Douglas Caddy

Why Bradleegate Matters: Woodward and Bernstein's Deception

By James Rosen

The Atlantic

May 22, 2012

The media focused on Ben Bradlee's doubts about Deep Throat, but the real story is the discrepancies between their original reporting and the established history of Watergate

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/why-bradleegate-matters-woodward-and-bernsteins-deception/257487/

.

"Please don't use the presently existing literature as established fact," warned H.R. Haldeman, the former White House chief of staff to Richard Nixon, at a symposium on the Nixon presidency convened at Hofstra University in November 1987. "There's an enormous amount of gross inaccuracies in most of the present views regarding the totality and the specific segments of the Nixon presidency."

A brilliantly efficient chief of staff -- his communications operations marked a quantum leap over his predecessors' and helped shape the modern presidency -- Haldeman wound up disgraced, serving 18 months at Lompoc Federal Prison in his native California for his role in the Watergate cover-up. Few in the saga were more thoroughly vilified. At Lompoc, this devout Christian Scientist and former J. Walter Thompson executive, a man described by historian Richard Reeves as "a pre-computer organizational genius," toiled as a sewage chemist. Haldeman recalled at Hofstra how he used "the unenviable luxury of substantial time on my hands" to devour, in his cell, the established literature on Nixon and Watergate.

Armed with three highlighter pens of different colors, he underlined in red every statement of fact he knew, "of my own personal and absolutely certain knowledge," to be false. The color blue Haldeman used to highlight sentences he knew, with equal certitude, to be true. And yellow was reserved for those claims that even Haldeman, the White House aide who spent the most time in Nixon's Oval Office, could neither verify nor refute. "It was a fascinating exercise," he said -- and with discernible glee, he would tell you the book with the highest percentage of red lines, the lowest truth quotient: 1974's The Palace Guard by Dan Rather and Gary Paul Gates.

****

The gauntlet Haldeman threw down to scholars and historians a quarter-century ago was finally picked up last month. With unprecedented authority and devastating consequences, similarly fastidious scrutiny -- color-coding and all -- was belatedly applied to the most influential and celebrated Watergate book of them all: All the President's Men, by Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward. This brave feat was performed in New York magazine, in its publication of excerpts from a new biography of legendary Watergate-era Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee. Yours in Truth: A Personal Portrait of Ben Bradlee was written by Jeff Himmelman, a thirty-something writer who had formerly served as a research assistant to both Bradlee and Woodward. And accompanying the article -- wham-o! - there it was: a graphic that deconstructed, line by line, page 212 of All the President's Men and used four different colors to do it. Except in this case, all of the colors highlighted statements Himmelman, knew to be false -- or at least highly misleading.

[A marked-up version of one page of All the President's Men shows how Woodward and Bernstein bent the truth. (New York)] [click on link at beginning or end of article to view this]

The passage in question recounted Bernstein's furtive December 1972 interview with a Washington, D.C., woman whom Himmelman -- using long-lost documents from Bradlee's own archives -- confirmed to have been a Watergate grand juror. In the passage, however, Bernstein had slyly led readers to believe that this source, whom he dubbed "Informant Z," was an employee of the Nixon White House or its 1972 campaign arm, the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CRP). Moreover, Woodward and Bernstein had spent decades -- decades! -- denying they had received information from any Watergate grand jurors.

Meanwhile, Himmelman also unearthed a 1990 interview with Bradlee in which he expressed profound misgivings about Woodward's whole story of his dealings with his shadowy Watergate source, Deep Throat. "Did that potted [plant] incident ever happen?" Bradlee mused, about the notion that Woodward used to move his flowerpot around on his balcony to signal for meetings with Deep Throat. Likewise, about Woodward's rendezvous in an Arlington, Virginia, parking garage with Deep Throat, Bradlee wondered: "One meeting in the garage? Fifty meetings in the garage? I don't know how many meetings [there were] in the garage." He added: "There's a residual fear in my soul that that isn't quite straight."

Within minutes of their publication online, Himmelman's excerpts touched off a media furor. Twitter was afire and the online community was astonished at the audacity of the younger man's patricide. Book reviews appeared alongside straight news articles reporting on Himmelman's revelations, complete with public statements by Bradlee and Woodward -- often as not, disparaging of Himmelman, a young man who had once practically lived with these people.

Despite the furor, the paucity of living individuals still knowledgeable about Watergate and the sheer number of Himmelman's Watergate bombshells combined to prevent his findings from receiving the kind of engaged critical attention, let alone acclaim, they deserved. Indeed, the vigor with which Woodward fought to prevent these disclosures from surfacing -- a series of tense personal encounters chronicled, in aching detail, by his former protege -- confirms their importance. Thanks to Himmelman, America's most revered journalist -- and by some measures her most successful non-fiction author -- felt the earth move under his feet a bit. And that doesn't happen to Bob Woodward very often.

The stuff about Bradlee naturally generated more buzz. Memories of his portrayal by Jason Robards in the film version of All the President's Men still linger. In his public statements about the Himmelman book, Bradlee sought to tamp down the controversy by arguing, in effect, that Woodward's scorecard in Watergate, the "details" about Deep Throat notwithstanding, was mostly exemplary. The Old Guard must have been on the right side of history because, as Bradlee's wife Sally Quinn noted in her statement: "Nixon resigned."

Ultimately, however, the disclosures surrounding Bernstein's interview of the grand juror, "Informant Z," warrant more attention than the deep residual fear tormenting Ben Bradlee's soul. In theory, they are probably equally significant, because both sets of disclosures go to the heart of the question: What can you believe of what these guys wrote? Some of this has to do with freshness. Surely it is newsworthy to learn that no less a figure than Bradlee, who directed the Post's Pulitzer Prize-winning coverage of Watergate, was as troubled as the Watergate revisionists by the dubiety of Deep Throat. But Woodward's details on Deep Throat -- actually, not mere "details," but important elements of what lawyers would call foundation -- have long been under assault. Author Jim Hougan cast the first critical eye, back in 1984, in his monument of revisionist research Secret Agenda: Watergate, Deep Throat, and the CIA. The party Bradlee joined -- in an uncharacteristically late arrival for the salty dog who regularly downed scotches with Jack Kennedy in the White House -- has been underway for a quarter century.

Bernstein's Z memo, however, was wholly new. The least of its revelations is the exposure of Woodward's and Bernstein's long deception about their dealings with the Watergate grand jury; the aged reporters now maintain that was all to protect their source. The real eye-opener is that color-coded, sentence-by-sentence deconstruction of All the President's Men. Among the previously unpublished treasures in Bradlee's archives was the seven-page memorandum Bernstein typed out to record his interview of Z. That document can now be juxtaposed with the account of the event in All the President's Men, On page 212 of the book, Z was quoted as saying, "My boss calls it a whitewash." From the Bernstein memo (small wonder no copy of it is included with the rest of the Woodward and Bernstein papers at the University of Texas) we learn that Z's full quote was: "My boss called it a whitewash, and he doesn't even have the facts" (emphasis added).

Forget the fact that Bernstein lopped off the second part of the quote, which is damning enough. The worst of it is: Now that we know this woman was a grand juror, and not an employee of the Nixon White House or CRP, who cares what her boss thinks? She could have worked at a pet store for all we know! In context, though, with her having been introduced with the le Carré-esque moniker "Informant Z," identified as a woman who "was in a position to have considerable knowledge of the secret activities of the White House and CRP," Bernstein's chopped-off quote leads the reader to think some wise man of the Nixon administration, Z's sage boss, was troubled by all the criminality there. It's beyond misleading.

This desecration of that holiest of sacred texts raises the question: What about the rest of the book? If we can't believe the assertions about Deep Throat -- and there is much there that is demonstrably untrue, of which the flower pot is only the beginning -- and we can't believe the portrayal of Informant Z, then what can we believe? How might the rest of All the President's Men -- indeed, the entirety of the Woodward-Bernstein canon -- fare under such strict Haldemanian scrutiny? It is, for honest and courageous researchers, a future avenue of enormous scholarly potential.

In The Strong Man: John Mitchell and the Secrets of Watergate, I offered another example: the famous September 29, 1972 Washington Post story in which it was alleged that John Mitchell had controlled a secret GOP fund, endowed with hundreds of thousands of dollars, that was used to sabotage Democrats. It was this story that really ratcheted up the Post's coverage of Watergate and which elicited Mitchell's famous threat -- Bernstein had awakened him, late at night, to secure his comment -- to the anatomy of Post publisher Katharine Graham. In all the Watergate testimony and trials that followed, however, no evidence was ever produced to show that Mitchell controlled such a fund. The Watergate special prosecutors never included anything remotely like it in their indictment of Mitchell.

It's amazing that Woodward, Bernstein, and Bradlee all lived to see this moment, this small but significant piercing of the armor of the Washington Post/Watergate/ATPM narrative. A shocking, wounding heresy by the highest-ranking defector from Woodwardia ever to make it to the other side, and with an assist from Bradlee himself! Heady days!

****

The advent of ProQuest and the Internet assures that future generations will likely be more open than Woodward and Bernstein's contemporaries to principled revisionism about Watergate and the Nixon presidency. Each new archival discovery -- and Himmelman's sensational work underscores that the field of Nixon Studies is still in its infancy -- will receive the crowd-sourcing treatment, producing a new, if not always intellectually rigorous, kind of hyper-scrutiny.

