Accounts show that News UK, who owns The Sun, is still suffering the consequences of the News of the World’s 2011 phone hacking scandal. That in addition to problems caused by the onset of the coronavirus pandemic has led to the newspaper’s value plummeting.

News Group Newspapers, which The Sun falls under and which is part of Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, lost more than £200 million in the financial year ending June 2020. It’s revenue fell by 23 percent to £324 million, according to financial accounts filed last Thursday. News Group Newspapers, owned by News UK, also owns The Sun on Sunday and The Sun’s website.

The Sun, which is known for its sensational headlines and right-wing politics, is Britain’s second most read newspaper after the Daily Mail.

Newspapers, like many businesses, have struggled during the Covid pandemic due to advertising budgets being cut or frozen. Even changes like fewer people commuting impacts newspaper sales.

The recent accounts show that the company is still dealing with costs associated with the phone hacking scandal from more than 10 years ago. The company has almost doubled the amount it originally thought it had to pay for legal fees and damages in the scandal to £52 million.

While investigations into phone hacking started in 2005, it wasn’t until 2011 that the truth finally came out. The News of the World, the Sun’s sister publication, had hacked the phones of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler, victims of the 7 July London bombings, relatives of soldiers who had died as well as members of the royal family and celebrities.

It led to the four-year Leveson inquiry, criminal trials for several newspaper executives, resignations and eventually the folding of the News of the World in 2011.

Speaking of the latest news that The Sun has had its value written down to zero, Richard Wilson, director at Stop Funding Hate, said: “A YouGov poll in 2017 found that 50 percent of Brits believed that the Sun has a negative impact on our society.

“Since then the paper has made some efforts to move in a more positive direction – but once a media brand has been tarnished by hate it can do lasting reputational damage.”

Nathan Sparkes, policy director at Hacked Off, said: “The decisions The Sun’s publisher News UK have taken in response to the hacking and unethical press conduct scandals have made a significant contribution in the paper’s financial decline.

“The decision to manage hacking cases by denying liability for The Sun and embarking on expensive legal defences, but then settling all claims (by making high offers) before they are determined by the Courts, has cost the paper hundreds of millions of pounds as well put claimants through undue stress.

“The paper’s refusal to participate in independent regulation and its continued opposition to the Leveson Part Two Inquiry damages public trust in the newspaper, in turn affecting readership, circulation and revenues.

“It’s regrettable that News UK has persisted with their loss-making opposition to accountability and tended to cut the jobs of hardworking journalists, rather than accept reform like a responsible news publisher.”

Lucy Skoulding is a journalist and human rights masters student. You can follow her on Twitter here.

The post The setting Sun: Murdoch paper valued at ZERO by News Corp appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

The Times has today spared us nothing by way of Andy Coulson love.

In reporting yesterday’s acquittal of the former editor of the News of the World (RIP) on the charge of perjury, the former paper of record invites us to sympathise with a man who was jailed last year for conspiracy to hack phones.

If you have tears, prepare to shed them now:

“As a boy growing up in a council house in Essex he had been intent on following his father into the RAF. It was a week’s work experience on his local paper, when he ‘fell in love with’ journalism. […]

Mr Coulson has not been able to earn anything since leaving his job as the government spin doctor. […]

For almost a decade, Mr Coulson’s life has been dominated by allegations […] At his recent trial, he asked outside court, almost defeated: ‘When will this ever be over?’“

There’s more:

“His first trial, in October 2013, opened with the revelation he and his co-defendent Rebekah Brooks had been lovers. For some of the time they were both married to other people.”

Revelations of marital infidelity, seized on by the press, can surely be unpleasant – as the many victims of such outings (with no legal justification) by Brooks and Coulson’s News of the World can tell you.

This tearjerker of a piece tells us Coulson’s ‘friends believe he will bounce back’. No doubt including friends at the Times, whose parent company News UK used to pay Coulson’s salary before he went to work for the paper’s hero, David Cameron.

Coulson’s old boss and proprietor of both papers, Rupert Murdoch, also happens to be godfather to his former colleague and lover, Ms Brooks. How cosy!

(The soppy piece does mention in passing that News UK owns the Times, but only when complaining about legal fees.)

But that’s not all. The Times front page has a large picture of Coulson outside court, and the piece mentioned above runs alongside two news stories on the judgement, both of which rather take the Coulson view of things.

The main news story slips in at the end Coulson’s sentence last year for what it breezily calls ‘phone hacking offences’. That’s the last half of the last line of the story.

