Rupert Murdoch and News Corp. have been in the news recently because of the recent phone-hacking scandal by the now defunct British tabloid News of the World. Reporters from News of the World are accused of illegally hacking the phones of celebrities, politicians, and even victims of violent crime and terrorism.
Celebrities such as Hugh Grant and Steve Coogan have spoken out against News of the World and News Corp’s unethical practices. The scandal has led to many high-profile resignations, including legal managers, the commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, chief executive of Dow Jones & Co. and Wall Street Journal Les Hinton and chief of London’s News International, Rebekah Brooks.
Rupert Murdoch and his son James Murdoch were brought before British Parliament last week for a hearing to investigate their illegal phone hacking practices and whether or not Murdoch was aware of what was going on.
Both Murdoch and his son seemed to show no interest in resigning despite being urged by members of the Parliament. They claim they had no idea that the phone hacking was happening, which is hard to believe considering the fact that there have been allegations of News of the World phone tapping celebrities and the Royal Family since 2005.
Supporters of News of the World argue that they were hacking phones in order to expose important news but this is completely untrue. Most of the time the phones being hacked belonged to celebrities, and the only purpose of listening to their messages was to find out who’s sleeping with who so that they could sell more newspapers. There was also an incident of News of the World reporters hacking the phone of a homicide victim in 2002 and there have also been allegations of reporters hacking phones of 9/11 victims and their families.
It’s highly probable that Murdoch knew about these practices and if he didn’t, he should have been more aware of what was going on under his watch. The people who he allegedly trusted were engaged in something that is both unethical and illegal, and he has to admit some kind of responsibility for that. Murdoch has profited from the sales of News of the World, and therefore he has to be partially responsible for what they choose to print.
News Corp. is an American company that subverted British laws and practices so they could make more money. News of the World was not interested in printing news; instead it was interested in writing gossip and rumors in order to sell papers. They had no right to invade the privacy of those people’s homes and listen to their messages. Freedom of the press does not include listening to private phone calls or spying on people, no matter who they are.
The problem with tabloids is that they hide behind laws that protect the press as if they are in the same category as a legitimate newspaper. The goal of an actual newspaper should be as a public service to inform people about what is happening in the world. The main focus of a newspaper should not be just to sell more papers.
In a time where newspapers have begun to suffer, it makes sense that people in the industry have begun to resort to extreme tactics. However, this does not excuse what News of the World has done, and someone needs to be held accountable. Murdoch may not need to resign, but he needs to admit that he is partially responsible for what happened. He cannot claim complete ignorance, because he was the one who trusted these people and allowed them to do what they did.