And the conservative intellectual establishment that didn't exist in the Nixon era -- the establishment he used to sit in the Oval Office and demand that his aides to get busy building, the think tanks, media outlets, and advocacy groups that materialized about a decade too late to defend the president's Silent Majority, the Haynsworth and Carswell nominations to the Supreme Court, John Mitchell's campaign for law and order, Henry Kissinger's conduct of the Vietnam War, and the other controversial aspects of Nixon's right-of-center regime -- these engaged conservatives will be among those pouring over, and publicizing, the never-ending revelations of Watergate. There is every reason to believe their mark will prove more enduring than those made by H.R. Haldeman's highlighters.

This article available online at:

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/05/why-bradleegate-matters-woodward-and-bernsteins-deception/257487/

Piers Morgan gave me phone hack lesson, Jeremy Paxman tells Leveson Inquiry

By John Fahey

The Independen

Wednesday, 23 May 2012

Former Daily Mirror editor Piers Morgan once told Jeremy Paxman how to access voicemail messages, the Leveson Inquiry heard today.

Newsnight anchorman Mr Paxman said he attended a lunch at Mirror headquarters in Canary Wharf in September 2002 where Mr Morgan teased Ulrika Jonsson about her relationship with former England football manager Sven-Goran Eriksson, saying he knew about a conversation they had.

Mr Paxman said Mr Morgan explained to him how to access people's phone messages after teasing the Swedish television presenter about the conversation.

Mr Paxman told the inquiry: "He turned to me and said 'Have you got a mobile phone?'

"I said yes and he asked if there was a security setting on the message bit of it. I didn't know what he was talking about.

"He then explained the way to get access to people's messages was to go to the factory default setting and press either 0000 or 1234 and that if you didn't put on your own code, his words, 'You're a fool'."

The BBC Newsnight presenter said he remembered the lunch for two reasons: he wondered why he had been invited and because of what Morgan said.

"Mr Morgan was teasing Ulrika that he knew what had happened in a conversation between her and Sven-Goran Eriksson," said Paxman.

"I don't know if he was repeating a conversation he had heard or he was imagining this conversation.

"To be fair to him I should imagine both possibly because he probably was imagining it."

Paxman said Morgan put on a funny Swedish voice.

"It was a rather bad parody."

He added: "I don't know if he was making this up, making up the conversation.

"But it was clearly something he was familiar with and I wasn't.

"I didn't know that this went on."

The veteran presenter said Morgan's treatment of Jonsson was close to bullying.

"I didn't like it," he said.

PA

Journalists who stalked hacking MP still employed by Murdoch

By Martin Hickman

The Independent

Tuesday, 22 May 2012

Two senior journalists now working for The Sunday Times arranged for an MP investigating the hacking scandal to be put under surveillance, The Independent can reveal today.

While working for the News of the World in 2009 Mazher Mahmood, a reporter known as the "Fake Sheikh" for his undercover stings, and news editor James Mellor agreed that Tom Watson be tailed for days in the mistaken belief he was having an affair with a female politician.

News International later described the surveillance as "inappropriate". However, it kept the men on when the News of the World closed and they are now employed at The Sunday Times, Mr Mahmood as investigative reporter and Mr Mellor as deputy news editor. News International, which says it has "zero tolerance" of wrongdoing, declined to say if either had been disciplined.

The email pinged into the inbox of news editor James Mellor at 10.05am on a Saturday. One of the News of the World's fiercest critics, the Labour MP Tom Watson, was having an extra-marital affair – or so claimed the paper's star investigative reporter, Mazher Mahmood.

Mr Mahmood himself put it less delicately in the message on 26 September 2009: Mr Watson was "shagging" a female politician, he claimed. According to an informant of the "Fake Sheikh", Mr Watson and the woman were staying at separate hotels at the Labour Party conference in Brighton and he was "creeping into her hotel". He described the MP as a "close lackey" of the then Prime Minister Gordon Brown and noted he was "anti-Blair".

Within minutes of being copied into the email, Assistant Editor Ian Edmondson acknowledged it was a "great story". The News of the World had long exposed "secret affairs", but this target was particularly juicy because Mr Watson was an enemy of News International. He excitedly told Mr Mahmood: "You might want to check his recent cutts [cuttings], v interesting!"

That summer Mr Watson – who had been investigating phone hacking at the News of the World – had been vexing Rupert Murdoch's newspaper group. On 30 June, The Sun had been forced to admit it had falsely claimed that he had been privy to a plot to smear leading Conservatives. And in July, he had elicited the information that Mr Murdoch's son, James, had authorised a secret payment to a hacking victim, Gordon Taylor, head of the Professional Footballers' Association.

Behind the scenes, there was another spicy element: News International's papers were about to switch their endorsement from Mr Brown's Labour Party to David Cameron's Conservatives.

Within 10 minutes of receiving the email, Mr Mellor and Mr Edmondson (who was subsequently arrested on suspicion of phone hacking) discussed putting Mr Watson under surveillance. With their agreement, Mr Mahmood commissioned a former policeman, Derek Webb, to tail him. Everything was in place for a front-page scoop, except one thing – the story was not true. Mr Watson was not and never had been having an affair with the politician.

Had News International paid Mr Webb a loyalty payment after the closure of the News of the World last summer, the incident would have remained one of its many secrets. But they did not, and Mr Webb spilled the beans at the end of last year, disclosing that he had tailed Mr Watson and dozens of celebrities, sports people and politicians up to Cabinet level for the paper for years. Until now, it was not known who ordered the surveillance on Mr Watson. Lawyers for Lord Justice Leveson indicated to The Independent that the surveillance, which was legal, would not be a line of questioning when Mr Watson appears before his inquiry today.

News International, which has apologised to Mr Watson for the surveillance, said: "It would be inappropriate for us to comment on this issue."

http://www.unknowncountry.com/dreamland/latest

http://www.ratline.us/

Rupert Murdoch denies claims that News Corp may sell UK newspapers

Mogul says News Corporation is 'firmly committed' to its papers including the Sun, Times and Sunday Times

Reuters

guardian.co.uk,

Saturday 19 May 2012 08.45 EDT

Rupert Murdoch has denied reports that News Corp is considering spinning off its British newspapers to protect the rest of his media empire from criminal scandals.

The Daily Telegraph and the Financial Times newspapers said executives at the company were looking into ways to split off the Sun, the Times and the Sunday Times, published by its News International unit.

However, Murdoch, the chief executive of News Corp, said in a statement: "News Corporation remains firmly committed to our publishing businesses, including News International, and any suggestion to the contrary is wholly inaccurate. Publishing is a core component of our future."

British police are examining claims that journalists at the News of the World – a paper shut by Murdoch last July – routinely hacked into the phones of hundreds of celebrities, politicians and victims of crime to generate front-page stories.

They are also investigating whether staff hacked into computers and made illegal payments to public officials, including the police, to get ahead in their reporting. Rebekah Brooks, a former senior executive of News International and editor of the News of the World, has been charged with attempting to pervert the course of justice.

The Daily Telegraph and the FT said News Corp was discussing putting the News International titles into a trust.

A News International spokeswoman denied the report, saying in a statement: "There are absolutely no plans to put News International into a separate trust."

Selling the newspapers to one or more wealthy individuals was another option under consideration, the FT said, quoting two people familiar with the company.

They noted no decisions had been made and a spin-off or a sale might not happen, the FT added.

The Daily Telegraph said a proposal to go into a joint venture with a media partner was also on the table, without citing its sources

After 7 Years, No End in Sight to Phone Hacking Scandal

By RAVI SOMAIYA

The New York Times

May 17, 2012

LONDON — The phone hacking scandal that shook Rupert Murdoch’s global media empire and hit the heart of the British government began quietly on a Monday in 2005, when aides to the British royal family gathered in a palace office appointed with priceless antiques to air suspicions that their voice mail messages had been intercepted.

Seven years and dozens of arrests later, the day after the latest criminal charges were brought, information from the police, prosecutors and investigators indicated Wednesday that the investigations are likely to go on for years, with no obvious end in sight.

Rebekah Brooks, the former editor of Mr. Murdoch’s Sun and News of the World tabloids, who rose to become chief executive of his British newspaper subsidiary, News International, and a close friend to Prime Minister David Cameron, was among the first to face criminal charges, the authorities announced Tuesday. Ms. Brooks, her husband and four former colleagues were accused of perverting the course of justice by removing materials pertinent to police investigations — charges she called “unjust.”

Ms. Brooks, who will appear in court on June 13, will most likely not be the last to face prosecution, the police and prosecutors said. There are three current police operations, Scotland Yard confirmed: Operation Weeting, which is examining illegal voice mail interceptions, currently employs 95 officers and staff members and has made 22 arrests; Operation Tuleta, which is looking into computer hacking, employs eight and has made three arrests; and Operation Elveden, which is exploring illegal payments by journalists to public officials, employs 29 and has made 28 arrests.

“It is difficult to give an end date,” said a police spokesman, who declined to be identified in line with policy. “We follow the evidence, and it’s impossible to say where it will lead. It’s safe to say it will last years.” A police budget for all the investigations into journalism extends into 2015, and anticipates that the cost will reach $64 million in total.

Criminal trials for central players in the scandal could air new information. Among those who could face charges is Andy Coulson, the former editor of The News of the World who later became Mr. Cameron’s director of communications.