A picture on the front page and absurdly positive coverage. Anything else? Why, yes! Today’s top editorial column decries the ‘Enemies of Free Speech’ who would dare to put such a fine chap on the stand.

As it happens, Coulson has not been cleared of lying in court. He was acquitted by a judge because his alleged lies in court were not relevant to the case in question, and were therefore not technically perjury.

Does such a technicality really warrant such lavish and generous news coverage?

Adam Barnett is a staff writer at Left Foot Forward. Follow MediaWatch on Twitter

Read more: 

Murdoch-owned Times attacks BBC for ‘media empire’ monopoly

Daily Mail’s 5 step guide to demonising migrants

Sign up for our weekly email by clicking here.

The post The Times weeps for ex-Murdoch employee Andy Coulson and buries his hacking conviction appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

Alex Salmond has called for cross party talks in Scotland to be led by a senior judge to take forward the proposals in the Leveson Report within the context of Scots law.

Whilst the final report concludes (page 1413, pdf), that, based on what he did rather than what he said he would do vis-à-vis his relationship with News Corp, the first minister “cannot be criticised” – as reported by Left Foot Forward yesterday – had Salmond undertaken what he had pledged to do in lobbying UK ministers on behalf of News Corp to secure jobs in Scotland, he would have been interfering in a quasi-judicial decision and thereby would have “rendered the decision unlawful”.

The report also concluded the SNP leader’s support to News Corp was “striking”.

Responding to the report’s observations, a spokesman for the first minister argued it represented:

“…a complete vindication of the first minister’s position in terms of the case he was prepared to put to promote Scottish jobs and the wider Scottish economic interest.”

However, in a sign of the likely conflict between Holyrood and Westminster, on the central issue of Leveson’s recommendations on a regulatory regime with a statutory backstop, the first minister embraced the report.

Salmond said:

“I am supportive of the conclusions of Lord Leveson, who has set out clearly the difference between statutory regulation of the press on the one hand and the argument for statutory underpinning of self-regulation on the other.

“That puts us very much in the territory of the Press Council of Ireland which I think might well provide a good template for the way forward. Clearly, we will have to be satisfied that this can be done within the necessary context of a free press.”

Addressing MSPs during First Minister’s Questions yesterday – just before the report was formally published – Salmond called for the establishment of cross-party talks to consider how the Scottish government, responsible for the regulation of the print press in Scotland, should take Leveson’s findings forward.

He explained:

“I believe it’s important to achieve cross-party agreement in Scotland on the best way forward.

“I propose the establishment of an independent implementation group, chaired by a current or recent court of session judge, with five non-politician members. The purpose of this group would consider how best to implement the Leveson proposals in the context of Scots law and devolved responsibilities of this parliament.”

Addressing the central points made by Leveson against Salmond, Scottish Labour’s parliamentary business manager, Paul Martin, argued it provided a “fascinating insight into the murky way Alex Salmond goes about his business”.

Declaring the recommendations as “sensible”, Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont added:

“I am not convinced that there is need for a separate press regulation system in Scotland, but, after reading Lord Leveson’s comments in his report, I am convinced that Alex Salmond is not the man to lead any form of press regulation.”

Echoing the concerns about Salmond taking the process forward, Scottish Lib Dem leader, Willie Rennie, observed:

“It is not clear to me how Mr Salmond is going to be able to convene a cross-party group of leaders to take forward the report given he has been so heavily criticised in the report. He should offer to stand aside from the cross-party work. It should be led by someone untainted by the report.”

Addressing the substance of the report, he continued:

“Lord Leveson has seen right through Alex Salmond. He is justly concerned about the murky dealings between Alex Salmond and the Murdochs. He found that Alex Salmond was prepared to entice a UK minister to act unlawfully on the BSkyB bid at the same time as he was seeking political support from Mr Murdoch’s newspapers.

“Lord Leveson did not believe Mr Salmond’s claims that the Ministerial Code required the first minister lobby those UK ministers on the bid. Although Lord Leveson found no hard evidence of a deal with the Murdochs he is clearly concerned about the cosy relationship.

“Of all the politicians considered by Lord Leveson he devotes the heaviest criticism for Alex Salmond.”

Concurring with the assessment of both Labour and the Lib Dems, Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson called on the first minister to “step back from the process he announced” in light of the “marked criticisms of the first minister and his conduct”.

