oliveiro, 7 Jul 2011 @ 6:20pm

As My Dentist Said When He Was Trying To Pull Out A Bad Molar ...
... Tooth is stronger than friction.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
michael e rosick, 2 Feb 2012 @ 7:03pm

help stop my phone email being hacked
hi my phone an email was hacked how do i make it stop my cell number 864 354 2564 really need the help
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael e rosick, 22 Feb 2012 @ 2:28pm

Re: What's good for the government is good for the press?
Please help me my phone an home might be buged I have info that it might my email an facebook got hacked an lies were told that cause be own tv so now people look at me funny an like I said tons of pages about it
WE
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael e rosick, 24 Feb 2012 @ 2:54pm

Internet bullying
My name michael rosick an my home buged an email people make profile about me an no one will help me if u can help help you contact me I. Contact lawyer my cell 5182219390 I really would like it to stop belive I went to my mother last summer an my face book was hacked by my boyfriend an family my boyfriend post xxx pics an said some. Bad lies about me. Please help also my email mikerosick27 @yahoo.com
[ link to this | view in thread ]