If it is proved that those in Mr. Murdoch’s employ conspired to pay public officials to further business interests, experts say he could be at risk of sanctions in the United States under the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Even a small fine would threaten to take the scandal across the Atlantic, and increase political pressure on Mr. Murdoch’s lucrative American interests.

A far-reaching British public inquiry, led by a senior judge, Lord Justice Brian Leveson, is running in parallel to the criminal investigations. It has elicited explosive testimony from Mr. Murdoch, his son James and their former senior executives and will continue into July with appearances by leading past and present politicians, said John Toker, a spokesman for the inquiry.

On the witness stand in the next two weeks will be Culture Minister Jeremy Hunt, who is accused of seeking to aid Mr. Murdoch’s bid to take over a British satellite broadcaster, BSkyB, instead of adjudicating it impartially.

It is unclear whether Mr. Cameron and his chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, will also give evidence on their relationships with the Murdoch family and company executives. Both officials have faced embarrassing allegations that dinners and parties with the Murdochs, including a gathering that Mr. Cameron attended on Mr. Murdoch’s yacht, reveal an inappropriate coziness that may have influenced the BSkyB deal.

The inquiry’s report will be released in October, Mr. Toker said, and the second part of the inquiry, focusing on the hacking scandal, will begin after criminal proceedings have ended.

Meanwhile, more than 100 civil lawsuits alleging illegal voice mail interceptions have been filed, according to court records. Many suits have been settled at an undisclosed cost, which could reach hundreds of millions of dollars in damages and legal fees. The police have said that there are likely more than 800 victims.

The judge overseeing the cases, Geoffrey Vos, set a trial date of Feb. 18, 2013, for any cases that are not settled out of court.

News International has also come under some pressure to waive legal privilege and allow the release of an internal dossier on hacking, compiled by the law firm BCL Burton Copeland in 2006, that might reveal whether senior executives knew of widespread illegality even as they said that hacking was limited to “one rogue reporter,” Clive Goodman, who was jailed in 2007. A News International spokeswoman declined to comment on the matter, and the law firm did not respond to messages.

“We’re now thinking in terms of years, not weeks or months,” said a News International official, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal strategy. But the company may not be alone. Other allegations of phone hacking outside of Mr. Murdoch’s empire — including accusations that it took place at a large corporation — are likely to emerge, one person familiar with the investigations said.

Tom Cruise says his phone may have been hacked

Tom Cruise has indicated in an interview that his phone may have been hacked by journalists.

The Telegraph

12:39PM BST

17 May 2012

The Hollywood actor's disclosure during a magazine interview make him potentially the highest-profile victim of the practice which has resulted in the closure of the News of the World, a major police probe, and the Leveson Inquiry.

Cruise, the star of Top Gun and the Mission Impossible series of films, did not elaborate further but said elsewhere in the article that he was someone who would "stand up" to bullies.

During the interview with Playboy magazine, he was reminded of how he called a news channel on the night that Diana, Princess of Wales died, to complain that the intrusiveness of the media had got out of hand.

When the subject moved on to the phone-hacking scandal and he was asked "have you ever been hacked?", Cruise, 49, replied: "Maybe."

The actor was asked what he made of "this invasion of privacy" and replied: "I put that in a minor pile of things I have to handle. But with certain ones you have to go 'Okay, you crossed a line, and now you have the attention of my lawyers'."

Previous reports have indicated that Mark Lewis, the British lawyer for alleged phone hacking victims, counted a "Hollywood case" among three clients who will soon be filing lawsuits in the US.

Mr Lewis is not, however, representing Cruise

Leveson Inquiry: Jack Straw reveals he 'gossipped' with Rebekah Brooks on the train every week

Jack Straw arranged to meet Rebekah Brooks every week for a "gossip" as they shared a train journey to London from Oxfordshire, the Leveson Inquiry has heard.

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

The Telegraph

12:36PM BST 16 May 2012

To view video:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/leveson-inquiry/9269634/Leveson-Inquiry-Jack-Straw-reveals-he-gossipped-with-Rebekah-Brooks-on-the-train-every-week.html

The former home secretary said he and the ex-chief executive of News International made an arrangement to sit next to each other every Monday morning after discovering they both caught the same early morning service.

Despite being the MP for Blackburn, Mr Straw had a weekend home in Minster Lovell, a few miles from Mrs Brooks’s country home in Churchill, Oxon.

Mr Straw told the Leveson Inquiry that from 2007 to 2009, when he was justice secretary, he and Mrs Brooks “made arrangements” to sit together on the train, which Mr Straw caught at Charlbury. Mrs Brooks was editor of The Sun at the time.

"We would talk about what was in the papers,” he said. “We'd gossip about personalities, and that sort of thing. We weren't nattering the whole journey.”

He said the conversations never involved anything sensitive because there were always people "earwigging".

The arrangement petered out in 2009 when Mrs Brooks became chief executive of News International.

Mr Straw admitted that Tony Blair's government had been too cosy with the press, blaming the fact that in opposition, links with journalists had become "very, very close, sometimes incestuous".

He said Rupert Murdoch had “power” over politicians, and: "He reckoned his political influence would be greater if, as it were, his support was available in return for what he thought he could get out of it.

"I don't mean a deal, because I have seen no evidence of a deal. But he thought there was something in it."

He went on: "I think that the perception I have got is that Mr Murdoch is enjoying the fact that he has been willing to play with political leaders in the way that the senior executives of the other papers have not.

"He is very interested in power for its own sake, because you do not get to that position running a huge international media empire without being interested in power."

Pressed on what Mr Murdoch might have thought he would get from his influence over politicians, Mr Straw suggested he wanted to "consolidate his non-newspaper interests in this country".

Mr Murdoch believed remaining available could "open more doors in government when it came to things like media regulation, licences, regulation of football and so on".

The Labour MP rejected as "disingenuous" James Murdoch's efforts to play down the importance of News International's publications to the wider News Corporation empire. Although they only constituted 2% of the group's financial interests, they were far more significant to the business in other ways, he said.

Asked whether Mr Murdoch wielded "power" or "influence", Mr Straw replied: "Certainly, to those on the receiving end it felt like power."

Rebekah Brooks defiant over charges relating to phone-hacking 'cover-up'

Former News International CEO expressed anger that those close to her had been 'dragged into the affair'

By Sandra Laville and Dan Sabbagh

guardian.co.uk,

Tuesday 15 May 2012 15.32 EDT

Rebekah and Charlie Brooks's statement. Video: ITN Link to this video

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/15/rebekah-brooks-defiant-phone-hacking

Rebekah Brooks made a defiant attack on the "weak and unjust" decision by the prosecuting authorities to bring charges against her on Tuesday and dismissed the case as an "expensive sideshow and waste of public money".

Outside her solicitor's office in London, the former chief executive of News International said she could not express how angry she was that those close to her had been "unfairly dragged into this".

An emotional and nervous-looking Brooks, 43, spoke out after a momentous day in the phone-hacking affair saw her facing three charges of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice over allegations that she concealed "material, documents and computers" from detectives investigating phone hacking at the News of the World and alleged bribes to public officials by journalists at the Sun.

Her husband, Charlie Brooks, a racehorse trainer and friend of the prime minister, faces one charge of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice by acting with others to "conceal documents, computer and other electronic devices" from detectives.

Speaking alongside his wife, he also condemned the decision as "an attempt to use me and others as scapegoats, the effect of which is to ratchet up the pressure on my wife, who I believe is the subject of a witch-hunt".

The couple were among six individuals – including News International's head of security, Mark Hanna – charged over allegations that they were engaged in a cover-up to hide evidence from police investigating phone hacking at the News of the World.

One of the most high profile figures in the newspaper industry, and a close confidante of Rupert Murdoch, Brooks was charged by police at a police station in Lewisham on Tuesday afternoon. She had travelled to London with her husband from their home in Oxfordshire to answer bail after their arrest in March.

The couple were made to attend different police stations – Mrs Brooks at Lewisham, and her husband at Hammersmith – to have the charges laid against them.

The decision to bring the first charges in the long-running phone-hacking investigation, Operation Weeting, had been announced earlier by Alison Levitt QC, of the CPS, in a high-profile televised statement, the lawyer said, in the interests of "transparency and accountability".

Brooks, however, condemned the live broadcast as "the further unprecedented posturing of the CPS".

All the alleged offences took place in July last year when the phone-hacking investigation was at its height.

The charge is a serious one which carries a maximum penalty of life, although the average term served in prison is 10 months. Brooks also remains on bail over phone-hacking allegations and allegations over bribes to public officials.

Levitt said the decision to charge six of the seven individuals arrested for conspiring to pervert the course of justice came after prosecutors applied the two-stage test they are required to when making charging decisions.

"I have concluded that in relation to all suspects except the seventh there is sufficient evidence for there to be a realistic prospect of conviction," she said.

"I then considered the second stage of the test and I have concluded that a prosecution is required in the public interest in relation to each of the other six."

Brooks and her husband were arrested in March. Detectives from Operation Weeting then handed their file of evidence on the couple and the other individuals to the CPS on 27 March. The five others arrested were Hanna, Cheryl Carter, Ms Brooks's former personal assistant for 19 years, Paul Edwards, Brooks's chauffeur and employee of News International, and Daryl Jorsling, who provided Brooks with security, supplied by News International.

The seventh suspect – who has not been named – also provided security.

Scotland Yard said later that the seventh man – for whom no charges were laid – had been released with no further action to be taken.

