(Photo:Mona Street)
Sunday, 10 July 2011
♪♫ Ash - Walking Barefoot
Gawdamn - bring on global warming is what I say...brrr!
More examples after the jump...
News Corp would do well not to keep it in the Murdoch family
The chances that Rupert Murdoch would choose to shut a 168-year-old newspaper, a profitable one at that, are nil. The News of the World's closure is a sure sign that the man at the top, known for calling all the shots himself, isn't alone any more.
News Corp is a family-run company – and, more and more, a family imbroglio. Some of the intrigue: Rupert has ceded substantial power to his son James, who made the decision to close the NoW. While James's power is part of a calculated succession plan, he also has his own leverage: he is his father's closest family ally in accommodating Wendi, the patriarch's divisive third wife. His father needs his support.
James has an often tense relationship with his sister, Elisabeth, who has a tense relationship with Wendi. Elisabeth has built her own media company, which her father bought this year, giving her great say within the company. James and Elisabeth's relationship, indeed many of the family relationships, are facilitated by Elisabeth's husband Matthew Freud, the most famous, and most famously slippery, PR man in London. One of Freud's closest friends is Rebekah Brooks, the CEO of News International, who almost everybody believes needs to be fired.
Rebekah, counselled by Matthew, has become James's most dedicated lieutenant. James and Matthew are determined not to fire her (indeed, she is an important instrument in Matthew's business).
As it happens, Wendi doesn't like Rebekah. Rupert, who has described Rebekah as a social climber in his family, can't press for her ousting for fear of siding with Wendi against his children.
Rupert's oldest son, Lachlan, once the presumed heir and now a sullen presence in Australia, fights with his brother and is most closely aligned with his sister Elisabeth. Their older half-sister, Prudence, is aligned with James. Ultimately, they will have four votes between them when it comes to running the company, with no tie-breaking mechanism.
Just as the NoW was a throwback to another era of lawless newsrooms, News Corp is a throwback to an insular and Byzantine family rule, and a them-versus-us relationship to the world. We don't apologise, don't accommodate – we wield our power: that is the Murdochian view. To them, the campaign against the NoW is a campaign by Murdoch's enemies.
The embattled Murdochs – and that is how they see themselves – have denied, stonewalled, stood tough, no matter that virtually every statement they've made about the unfolding scandal has been contradicted by events to come. If there's regret on their part, it's not so much about breaking the law, as it is about giving their enemies a weapon. Shutting the paper down is, they hope, a way to take away that weapon.
James seeks to be his father. He's Rupert without the subtlety – quite something to think about. Even his father was gobsmacked when, during the 2010 general election campaign, James publicly upbraided the editor of the Independent for his paper's coverage of News Corp.
Rupert has watched much of the phone-hacking scandal unfold from afar. And he's been grumpy about it, often complaining to Robert Thompson, the Wall Street Journal editor, about how James has been handling the mess. That's one reason James doesn't much like Thompson or his father's other advisers. He sees himself as his father's adviser, and their advice often leads to his interference. In this he has the support of his siblings, who don't like their father's interference either. (Two of Rupert's key confidantes, his communications chief, Gary Ginsberg, and general counsel, Lon Jacobs, lost their jobs this year in part because they didn't get along with James.)
Recently the Murdochs have started to refer to the hacking scandal as a crisis as serious as News Corp's near-bankruptcy in the early 90s – in family lore one of Rupert's finest moments. That, however, was a crisis resolved by negotiation, cutting deals, and leveraging strength. Rupert is at his best when talking power to power (one reason why the BSkyB deal seems still viable).
But this crisis is about public perception and trust, which is not, to say the least, Rupert's nor his son's métier. Family insiders say it was Freud who suggested closing the paper. He is said to have described it to James as a "Wapping" approach – that is, when Rupert in the dead of night moved his British papers to Wapping to break the print unions.
Closing the NoW may be the first instance of proactive PR strategising during the scandal, but it is probably too little too late. Credibility may be restored, and the public cry for blood sated, only when the company is no longer run by someone named Murdoch.
Michael Wolff @'The Guardian'
News Corp is a family-run company – and, more and more, a family imbroglio. Some of the intrigue: Rupert has ceded substantial power to his son James, who made the decision to close the NoW. While James's power is part of a calculated succession plan, he also has his own leverage: he is his father's closest family ally in accommodating Wendi, the patriarch's divisive third wife. His father needs his support.