In his analysis, BBC Scotland Political Editor, Brian Taylor, wrote:

“All three main opposition parties have now backed the concept of talks – but questioned whether Alex Salmond is the one to lead them, given his proximity to the Murdochs and News Corp in the past.

“Mr Salmond notes that his contacts with Rupert Murdoch were far more limited than those of political leaders from UK parties – and that he is vindicated by the Leveson findings.

“There is, of course, no prospect of Mr Salmond standing aside from an initiative which he has instigated. That is simply unthinkable. Which… leaves the concept of cross-party talks under question.”

Concluding:

“Expect a few days, then, of selective quotation – with critics drawing attention to implications and inferences while Mr Salmond points to the summation that he “cannot be criticised” and was defending Scottish jobs.

“Then, perhaps, talks can begin. But there too there are pitfalls. Labour’s Johann Lamont, for one, has said she is not convinced that there is any need for a distinctive Scots regulator. In response, Mr Salmond says that, if Westminster cannot agree, then Scotland should take the lead.”

See also:

• Leveson: Salmond’s meddling in BSkyB bid and readiness to assist News Corp “striking” – November 19th, 2012

The post “Not the man to lead” – opposition parties attack ‘tainted’ Salmond over Leveson appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

As the phone hacking horror recedes further into people’s memories, 15 months on from the initial public outpouring of rage, there has been a steady stream of attacks on the Leveson Inquiry and any attempt to bring in regulation of the press – in other words, a return to normal, as you were, back to the bad old days of tabloid excess, move along now, nothing to see here and all that.

One of the biggest critics of reform is former News of the World hack Neil Wallis (surprise, surprise), currently on bail following his arrest last July. On yesterday’s Daily Politics, he debated media lawyer and key figure in the Hacked Off cammpaign Charlotte Harris – and was put right on some of the arguments the status quo brigade have been pedalling against regulation.

Watch it:

Rebutting the main attacks, Harris said:

“It really isn’t muzzling, it’s been a very convenient way of describing any sort of statutory underpinning to law by saying that this is an attack on free speech and somehow it’s going to involve some form of censorship. There isn’t a free press at the moment and that was very dramatically seen when the press decided they wouldn’t report on their own scandal.

“It was in the public interest to know about phone hacking and yet something that should have been printed and would have actually sold papers wasn’t in their commercial interests – suddenly there was silence on it until they were forced to. The fact is, what that shows is that newspapers are censored; they are censored by their proprietors and by their commercial interests…

“If you have statutory regulation that is independent then you don’t have this self-censorship of the press that emanates from them. What you need is to have something like the editors’ code, which newspapers sign up to, but rather than the editors and people with commercial interests deciding whether or not that code has been adhered to you have independent regulators like you do with doctor and lawyers.”

While on the actual substance and impact of what may be proposed, she added:

“What I would like it to be, and there are several models, there’s the editors code – that would gave a statutory underpinning so that we can all have a conversation where there aren’t these dramatic statements about censorship by you [Wallis] and people are waving a banner of free speech when we all know it’s nothing to do with free speech. If you really believed in free speech then you wouldn’t be so frightened to obey these laws.

“So in terms of editorial decisions why are you saying these decisions would be interfered with if they simply had to obey a code that they signed up to in the first place voluntarily?… Are you saying that we couldn’t get the good stories? That still the papers wouldn’t be able to get the good stories? ITV managed to uncover the Jimmy Saville scandal and the broadcast media are heavily regulated.”

With the like of Neil Wallis and Boris Johnson, in his error-strewn Telegraph column yesterday, turning up the anti-regulation dial, Leveson will need to hold his nerve and stand firm – and the Lib Dems will have to ensure the Tories don’t wriggle back on reform, back the hackers and screw the victims.

The post Watch: Charlotte Harris rebuts the anti-regulation “scaremongering” appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

The phone hacking heat was turned up on Piers Morgan last night, as the Daily Mirror became the first non-Murdoch title to face court action over illegal voicemail intercepts.

Former England manager Sven Goran Errikson, the former nanny of David Beckham’s children, a Coronation Street actress and former footballer Garry Flitcroft are suing the Mirror and the People at the High Court.

The claims lodged at the allege “breach of confidence and misuse of private information” in relation to the “interception and/or misuse of mobile phone voicemail messages and/or the interception of telephone accounts” – the same charge sheet that sunk the News of the World.