The first charge against Mrs Brooks alleges that between 6 July and 19 July 2011 she conspired with Charlie Brooks, Cheryl Carter, Mark Hanna, Paul Edwards, Daryl Jorsling and persons unknown to conceal material from officers of the Metropolitan Police Service.

The second charge, which she faces along with Carter, alleges that between 6 July and 9 July 2011 they conspired together to permanently remove seven boxes of material from the archive of News International.

In the third charge she is accused, along with her husband, Mark Hanna, Paul Edwards and Daryl Jorsling and persons unknown, of conspiring together between 15 July and 19 July 2011 to conceal documents, computers and other electronic equipment from officers of the Metropolitan Police Service.

Brooks and her husband revealed they were to be charged some 10 minutes before the CPS live announcement on Tuesdaymorning.

They promised they would make a further statement after attending the police station. They did that shortly after 5pm outside their solicitors, Kingsley Napier, in London.

Looking tired, Brooks said: "Whilst I have always respected the criminal justice system, you have to question whether this decision has been made on a proper impartial assessment of the evidence. Although I understand the need for a thorough investigation, I am baffled by the decision to charge me.

"However, I cannot express my anger enough that those close to me have unfairly been dragged into this.

"As the details of the case emerge people will see today as an expensive sideshow, and a waste of public money as a result of this weak and unjust decision."

Standing next to her, Mr Brooks raised doubts that his wife would get a fair trial.

"There are 172 police officers, about the equivalent of eight murder squads, working on this; so it doesn't surprise me that the pressure is on to prosecute, no matter how weak the cases will be," he said.

"I am confident that the lack of evidence against me will be borne out in court, but I have grave doubts that my wife will ever get a fair trial, given the volume of biased commentary which she has been subject to."

Scotland Yard said all six defendants were released on bail to appear at Westminster magistrates on 13 June.

Analysis: Decision to charge Rebekah Brooks means hacking will hang over Government until next election

David Cameron is currently in his weekly Cabinet meeting – it started at 9.45am – and will almost certainly have been informed about the decision to charge Rebekah Brooks with three charges of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice earlier.

By Christopher Hope, Senior Political Correspondent

The Telegraph

10:32AM BST 15 May 2012

During the various presentations during the 90 minute meeting from other Cabinet ministers, he will have had the chance to reflect on the fate of his old friend and Oxfordshire neighbour Mrs Brooks.

Unquestionably the decision to charge the former tabloid editor and chief executive of News International hugely increases the pressure on the Prime Minister, who is due to give evidence under oath to the Leveson inquiry on press ethics within the next few weeks.

Crucially it also means that the spectre of phone hacking will hang over the Government right up until the next general election, due in 2015, with the prospect of potentially more embarrassing disclosures from the court process.

Mr Cameron had tried to limit the embarrassment from the Leveson inquiry by requiring it to report this autumn. However, the prospect of the trial of Mrs Brooks means that the prospect of further embarrassing disclosures will hang over for a long time after that.

Mr Cameron and Mrs Brooks were certainly close – he used to sign text messages to her “LOL [Lots of Love] DC” – and it is this relationship that will come under such scrutiny from the inquiry’s QC Robert Jay.

According to Mrs Brooks’ diary, the pair met on 22 different occasions over the past six years – on average once every three months. Some of those meetings were in Oxfordshire over Christmas 2010, when Rupert Murdoch was trying to buy the remaining shares in BSkyB.

That's only the meetings with Mr Cameron. There could be other disclosures from other meetings with other Cabinet ministers, which could also prove difficult to explain away for the Government.

Yet so far we only know about the fact of these meetings. It is highly likely that as part of the routine court disclosure process, more embarrassing details might emerge, which could further damage the Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues. This has a long way to go.

Rebekah Brooks to be charged with perverting the course of justice

Former News International chief executive, her husband and four others to be charged in phone-hacking inquiry

By Sandra Laville, crime correspondent

guardian.co.uk,

Tuesday 15 May 2012 08.45 EDT

The Crown Prosecution Service says Rebekah Brooks will be charged with perverting the course of justice. Video: ITN Link to this video

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2012/may/15/rebekah-brooks-charged-perverting-course-justice

Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International, is to be charged over allegations that she tried to conceal evidence from detectives investigating phone hacking and alleged bribes to public officials.

Brooks, one of the most high-profile figures in the newspaper industry, will be charged later on Tuesday with three counts of conspiracy to pervert the course of justice in July last year at the height of the police investigation, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced.

She is accused of conspiring with others, including her husband, Charlie Brooks, the racehorse trainer and friend of the prime minister, and her personal assistant, to conceal material from detectives.

Brooks and her husband were informed of the charging decision – the first since the start of the Operation Weeting phone-hacking investigation last January – when they answered their bail at a police station in London on Tuesday morning.

They are among six individuals from News International, along with the company's head of security, Mark Hanna, to be charged over allegations that they removed material, documents and computers to hide them from officers investigating phone hacking. The charge carries a maximum penalty of life, although the average term served in prison is 10 months.

In a statement, Brooks and her husband – who are both close to David Cameron – condemned the decision made by senior lawyers and overseen by Keir Starmer QC, the director of public prosecutions.

"We deplore this weak and unjust decision after the further unprecedented posturing of the CPS," the statement said. "We will respond later today after our return from the police station."

The CPS chose to announce the charges against Brooks, her husband and four others in a televised statement in the interests of "transparency and accountability".

Brooks is accused in one charge of conspiring with her PA, Cheryl Carter, to "remove seven boxes of material from the archives of News International".

In a separate charge she is accused of conspiring with her husband, Hanna, her chauffeur and a security consultant to conceal "documents and computers" from the investigating detectives. All the offences are alleged to have taken place in July last year.

Alison Levitt QC, Starmer's principal legal adviser, said the decision to charge six of the seven individuals arrested over the allegations came after prosecutors applied the two-stage test required of them when making charging decisions.

"I have concluded that in relation to all suspects except the seventh there is sufficient evidence for there to be a realistic prospect of conviction," she said.

"I then considered the second stage of the test and I have concluded that a prosecution is required in the public interest in relation to each of the other six."

Levitt said the televised statement had been made in "the interests of transparency and accountability to explain the decisions reached in respect of allegations that Rebekah Brooks conspired with her husband, Charles Brooks, and others to pervert the course of justice".

She said detectives handed prosecutors a file of evidence on 27 March this year in relation to seven suspects: Brooks, her husband, Hanna, Carter, Paul Edwards who was Brooks's chauffeur employed by News International, and Daryl Jorsling, who provided security for Brooks, supplied by News international.

The seventh suspect – who has not been named – also provided security. But Levitt said no charges were to be laid against him.

Brooks is charged on count one that between 6 July and 19 July 2011 she conspired with Charles Brooks, Carter, Hanna, Edwards, Jorsling and persons unknown to conceal material from officers of the Metropolitan Police Service.

On count two she is charged with Carter between 6 July and 9 July 2011 of conspiring together to permanently remove seven boxes of material from the archive of News International. In the third count Brooks is charged with her husband, Hanna, Edwards and Jorsling and persons unknown of conspiring together between 15 July and 19 July 2011 to conceal documents, computers and other electronic equipment from officers of the Metropolitan Police Service.

In a statement issued through her solicitor, Carter said she "vigorously denies" the charges.

Hanna said: "I have no doubt that ultimately justice will prevail and I will be totally exonerated."

All the allegations relate to the police investigation into allegations of phone hacking and corruption of public officials in relation to the News of the World and the Sun newspapers, Levitt said.

Brooks and her husband had travelled to London from their home in Oxfordshire to answer bail following their arrest in March on suspicion of perverting the course of justice. They were informed of the decision at that meeting. They will attend Westminster magistrates court along with the four others at a date to be fixed.

The six people become the first to be charged as a result of the new Scotland Yard investigation into phone hacking. The inquiry is one of three linked investigations for which the Yard has budgeted £40m until 2015.

Carter was the first to be arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice in January. Two months later the other suspects were arrested.

The news of the charges came as Scotland Yard announced on Tuesday that two further people had been arrested in connection with alleged bribery of public officials.

A 50-year-old man who works for HM Revenue and Customs and a 43-year-old woman from the same address were arrested by officers from Operation Eleveden, the Met police operation investigating alleged bribery of public officials. The man was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in a public office and the woman on suspicion of aiding and abetting the offence.

Brooks was a high-flyer at News International. At 31, she became News of the World editor and three years later, in 2003, was given the editorship of the Sun. She was appointed chief executive of News International in 2009 before quitting in July 2011.

Days later she was arrested over alleged phone hacking and corruption offences, for which she remains on bail without charge. She was arrested again in March in connection with the separate allegation of perverting the course of justice along with her husband and others.

Charlie Brooks has been a columnist for the Daily Telegraph as well as writing a novel entitled Citizen.

Prosecutors are still considering four files of evidence – relating to at least 20 suspects – and involving allegations of phone hacking, alleged bribery of public officials and misconduct in a public office from the linked inquiries.

Starmer said he was facing "very difficult and sensitive decisions" as he predicted last month that more cases were coming his way.

Police launched Operation Weeting, the inquiry devoted specifically to phone hacking, after receiving "significant new information" from News International on 26 January last year.

Operation Elveden was launched months later following allegations that News International journalists made illegal payments to police officers.