James has an often tense relationship with his sister, Elisabeth, who has a tense relationship with Wendi. Elisabeth has built her own media company, which her father bought this year, giving her great say within the company. James and Elisabeth's relationship, indeed many of the family relationships, are facilitated by Elisabeth's husband Matthew Freud, the most famous, and most famously slippery, PR man in London. One of Freud's closest friends is Rebekah Brooks, the CEO of News International, who almost everybody believes needs to be fired.
Rebekah, counselled by Matthew, has become James's most dedicated lieutenant. James and Matthew are determined not to fire her (indeed, she is an important instrument in Matthew's business).
As it happens, Wendi doesn't like Rebekah. Rupert, who has described Rebekah as a social climber in his family, can't press for her ousting for fear of siding with Wendi against his children.
Rupert's oldest son, Lachlan, once the presumed heir and now a sullen presence in Australia, fights with his brother and is most closely aligned with his sister Elisabeth. Their older half-sister, Prudence, is aligned with James. Ultimately, they will have four votes between them when it comes to running the company, with no tie-breaking mechanism.
Just as the NoW was a throwback to another era of lawless newsrooms, News Corp is a throwback to an insular and Byzantine family rule, and a them-versus-us relationship to the world. We don't apologise, don't accommodate – we wield our power: that is the Murdochian view. To them, the campaign against the NoW is a campaign by Murdoch's enemies.
The embattled Murdochs – and that is how they see themselves – have denied, stonewalled, stood tough, no matter that virtually every statement they've made about the unfolding scandal has been contradicted by events to come. If there's regret on their part, it's not so much about breaking the law, as it is about giving their enemies a weapon. Shutting the paper down is, they hope, a way to take away that weapon.
James seeks to be his father. He's Rupert without the subtlety – quite something to think about. Even his father was gobsmacked when, during the 2010 general election campaign, James publicly upbraided the editor of the Independent for his paper's coverage of News Corp.
Rupert has watched much of the phone-hacking scandal unfold from afar. And he's been grumpy about it, often complaining to Robert Thompson, the Wall Street Journal editor, about how James has been handling the mess. That's one reason James doesn't much like Thompson or his father's other advisers. He sees himself as his father's adviser, and their advice often leads to his interference. In this he has the support of his siblings, who don't like their father's interference either. (Two of Rupert's key confidantes, his communications chief, Gary Ginsberg, and general counsel, Lon Jacobs, lost their jobs this year in part because they didn't get along with James.)
Recently the Murdochs have started to refer to the hacking scandal as a crisis as serious as News Corp's near-bankruptcy in the early 90s – in family lore one of Rupert's finest moments. That, however, was a crisis resolved by negotiation, cutting deals, and leveraging strength. Rupert is at his best when talking power to power (one reason why the BSkyB deal seems still viable).
But this crisis is about public perception and trust, which is not, to say the least, Rupert's nor his son's métier. Family insiders say it was Freud who suggested closing the paper. He is said to have described it to James as a "Wapping" approach – that is, when Rupert in the dead of night moved his British papers to Wapping to break the print unions.
Closing the NoW may be the first instance of proactive PR strategising during the scandal, but it is probably too little too late. Credibility may be restored, and the public cry for blood sated, only when the company is no longer run by someone named Murdoch.
Michael Wolff @'The Guardian'
Saturday, 9 July 2011
suigenerisjen Jen Robinson
struck by the irony: #Assange and #WikiLeaks wrongfully accused of hacking and illegal activity when all along it was Murdoch and #NOTW!
Federal government says marijuana has no accepted medical use
The decision comes almost nine years after medical marijuana supporters asked the government to reclassify cannabis to take into account a growing body of worldwide research that shows its effectiveness in treating certain diseases, such as glaucoma and multiple sclerosis.
Advocates for the medical use of the drug criticized the ruling but were elated that the Obama administration had finally acted, which allows them to appeal to the federal courts, where they believe they can get a fairer hearing. The decision to deny the request was made by the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration and comes less than two months after advocates asked the U.S. Court of Appeals to force the administration to respond to their petition.
