Welcome To Zelo Street!

This is a blog of liberal stance and independent mind

Friday 21 January 2011

Murdoch Is Served (28)

This blog, as the title suggests, has been observing the events surrounding Phonehackgate for some time. From the early days of the story, when the right leaning part of the blogosphere was howling down any mention of Andy Coulson’s part in the affair as a “non story”, to the eventual fall of Young Dave’s chosen spinmeister, this was unmissable stuff.

And the main reason was that Coulson, as editor of the Screws at the time of the trial and jailing of private investigator Glenn Mulcaire and NotW royal correspondent Clive Goodman, could not have done his job without knowing that routine – and illegal - interception of voicemail was happening. His continued assertion that this action – underpinned by the payment of significant sums of money – could proceed without his knowledge never sounded credible.

That is why, earlier this week, I called out Telegraph man Benedict Brogan and suggested that his piece on the business was in the “famous last words” category. But Ben was not the only one weighing in on the side of the former Screws editor.

On September 4 last year, Iain Dale, a compliant and reliable conduit for Tory propaganda, told his blog readers thatCoulson’s Accusers Can Go To Hell”. Dale’s pal Phil Hendren (aka Dizzy Thinks) spewed out a characteristic cloud of Whataboutery and claimed that it was a “non story” because nobody cared. And the routinely clueless Paul Staines (aka Guido Fawkes) told his readers as recently as December 11 that “They huffed and puffed, Coulson still standing”, adding that “Punters now give Coulson a 96% chance of surviving”.

But then, Staines’ judgment has not been too good recently, as shown when he sprayed 500 notes up the wall betting that David Laws would not lose his job. His calls bear all the hallmarks of partisan denial – or he isn’t as well informed as he would have us believe.

No, the right leaning part of the blogosphere has not covered itself in glory on this one – the real credit has to go to one journalist, and one alone: step forward Guardian man Nick Davies, tenacious investigator and the man who brought us the go-to book on the workings of the press, Flat Earth News.

Davies, ably supported by his editor Alan Rusbridger, is part of the MSM, which is supposed to be so very last Century. Well, apparently not.


Guido Fawkes said...

Actually my position has always been that NI and all the rest were at it, but that I don't believe Coulson will have left an evidential paper trail. He isn't stupid. We shall see.

Tim said...

"We shall see"

But you won't be looking into it, natch.

dizzy said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
dizzy said...

Why was my comment deleted?

Tim Fenton said...

Zelo Street welcomes a range of opinions, including those that dissent from the argument being advanced. But using this facility to carry on a personal attack on another commenter will not be tolerated.

Hence the deletion of comment 3 from Phil Hendren (who styles himself "Dizzy").

dizzy said...

It was not a personal attack, it was a genuine question about a smear against me by said person, but fair enough.

As I said in relation to your post, you have attributed the quote "non story" to me which does not appear to have been written by me in the post you linked too.

I also stand by the fact no one really gives a crap about the phone messages of celebrities who seek media attention being listened to by media giving them attention.

Mike said...

You are right - few people give a crap about the phone messages of a few celebrities, but the do give a crap about routine illegal behaviour by an organisation headed by someone trusted enough by our Prime Minister to be his press spokesperson. And they do give a crap about the lack of judgement by said PM that implies. And they do give a crap about the interception of the messages of serving MPs.

In fact to try to make this about celebrities is either misunderstand the situation entirely or to deliberately try to bury it. You're not stupid, so.... the latter perhaps?

Carl Eve said...

Dizzy forgets history when it suits. For much of Watergate, many people felt that no-one gave a crap about the stories being written in the Washington Post and New York Times.
Except the editors and the reporters who continued to dig.

Gosh... what a non story it turned out to be.

People DO give a crap Diz, not just because it's NOTW and Murdoch, but because it crosses a line not.

Hacking phones is fine for serious investigative journalism, for digging out wrong-doing, criminality and impropriety.

But for giving the party you don't like a kicking or embarrassing individuals with tittle tattle?

I think we have enough of that cack from you, Iain and Staines thanks very much.

(as proof, you "stand by the fact no one really gives a crap about the phone messages"... no Diz, you stand by your opinion... your opinion is not fact. I know you get the two confused but try and keep up, eh?)