As the inquiry escalated officers launched three related operations: the Sasha inquiry into allegations of perverting the course of justice; Kilo, an inquiry into police leaks; and Tuleta, the investigation into computer-related offences.

News International did not immediately make a statement, but confirmed that it still employed Hanna and Edwards.

A spokesman for Rebekah Brooks said she and her husband were still with police, and that the couple were likely to release a further statement on Tuesday afternoon.

Rebekah Brooks and six others to learn if charged over phone hacking

Rebekah Brooks will find out tomorrow whether she is to be charged over the alleged destruction of evidence relating to phone-hacking.

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

Guardian.uk.

5:47PM BST

14 May 2012

Alison Levitt QC, principal legal adviser to the Director of Public Prosecutions, will announce at 10am whether the former News International chief executive and six others are to be charged with perverting the course of justice.

Last month a file on the seven, who also include Mrs Brooks’s husband Charlie, was sent to the Crown Prosecution Service by the Metropolitan Police team investigating phone-hacking.

Mr and Mrs Brooks were arrested in March as part of Operation Sacha, an investigation into alleged attempts to destroy material relating to Scotland Yard’s inquiries into phone-hacking, computer hacking and corrupt payments to public officials.

The arrests followed reports that News International instigated an “email deletion policy” as victims of phone-hacking began suing its subsidiary, News Group Newspapers, publisher of the News of the World.

Last year police examined a computer, paperwork and a mobile phone found in a bag in a bin near the Brooks’s London home the day after Mrs Brooks had been arrested on suspicion of conspiring to intercept communications and of corrupting police officers.

Mrs Brooks’s spokesman said at the time that the bag and its contents belonged to Charlie Brooks, a columnist for The Daily Telegraph, and were nothing to do with Mrs Brooks or the phone-hacking case.

The discovery of the bag in a bin was put down by Mr Brooks to a mix-up over where the bag should be dropped off after he lent it to a friend.

Mr and Mrs Brooks and the five others who were arrested on suspicion of perverting the course of justice will only be told moments of the CPS’s decision moments before it is publicly announced.

So far, no-one has been charged since Scotland Yard launched a fresh investigation into phone-hacking in January last year.

More than 40 people remain on bail after being questioned by detectives

Jeremy Hunt 'should have known' what his special adviser was up to, Leveson Inquiry told

Jeremy Hunt, the Culture Secretary, should have known what his special adviser was doing when he gave News Corporation daily updates on the Government’s scrutiny of its bid for BSkyB, Britain’s former top civil servant has said.

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

The Telegraph

3:14PM BST 14 May 2012

Lord O’Donnell, who was Cabinet Secretary until the end of last year, suggested that Mr Hunt should have been “clear” about what was expected of Adam Smith, the special adviser who resigned last month after emails he sent to News Corp were disclosed by the Leveson Inquiry.

Asked by Lord Justice Leveson for his opinion on how the relationship between Mr Hunt and Mr Smith “should have worked”, Lord O’Donnell said: “It’s clear in the special advisers’ code [of conduct] that in terms of authorisation ministers should authorise their special advisers as to what they should do, for example with the media.

“I would have expected the minister to be clear as to what he thought the special adviser should have been doing.”

He also suggested that “all parties” should have been kept informed about the progress of the scrutiny of the News Corp bid for BSkyB.

"Talking about process is fine," he said, "but you should make sure that the same information is

Mr Hunt has faced calls to resign after dozens of emails between Mr Smith and News Corp lobbyist were submitted to the Leveson Inquiry by Rupert Murdoch last month.

They appeared to show that News Corp was given advance notice of major decisions in the regulatory process and that Mr Hunt had assured News Corp that the bid would be successful well before the process had been completed.

Lord O’Donnell was also asked about the appointment of Andy Coulson, the former editor of the News of the World, as the Downing Street communications chief in 2010.

He said Mr Coulson signed a statement of his financial interests, but omitted to mention the fact that he owned shares in News Corp which had been part of his severance package.

Last week Mr Coulson told the Inquiry he had failed to declare £40,000 of News Corp shares, which he acknowledged gave rise to a potential conflict of interest.

Lord O’Donnell disclosed that Gordon Brown had asked him for his advice on starting an inquiry into media standards in March 2010, and he advised against it.

Asked whether he had been unwilling to pick up a "hot potato", the peer replied: "I would say it was clearly a big potato. The timing was not ideal.

"If you are going to do this it would be good to have all-party agreement. Trying to broker such a thing in the weeks leading up to a general election would be quite difficult."

Former News of the World reporter claims journalists made up stories

Sunday tabloid was driven by culture of fear and unethical practices were rife, BBC told

By Cass Jones

guardian.co.uk,

Saturday 12 May 2012 18.36 BST

A former News of the World reporter has claimed that journalists at the now defunct newspaper regularly made up stories and unethical practices were rife because of a "culture of fear" at the tabloid.

Graham Johnson, who worked at the newspaper between 1995 and 1997, said many employees carried out illegal operations and fabricated articles due to pressures from the top.

He told the BBC: "You can't get through the day on a tabloid newspaper if you don't lie, if you don't deceive, if you're not prepared to use forms of blackmail or extortion or lean on people, you know, make people's lives a misery. You just have to deliver the story on time and on budget, and if you didn't then you'd get told off.

"The News of the World culture was driven by fear, because it's a hierarchy, it's a military operation, it's a seamless operation."

In the wake of the phone hacking scandal, News International insisted illegal activities at the Sunday tabloid were only carried out by a few rogue reporters.

However, Johnson claims that many employees regularly obtained information for stories through the use of unethical practices and journalists would make up stories.

"Almost all stories that you worked on involved the use of private detectives and accessing various records, which were either illegal or confidential," said Johnson. "So for instance, medical records, bank accounts, telephone records – this kind of data. It was all a phone call away. Within a few days of working at the News of the World I was given several numbers for private detectives.

"I fabricated stories about drug dealers, neo-Nazis, people who were selling guns, people who were selling fake documents."

Johnson told the BBC that he could not justify his actions but that the culture at the News of the World was partly to blame.

When approached by the BBC, News International would not comment on the allegations

IoS exclusive: Revealed - how Coulson called Cameron's bluff

New book exposes desperation of the Tory leader to woo Murdoch

The Independent

By Jane Merrick, Matthew Bell

Sunday, 13 May 2012

David Cameron was so anxious to secure the services of Andy Coulson as his director of communications that the Tory leader backed down on one of his key demands, it is revealed today.

In a sign of how Mr Coulson was in the driving seat over his controversial appointment, the former News of the World editor called the bluff of the Tory leader and George Osborne by refusing to sign a confidentiality clause as part of his appointment.

The move reveals for the first time the desperation of Mr Cameron, then Leader of the Opposition, and Mr Osborne, to win over the Murdoch empire as they manoeuvred to secure a general election victory.

As the Leveson inquiry prepares to hear more evidence this week about the relations between News International and the Tories, The Independent on Sunday has learnt that Rebekah Brooks and her husband spent a weekend at Dorneywood, the Chancellor's official residence, during a key period in the bid by News Corp to take over BSkyB.

The previously undisclosed "pyjama party", in 2010, which also featured Mr Coulson and his wife, Eloise, will add fuel to demands for the Chancellor to be called to give evidence to Leveson in person.

Mr Osborne is among eight cabinet ministers to be granted "core participant" status, allowing them privileged access to documents put before the inquiry, but he is the only minister of the group not scheduled to give evidence. Last night an aide to Mr Osborne said that the Chancellor had listed on the Treasury website a "social" engagement with Mrs Brooks in September 2010, even though full details of the Dorneywood weekend were not given. The aide said that Mr Osborne had been "absolutely transparent" in his dealings with News International figures.

A new edition of a biography of David Cameron, Practically a Conservative, reveals that in 2007, at the time of Mr Coulson's appointment, the Tory leader was concerned that the ex-NOTW editor would write a memoir about working for him.

The book, by James Hanning, deputy editor of The Independent on Sunday, and Francis Elliott of The Times, reveals that "Cameron wanted a clause inserted in Coulson's contract guaranteeing that he would not write a memoir, but Coulson refused. Tellingly, Osborne, tasked with brokering the hire, didn't feel they could insist and backed down."

The authors write that there was a "cursory check" into whether there were any outstanding court cases or industrial tribunals that might throw up further details. "We wanted to be sure there were no outstanding legal cases," said one of those involved.

Last week Mr Coulson told the inquiry that he was asked only once by Mr Cameron about phone-hacking, which triggered his resignation from the Murdoch-owned newspaper. But, according to Practically a Conservative, to be serialised in The Independent on Sunday next week, Mr Cameron's concern at hiring Mr Coulson was less to do with the circumstances of his resignation earlier that year than the result of his wariness of journalists as a breed.

Mr Cameron was worried that Mr Coulson might follow the behaviour of Amanda Platell, another former editor turned press secretary who worked for William Hague. She went home each night during the 2001 election campaign to record a video diary, later seen on national television.

But Mr Cameron and Mr Osborne, in particular, were desperate to emulate Tony Blair and acquire for the Tories their "own Alastair Campbell". When Mr Coulson refused to sign a confidentiality clause, Mr Osborne backed down. The revelation also sheds further light on the central role played by the then Shadow Chancellor in pursuing the Blair strategy. Mr Coulson's appointment is expected to come under scrutiny at Leveson tomorrow when the former cabinet secretary, Lord O'Donnell, gives evidence. Lord O'Donnell oversaw the vetting process for civil servants, including advisers such as Mr Coulson, who was subjected to a lower level of security clearance when he became director of communications at Downing Street in May 2010.