“We have foiled the government’s strategy of delay, and we can now go head-to-head on the merits, that marijuana really does have therapeutic value,” said Joe Elford, the chief counsel for Americans for Safe Access and the lead counsel on the recently filed lawsuit. Elford said he was not surprised by the decision, which comes just after the Obama administration announced it would not tolerate large-scale commercial marijuana cultivation. “It is clearly motivated by a political decision that is anti-marijuana,” he said. He noted that studies demonstrate pot has beneficial effects, including appetite stimulation for people undergoing chemotherapy. “One of the things people say about marijuana is that it gives you the munchies and the truth is that it does, and for some people that’s a very positive thing.”
DEA Administrator Michele M. Leonhart sent a letter dated June 21 to the organizations that filed a petition for the change. The letter and the documentation that she used to back up her decision were published Friday in the Federal Register. Leonhart said she rejected the request because marijuana “has a high potential for abuse,” “has no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States” and “lacks accepted safety for use under medical supervision.”
This is the third time that petitions to reclassify marijuana have been spurned. The first was filed in 1972 and denied 17 years later. The second was filed in 1995 and denied in 2001. Both decisions were appealed, but the courts sided with the federal government.
John Hoeffel @'LA Now'
Paul McMullen admits 'destroying' suicide victim he wrote about & paying police
Ex NOTW journalist Paul McMullan, BBC Radio 4, 2010, repeated, July 2011
Leaky Boat
On the last Sunday of winter in 2001, far off Australia's North West Coast, a fishing boat was sinking. A Norwegian tanker, alerted by Australian Rescue, went to its aid. The Norwegians pulled more than 400 men, women and children out of the little boat. Refugees. The refugees promptly confronted their rescuers and demanded to be taken to Christmas Island or, they told the captain, they would go crazy. As the captain set course for Christmas Island in Australian territory, the Australians radioed. They threatened to seize his ship and throw him in prison if he entered Australian waters. The order had come from the very top: this ship, The Tampa, would not be allowed to land.
That night triggered ten of the most dramatic weeks in our history: the moment that Australia stopped the boats. In one of the most aggressive responses to refugee boats in the world, we sent the major warships of our Navy to confront the boats. Some extraordinary dramas followed: parents were said to have thrown their children overboard, a boat called SIEV X sank taking 353 people to their deaths, refugees wrecked and burnt their boats with deadly results. And as the boats of Muslims came towards us, the Twin Towers came down. It felt like the world would never be the same.
We've rarely felt so strongly about our politics. But we've rarely known so little of what was actually happening. Ten years on, this is the story, told by the men and women who were there. They include John Howard, Philip Ruddock, Peter Reith & Kim Beazley, Navy admirals and sailors, SAS commandos, Afghan farm boys and Iraqi school girls. And there were the pollsters who took careful note of how we responded.
The decision to stop the Tampa was one of the most popular ever taken by any Australian government. So this film is also very much about us -- and the old dance of democracy between the people and our leaders. And its fundamental puzzle -- who is leading and who is following?
A decade later, as we continue to grapple with the scenario of refugee boats arriving, and try to find a way to square the tricky issues of security, compassion and a good orderly migration process, it seems appropriate to lookafresh at the story of 2001.
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/leakyboat.htm
That night triggered ten of the most dramatic weeks in our history: the moment that Australia stopped the boats. In one of the most aggressive responses to refugee boats in the world, we sent the major warships of our Navy to confront the boats. Some extraordinary dramas followed: parents were said to have thrown their children overboard, a boat called SIEV X sank taking 353 people to their deaths, refugees wrecked and burnt their boats with deadly results. And as the boats of Muslims came towards us, the Twin Towers came down. It felt like the world would never be the same.
We've rarely felt so strongly about our politics. But we've rarely known so little of what was actually happening. Ten years on, this is the story, told by the men and women who were there. They include John Howard, Philip Ruddock, Peter Reith & Kim Beazley, Navy admirals and sailors, SAS commandos, Afghan farm boys and Iraqi school girls. And there were the pollsters who took careful note of how we responded.
The decision to stop the Tampa was one of the most popular ever taken by any Australian government. So this film is also very much about us -- and the old dance of democracy between the people and our leaders. And its fundamental puzzle -- who is leading and who is following?
A decade later, as we continue to grapple with the scenario of refugee boats arriving, and try to find a way to square the tricky issues of security, compassion and a good orderly migration process, it seems appropriate to lookafresh at the story of 2001.
http://www.abc.net.au/tv/programs/leakyboat.htm
Steve Coogan tears The News Of The World a new areshole
Bonus Hugh Grant video on bugging Paul McMullen after the jump...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