Uncertainty remains over aspects of Mrs Brooks's evidence to the inquiry on Friday. In July last year, The IoS revealed that Mrs Brooks and Mr Cameron met at a drinks party in an Oxfordshire manor on Boxing Day 2010. A week later, sources close to the Prime Minister confirmed that they had met at that party at the house of Mrs Brooks's sister-in-law, Annabel Brooks. It came only three days after Mr Cameron and Mrs Brooks had dinner with James Murdoch on 23 December. On Friday, when Mrs Brooks was asked whether she had met the Prime Minister on Boxing Day, and whether she had had a conversation with him, she said she might have seen him across the room, but that "No, I don't think there was a conversation". However, a fellow guest at the party has confirmed to The IoS that the two definitely spoke to each other on at least two occasions that evening.

The position of the Culture Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, remained in the balance last night after an email revealed by Mrs Brooks on Friday suggested he had asked for News International to guide No 10 and his own department about phone hacking.

Yesterday the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, stepped up pressure on Mr Hunt to resign. In a speech to the Progress Conference, he said: "One of the reasons so many people hate politics so much right now is that they think politicians stand up for the wrong people, not the right people. This is a clear example of that – Jeremy Hunt was standing up for Rupert Murdoch, not for the public interest. Out of touch with the many. Too close to the few. Jeremy Hunt should go."

Leveson Inquiry: Jeremy Hunt asked News Corp for advice on phone hacking, new emails show

Jeremy Hunt faces fresh questions over his relationship with News Corporation after an email from its chief lobbyist claimed the Culture Secretary had asked him for “private” advice on the phone-hacking investigation to “guide his and No.10’s positioning”.

By Gordon Rayner, Chief Reporter

The Telegraph

2:49PM BST

11 May 2012

The same email shows that News Corp was given an “extremely helpful” tip-off by Mr Hunt’s office that he would refer to phone-hacking in a statement to Parliament.

It was released to the Leveson Inquiry by Rebekah Brooks, the former chief executive of News International, as part of her witness statement to the Inquiry.

As well as dragging Mr Hunt further into the row which has already claimed the scalp of his special adviser Adam Smith , the email makes uncomfortable reading for David Cameron, as it suggests his response to the phone-hacking scandal was being guided by the owner of the News of the World.

The email was sent by Frederic Michel, the News Corp head of public affairs whose emails to and from Mr Smith, previously released to the Inquiry by Rupert Murdoch, showed that News Corp was being given advance notice of key decisions in the Government’s scrutiny of its bid to take over BSkyB.

Sent at 4.29pm on June 27 last year, it said: “JH is now starting to look into phone-hacking/practices more thoroughly and has asked me to advise him privately in the coming weeks and guide his and No.10’s positioning.”

Mr Michel has claimed he used “JH” as shorthand for Mr Hunt’s office in general, and Mr Hunt has claimed Mr Smith told News Corp far more than he should have done.

At the time the email was sent, the Metropolitan Police was six months into its ongoing investigation into phone-hacking at the News of the World, which later led to the arrest of Mrs Brooks.

In the same email to Mrs Brooks, Mr Michel states: “Hunt will be making references to phone-hacking in his statement on Rubicon [News Corp’s codename for the BSkyB bid] this week.

“He will be repeating the same narrative as the one he gave in Parliament a few weeks ago.

“This is based on his belief that the police is (sic) pursuing things thoroughly and phone-hacking has nothing to do with the media plurality issue [which the Competition Commission had been asked to examine].

“It’s extremely helpful.”

Mrs Brooks replied: “When is the Rubicon statement” and Mr Michel replied “probably Wednesday”.

Mr Hunt did, indeed, make his statement to Parliament on Wednesday, June 30, when he said the bid could go ahead subject to one final brief public consultation.

After the parliamentary statement Mr Michel texted Adam Smith to say “Think we are in a good place, no?” Mr Smith replied: “Very, yes. Jeremy happy.”

Mr Hunt faced calls for his own resignation last month after Rupert Murdoch released dozens of emails showing the extent to which Mr Smith was giving News Corporation prior warning of developments in the Government’s process of scrutinising its proposed takeover of BSkyB.

The email from Mr Michel to Mrs Brooks also discloses Mr Hunt’s thoughts on the workings of a parliamentary committee on privacy, set up earlier that month in the wake of a rash of celebrity super-injunctions.

“On the issue of the Privacy Committee,” it states, “he supports a widening of its remit to the future of the press and evidence from all newspaper groups on the regulatory regime.

“He wants to prevent a public enquiry. For this, the Committee will need to come up with a strong report in the autumn and put enough pressure on the PCC to strengthen itself and take recommendations forward.”

A spokesman for the Department of Culture, Media and Sport said: "Jeremy Hunt will respond to this when he gives his evidence to the Leveson Inquiry in due course. He is confident that his evidence will vindicate the position that he has behaved with integrity on every issue.

“It has already been made clear that when Fred Michel has claimed in emails to be speaking to Jeremy Hunt that was not the case.

“On 11 July 2011 Jeremy Hunt wrote to Ofcom for further advice about the impact of phone hacking on the BSkyB bid.”

Rebekah Brooks tells Leveson of more meetings with David Cameron

• Ex-NoW editor got texts from PM during 2010 election

• Cameron was at dinner where BSkyB bid was discussed

• Brooks recalls updating PM about phone-hacking inquiry

By Dan Sabbagh

guardian.co.uk,

Friday 11 May 2012 09.59 EDT

After a morning of Leveson inquiry testimony from Rebekah Brooks, No 10's worst fears over what the former News International boss might reveal about their relationship have not been realised. But Brooks did disclose a number of details about their communication and meetings that will embarrass the prime minister and lead to further questions about the appropriateness of their relationship.

These included Brooks telling Lord Justice Leveson on Friday morning that she exchanged up to two texts per week with David Cameron during the 2010 general election campaign. He signed off texts with "DC" or sometimes "LOL" – until she explained that the latter phrase meant "laugh out loud", not "lots of love". However, Brooks dismissed as "ludicrous" reports that they exchanged texts up to 12 times a week.

Brooks also confirmed for the first time that she was at a Boxing Day party with Cameron in December 2010. This came three days after she entertained the prime minister at her Oxfordshire home, with a dinner during which News Corporation's £8bn bid for BSkyB was discussed.

She said she could recall a conversation in 2010 with Cameron on the subject of phone hacking , in which the NI chief executive updated him about developments in the growing number of civil cases.

Brooks told the inquiry Cameron was one of a number of politicians, including George Osborne and Tony Blair, who sent her messages of support – indirectly, in the prime minister's case – after she resigned at the height of the News of the World phone-hacking scandal in July 2011.

Around this time there had also been a single email message from Cameron to her BlackBerry, but it was "compressed" and therefore "there's no content in it", Brooks said.

Brooks disclosed she was at a "mulled wine, mince pie" party at which Cameron was presenton Boxing Day 2010 at "my sister-in-law's". But she was unsure if she spoke to Cameron or his wife Samantha at the event, although "my sister-in-law tells me they were definitely there".

She also said Cameron was told over dinner three days earlier that News Corp hoped the company's £8bn bid for BSkyB would be judged fairly in the aftermath of Vince Cable being stripped of the power to adjudicate on the takeover.

The prime minister was at the social event at Brooks's Oxfordshire home on 23 December 2010, which came at a crucial point in the bid approval process and two days after Cable, the business secretary, had been replaced by the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt, as the minister responsible for the BSkyB bid.

James Murdoch, News Corp's deputy chief operating officer – and at the time News International chairman –was also present at the 23 December dinner. Murdoch had previously told the inquiry he had a brief conversation there with the prime minister about the bid.

Brooks told the Leveson inquiry that the bid came up at the dinner, but was not widely discussed. "It was mentioned because it was in the news, because obviously Dr Cable had resigned from that role," she said, referring to the fact that the business secretary had been stripped of responsibility to approve the bid after being covertly recorded saying he had "declared war on Murdoch".

The former NI chief executive was asked by Robert Jay QC, counsel to the inquiry, if she was "party to any conversations along the lines that Dr Cable had acted in breach of duty, let's hope the next one, Mr Hunt, does not".

Brooks replied: "Not necessarily, but clearly that was our view. We hoped that … it would be a very fair process and that it would be fair and democratic" now that Hunt had been handed the task. Brooks added it had been disappointing "to find out that perhaps some personal prejudice came into that decision" – referring to Vince Cable – and "at least now the decision would be fair".

The end of 2010 was a critical moment in the BskyB bid process, not just because of the Cable row. Ofcom was due to send a report evaluating whether the bid would raise any concerns about "media plurality" at the very end of the year – a document that was the basis for personal negotiations between Hunt and News Corp over the bid in the first three months of 2011.

Brooks also revealed that she first became aware of the planned BSkyB bid "six [to] eight weeks" before it was disclosed in public in June 2010 – just before the general election in May. She said she had little involvement in the bid. But Leveson queried if her early knowledge would at least be useful to help with "the public presentation, perhaps the way in which the criticisms could be countered".

Brooks told the inquiry she could recall a conversation with Cameron on the subject of phone hacking during 2010, in which she updated him about developments in the growing number of civil cases. She said that the prime minister – who at that point was still employing former News of the World editor Andy Coulson – had asked her for an update as part of a general conversation of which she could only remember part.

"I think it had been on the news that day, and I think I explained the story behind the news. No secret information, no privileged information, just a general update. I'm sorry I can't remember the date, but I just don't have my records," she added.

Jay pressed Brooks to reveal what the PM had said, or how he had responded to what she had told him. The counsel to the inquiry asked if Cameron was having "second thoughts" about hiring Coulson, his then director of communications, but Brooks replied firmly: "No, not in that instance, no."

However, Brooks said she could not remember to which development in the civil cases their conversation could have referred. During 2010, a handful of celebrities were bringing phone-hacking claims against the News of the World, the most high profile of which came from Sienna Miller.

On Thursday, Coulson told the inquiry he had had no conversations with Cameron about the phone-hacking allegations at any time apart from an initial conversation in May 2007, when he was appointed as the Conservative party's director of communications.

Brooks, in her evidence on Friday, repeatedly denied that politicians lived in fear of the Sun or that she was unhealthily close to them. After Jay had pressed her on this point, Leveson invited Brooks to consider the issue again: "Can you understand where [it] might be a matter of public concern, that a very close relationship between journalists and politicians might create subtle pressures on the press, who have the megaphone and on the politicians who have their policy decisions?' Brooks replied "yes", she could see that point.

As far as I can tell, the only accomplishment Obama has done to fulfill what he promised the American people when he was campaigning was to nominate two outstanding persons to the U.S. Supreme Court, who were later confirmed by the Senate. Of course, had he reneged on this crucial issue like he has on all the others, there would have been a real revolt not only from Democratic office holders but from the rank-and-file.

As it is, a lot of voters like myself plan to vote in November for candidates on the ballot for every office except that of U.S. President, since neither major presidential candidate represents what needs to be done for the best interests of the nation and the world. We won't stay home but we will show how we feel by skipping the first line on the ballot.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2141657/Texas-INMATE-gets-40-cent-votes-Obama-West-Virginia-primary.html

Rupert Murdoch's big backer sounds News Corp warning

News Corporation's second-biggest shareholder says phone-hacking scandal is damaging company's name

By Christian Sylt and Caroline Reid

guardian.co.uk,

Tuesday 8 May 2012 19.16 BST

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal has been one of Rupert Murdoch's staunchest supporters. Photograph: Yasser Al-Zayyat/AFP/Getty Images

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the second biggest shareholder in Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, has revealed his frustration with the fallout from the News of the World phone-hacking scandal and admitted that it is harming the reputation of the company overall, not just its publishing interests.

Alwaleed is a nephew of Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah, and, according to Forbes magazine, is the 29th wealthiest person in the world, with a fortune of $18bn (£11bn). He owns large stakes in Citigroup, Apple, Canary Wharf and London's Savoy hotel as well as 7% of the voting shares in News Corp, which on Wednesday announces its results for the three months to the end of March. Analysts expect profits to rise around 19% from the same quarter last year.

Alwaleed said that although News Corp was "very diversified," with interests covering books, magazines, newspapers, television and film, the phone-hacking scandal was having a company-wide effect. "I really hope that this is behind us because really it is not helping the name of the company," he said. "We hope that this page is folded and put behind us because really it is not something to be proud of."

News Corp investors have voiced concerns about the phone-hacking scandal since it erupted last year and, at the company's AGM in October, several shareholders, including powerful pension fund CalPERS, called for the appointment of an independent chairman. Murdoch currently holds the position of chairman alongside that of chief executive. Alwaleed is one of Murdoch's staunchest supporters and had never before spoken publicly about the wider impact of the scandal.

His most public previous involvement was to suggest the resignation of Rebekah Brooks as chief executive of News Corp's UK newspaper division, News International. Brooks was editor of the News of the World when its journalists hacked the phone of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler and in July last year Alwaleed told the BBC's Newsnight: "If the indications are for her [brooks's] involvement in this matter is explicit, for sure she has to go, you bet she has to go … Ethics to me is very important." Brooks resigned the following day.

News Corp holds a significant stake in Alwaleed's Saudi Arabian film, TV and music business Rotana Media Group and he said: "We have a strategic alliance with Rupert Murdoch for sure and I have been with him for the last 15 or 20 years. My backing of Rupert Murdoch is definitely unwavering."

Alwaleed said that although the scandal had had an impact on News Corp's reputation, its financial results had not been damaged. "The share price is really separating from what is happening in the UK," he said. "We see the price is hovering around $20 and the results are very good."

News Corp shrugged off the hacking scandal in its second-quarter results as net income increased 65%, despite it having to pay $87m during the period as a result of the ongoing investigations that led to the closure of the News of the World. Net income rose to $1.06bn for the quarter, compared with $642m a year before, driven by growth in its cable networks and movie studio divisions.

Alwaleed expects this trend to continue despite the ongoing scandal and he said: "I believe that once this page is flipped over, News Corp can withstand the heat of what is happening there."

Steering Murdoch in Scandal, Klein Put School Goals Aside

The New York Times

May 7, 2012

By AMY CHOZICK

Last week, after a British parliamentary report declared that Rupert Murdoch was “not a fit person” to lead a major corporation, several senior News Corporation executives huddled in tense discussion on the eighth floor of the company’s New York headquarters.

Some initially wanted to take off the gloves and issue an equally damning condemnation of the report’s criticism of their chairman and chief executive.

Joel I. Klein, the former New York City schools chancellor who has become Mr. Murdoch’s trusted adviser, was more restrained, arguing that the company’s statement needed a balanced tone, according to a person close to the company who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The executives eventually agreed.

The response, drafted by Mr. Klein and the company’s general counsel, Gerson A. Zweifach, dismissed the personal jabs at Mr. Murdoch as “unjustified and highly partisan,” but also acknowledged that the company’s response to wrongdoing in Britain had been “too slow and too defensive.”

The statement reflected the measure and care of a man who has spent decades in politics.

“Joel likes to fight, but he’s also incredibly politically astute,” said a person close to Mr. Klein.

Mr. Klein’s political instincts may have helped News Corporation, but his involvement has delayed his own ambitions within the company. He was hired by Mr. Murdoch to lead his company’s aggressive push into the education market. But just over six months into his tenure, the news broke that the company’s News of the World tabloid in Britain had hacked into the phone of a murdered 13-year-old, Milly Dowler, and suddenly, Mr. Klein became Mr. Murdoch’s legal compass in the ensuing British firestorm.

Mr. Klein, who declined to comment for this article, has slowly returned his attention to parts of his education portfolio, but prospects for success may have been damaged by the investigation. In 2010, News Corporation paid $360 million for a 90 percent stake in Wireless Generation, a company based in Brooklyn that specializes in education software, data systems and assessment tools to help teachers analyze student performance and customize lessons.

Last year, New York State rejected a $27 million contract with Wireless Generation, citing “the significant ongoing investigations and continuing revelations with respect to News Corporation.”

More recently, there has been criticism of Mr. Klein’s seemingly contradictory roles within News Corporation, both investigating wrongdoing inside the company and advising Mr. Murdoch on handling public relations and his appearances before the British Parliament.

While Mr. Klein still worked for Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, Mr. Murdoch and Mr. Klein became close friends. They talked frequently about the state of public schools and Mr. Klein was lured to News Corporation with the promise that he could use the company’s deep coffers to put in place his vision of revolutionizing K-12 education. Mr. Murdoch has said he would be “thrilled” if education were to account for 10 percent of News Corporation’s $34 billion in annual revenue in the next five years.

“Joel has a huge amount of respect and admiration for Mr. Murdoch and what he’s accomplished in his life,” said Merryl H. Tisch, chancellor of the Board of Regents, which oversees New York State’s Education Department.

Mr. Klein’s résumé — he previously served as head of the Justice Department’s Antitrust Division, helped the Clinton White House respond to the Whitewater inquiries and prepared Ruth Bader Ginsburg for her Supreme Court nomination hearings — made him an obvious candidate to help Mr. Murdoch through the phone-hacking scandal. He agreed, with the hope that News Corporation would provide him with the resources to realize his longtime goal of getting technology into schools, according to people close to both men.

“It wasn’t just ‘Oh, by the way, let’s get into schools.’ This is something that’s very important to Murdoch, or Joel wouldn’t have done it,” said a longtime friend of Mr. Klein’s, Barbara Walters. She said the scandal in Britain had “sidetracked” Mr. Klein.

He emerged as one of Mr. Murdoch’s most trusted advisers, along with Chase Carey, president and chief operating officer of News Corporation; and David F. DeVoe, the chief financial officer. Mr. Murdoch put Mr. Klein in charge of the internal investigation into the hacking case, reporting to Viet D. Dinh, an independent director on News Corporation’s board. But Mr. Klein also advised on handling the scandal, sitting behind Mr. Murdoch during his first testimony before a parliamentary panel in summer 2011 and spending hours in London helping Mr. Murdoch prepare for a second round of questions last month.

Shareholder groups have expressed concerns about Mr. Klein’s independence in leading the investigation. His compensation package at News Corporation was more than $4.5 million last year, according to company filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

“His salary was a huge bump, so he’s clearly beholden to Murdoch and should not be running an internal investigation,” said Michael Pryce-Jones, a spokesman for the CtW Investment Group, a shareholder advocacy group based in Washington that works with pension funds for large labor unions. (British investigators have said they believe the internal review led by Mr. Klein was independent.)

In December, Mr. Klein championed the hiring of Mr. Zweifach, a Washington lawyer from Williams & Connolly, as News Corporation’s new general counsel. The hiring of Mr. Zweifach, who has represented The Star tabloid in a libel lawsuit filed by the parents of JonBenet Ramsey, and The National Enquirer in an invasion of privacy lawsuit filed by Clint Eastwood, has helped Mr. Klein return his focus almost entirely to education, something friends said he had been impatient to do.

He now spends about two-thirds of his time on education and the rest on issues related to the fallout in Britain, according to people with knowledge of Mr. Klein’s schedule.

Mr. Klein’s education unit is now one of the few areas within the company that is currently growing, both through investment in Wireless Generation and potential acquisitions. The company is looking at several small education-related companies, though no deals are imminent, according to a person knowledgeable about News Corporation’s preliminary strategy.

Wireless Generation had come under fire before the dropped New York bid. The company had been a key Education Department partner on two efforts that Mr. Klein had championed as chancellor. The timing of News Corporation’s acquisition, two weeks after Mr. Klein said he would join the company, prompted accusations that he had violated the city’s conflict-of-interest rules. At the time, a News Corporation spokeswoman said the deal had been developing for several months and Mr. Klein had no involvement in it. A spokeswoman for the Education Department said Mr. Klein recused himself from all business between the city and Wireless Generation as soon as he knew News Corporation had acquired it.

Unions representing teachers remain steadfastly opposed to News Corporation’s move into education. Randi Weingarten, president of the American Federation of Teachers, who has clashed with Mr. Klein in the past, called the company’s education push in the midst of the hacking scandal “the definition of chutzpah.”

Michael Mulgrew, president of the United Federation of Teachers, which represents New York City teachers, asked, “What parent would want personal information about themselves and their children in the hands of Rupert Murdoch, given the current circumstances?”

Wireless Generation said more than 2,500 United States school districts, 200,000 teachers and three million schoolchildren currently use its products, and many of those contracts were won after the rejected New York bid.

“Joel is a big thinker,” said John White, superintendent of Louisiana’s Education Department, who was deputy chancellor in New York under Mr. Klein. “Among those of us in the field, we’re anxiously awaiting what News Corporation will offer.”

Mr. Klein has hired some of the biggest names in education. Kristen Kane, a former chief operating officer for New York City’s Department of Education; Peter Gorman, former superintendent at the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools in North Carolina; and Diana Rhoten, co-founder of the nonprofit Startl, which helps develop digital learning tools, have all joined News Corporation.

They’ll most likely carry out Mr. Klein’s vision without his full attention as long as News Corporation remains caught up in the hacking scandal. Mr. Klein’s office is just down the hall from Mr. Murdoch’s on News Corporation’s executive floor, and the two men occasionally have lunch together on weekends at an Italian restaurant near their homes on Manhattan’s Upper East Side.

“We’ve had our history of battles,” Ms. Weingarten said of Mr. Klein. “But he’s always had a reputation for integrity, and I can’t imagine the last several months of being mired in this scandal have been fun for him.”

Catherine Austin Fitts, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Housing/Federal Housing Commissioner, has told the story several times on national radio about how Housing Secretary Jack Kemp would say to her, “Catherine, they have something one everyone in this town. What do they have on you?” and she would always reply, “nothing,” which Kemp found hard to believe given what they had on him.

They have something on Obama, which is why Joseph Stiglitz says Obama has merely continued the Bush financial policies using the same people who caused the crisis to begin with. Is this “Change you can believe in?” I have no idea what they have on Obama. It could be sex, it could be a CIA background, it could be something else.

See the Frontline interview with Joseph Stiglitz below.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/oral-history/financial-crisis/joseph-stiglitz/

Also worth viewing is Max Keiser’s interview on April 19 with Matt Tiabbi. It starts at minute 12:45 in the video below. Max and Matt agree that covering financial news today is like covering a crime story – organized crime. Under Obama, there has been no accountability. One wonders why.

The Cozy Compliance of the News Corp. Board

The New York Times

May 6, 2012

By DAVID CARR

If you sat on the board of a company that was raked over the coals by a British parliamentary committee in a 121-page document, accused of a pattern of corporate misconduct that included widespread phone hacking and an ensuing cover-up by senior officials, you might want to pause for a moment and consider all the implications.

But there was little reflection last week by the board of News Corporation, which met quickly the day after the committee’s report and announced “its full confidence in Rupert Murdoch’s fitness and support for his continuing to lead News Corporation into the future as its chairman and C.E.O.” before the ink was even dry on the report. (While the board expressed unanimous support for Mr. Murdoch, it’s worth noting there were no such words for his son James.)

There are many reasons Rupert Murdoch has avoided any serious consequences from the scandal despite hundreds of British citizens having had their phones hacked, dozens or more being bribed in law enforcement and several dozen more of his employees having been arrested.

The market, of course, has no conscience. News Corporation’s share price has risen about 30 percent in the last nine scandal-ridden months and investors might have decided that the bad news from the print division in Britain was really good news for those who believe the company should abandon newspapers altogether.

Further, Mr. Murdoch runs a large, multinational company with some 50,000 employees, so he has a certain plausible deniability, even though several of his most trusted lieutenants were accused by the committee of playing a central role in the growing scandal and cover-up.

Mr. Murdoch also remains mostly unscathed because much of News Corporation’s business and most of its profits lie here in the United States, where the scandal is viewed as something happening on a distant island.

There have been reports of corporate misdeeds in America, including computer hacking at its News America Marketing division, but other than some faint rumbles in Washington about further investigations, it’s been mostly smoke, no fire.

“Ask anyone’s mother here who Rupert Murdoch is and you will get blank stares,” said Rich Greenfield, an analyst at BTIG, adding that other News Corporation assets seem unaffected by the scandal. At parties for the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner last weekend, many reporters remarked on how the hacking scandal had very little traction or traffic among readers.

But the primary reason Mr. Murdoch has not been held to account is that the board of News Corporation has no independence, little influence and no stomach for confronting its chairman.

Like many media companies (including the one I work for), News Corporation has a two-tiered stock setup that gives the family control of the voting shares. The current board includes family members and several senior executives; the independent slots are filled by a host of familiars.

Viet Dinh, a former Bush administration official, is godfather to Lachlan K. Murdoch’s son. Roderick Eddington was deputy chairman of a division of the company in the late 1990s. Andrew S. B. Knight and Arthur M. Siskind are both former senior executives, and John L. Thornton, the former Goldman Sachs president, served as an adviser to News Corporation on several major deals.

The board also includes Natalie Bancroft, a trained opera singer who made a great deal of money when her family sold Dow Jones, which included The Wall Street Journal, to Mr. Murdoch in 2007, and José Maria Aznar, a former prime minister of Spain, who is a friend of Mr. Murdoch’s.

Being a board member of News Corporation is not a bad gig; it pays over $200,000 a year and requires lifting nothing heavier than a rubber stamp. The directors apparently haven’t asked why the company maintained its “rogue reporter” defense after it became clear that “rogue enterprise” was a more apt description. They appeared to sit silently by while Mr. Murdoch and his son James waited for law enforcement officials to finally ferret out employees of the company’s British newspaper division who were accused of engaging in criminal conduct.

Still, the board may regret being quite so quick to throw its full support behind Mr. Murdoch and the current management. The parliamentary report, as scathing as it was, is only the first of many dominoes expected to fall in the next few weeks and months. Ofcom, the British broadcasting regulator, is assessing whether News Corporation should be allowed to continue to hold its stake in British Sky Broadcasting. For its part, BSkyB was quick to get out the 10-foot pole, reminding everyone that the two companies are separate even though News Corporation owns a 39 percent stake.

Next week, Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson will appear before the Leveson Inquiry in Parliament, offering another peek under unseemly blankets. The British Supreme Court will soon hear a case that could decide whether Glenn Mulcaire, the private investigator who pleaded guilty to charges that he had hacked phones for The News of the World, is to be freed from a confidentiality agreement he made in return for payment of legal fees.

He reportedly has 11,000 pages documenting his work for News Corporation. Three separate police investigation are under way — into phone hacking, computer hacking and bribes — and the results of Operation Weeting, the phone hacking inquiry, will be disclosed in the next few months. Soon enough, there could be a parade of criminal trials that could produce new evidence that those accused of misdeeds were hardly rogues but rather following a corporate culture formed to win at all costs.

It was never going to be one single thing that would loosen Mr. Murdoch’s grip, but rather the steady accretion of damage from a ticktock of criminal, civil and governmental inquiries that will go on for months and years.

At some point, the artfully crafted statements from the company and expressions of support from a board in lock step will begin to sound silly.

“We wonder how many more of these issues have to surface before the board takes a more assertive oversight role over the activities of News Corporation management,” Anne Sheehan, director of corporate governance at the California State Teachers’ Retirement System, which owns 5.9 million shares of nonvoting stock in News Corporation, said in a statement the day the parliamentary report came out.

Nothing will stop News Corporation’s remarkable run as a successful enterprise, because a great deal comes from lucrative cable and broadcast properties that are not at risk in the current scandal. But the Rupert Murdoch that we have known — untouchable and evasive — has become a man falling down stairs, slowly but surely. Continued profits and a compliant board can check the fall, but they can’t stop it.

E-mail: carr@nytimes.com;