Morgan, when he appeared before the Leveson Inquiry via video link from New York last year, claimed:

“Not a single person has made any formal or legal complaint against the Daily Mirror for phone hacking.”

With Trinity Mirror last year insisting:

“Trinity Mirror’s position is clear. Our journalists work within the criminal law and the PCC code of conduct.”

The pain caused by tabloid intrusion was laid bare by Flitcroft, one of those now suing the Mirror, in his testimony before Leveson last November. His father’s life plunged into depression after newspapers intruded into his private life in 2002, unable to go to games to watch his son “because the chants were so bad”. Mr Flitcroft committed suicide six years later.

Flitcroft told the Leveson Inquiry:

“Suffering from anxiety and depression you’ve got to have something in your life and his life was watching me play football… I would say over the years his depression got worse because he wasn’t watching me play football.”

Adding:

“There’s no reason why my private life should be in the public interest. If I’d been done for match-fixing or taking cocaine then that’s in the public interest.”

Watch his moving testimony about the death of his father:

The scandal of tabloid excess and phone hacking was never restricted to the Murdoch empire alone – it’s time for all those who indulged in these illegal tactics (and continue to harass and intrude into people’s lives) to face justice.

The post Phone hacking: Net closes in on Piers Morgan’s Mirror appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

.

Boris Johnson, drunk on the power of being London Mayor at the time of our Games, looks set to test his new-found popularity to the max with a red carpet invite to Rupert Murdoch – yes, Rupert Murdoch – as his personal guest at the Olympic swimming this Friday.

Boris has long been a huge admirer of the Digger – defending to the hilt News International over phone-hacking, describing the initial allegations as “a politically motivated put up job” and “a load of codswallop cooked up by the Labour Party”, saying:

“I am completely satisfied [with the Met’s handling of the allegations].”

“[Labour are raising this] simply in order to score party political points against the prime minister’s press spokesman [Andy Coulson].”

“I think it looks like a politically motivated put up job.”

“This is completely spurious and political.”

“You are trying to make a song and dance about nothing in my view.”

“This is a load of codswallop cooked up by the Labour Party.”

“As far as I can see, this is something that has been already substantially investigated, where no new and interesting facts have been brought into the public domain and which is being whipped up by the Guardian and the Labour Party.”

“I have every confidence that the police will come to the right conclusion.”

More recently, he said too many officers are “tying up their time” on phone hacking, that he wants “the caravan to move one” and “Let’s knock it on the head as fast as we can”.

There is also the small matter of his recent cover-up of a secret dinner with Rupert Murdoch: He dined with him at his London home two days before the Met launched Operation Weeting – a meeting he tried to keep secret from London Assembly members; journalists were told his meetings were in an online diary – but Boris Johnson’s dinner at Murdoch’s home was not disclosed, with the details then hidden in an obscure area of City Hall website.

• Boris and Murdoch: The ten questions the Mayor still hasn’t answered 30 Apr 2012

As the Guardian reports, news of Friday’s Murdoch invite is unlikely to have been greeted with delight by Downing Street, and was seized upon by opponents of the Mayor:

But the decision of Johnson, who in his role as mayor has oversight of Scotland Yard, to “schmooze” the News International proprietor while a Metropolitan police investigation into the News of the World phone-hacking scandal involving the company is still under way, provoked dismay among his political opponents.

Jenny Jones, a green party member of the London assembly who sits on the police and crime committee, said inviting Murdoch was “inappropriate” and showed “appalling judgment”.

Jones said: “Johnson seems to think he can get away with anything but there is always a step too far and this could be it. Most people will be appalled that he has taken someone who heads up a company that is currently involved in a criminal investigation.”

Since the full scale of phone hacking at News International came to light, he has steadfastly refused to condemn Murdoch.

“Codswallop”, cover-ups and non-condemnation, hardly the leadership London, nay Britain, needs – especially with Coulson, Brooks and the rest facing trial.

The post Surprised at Boris’s Olympic invite to Murdoch? Don’t be – he’s his biggest fan appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

.

The Crown Prosecution Service today announced eight people will be charged in connection with the phone hacking scandal. Proceedings will begin next month.

Those facing charges include former NOTW editors Rebekah Brooks and Andy Coulson, private investigator Glenn Mulcaire and former chief NOTW reporter Neville Thurlbeck.

The decision to press charges against Brooks and Coulson will cause a headache for the prime minister, considering Coulson once worked as the PM’s director of communications and Brooks used to share country suppers and affectionate texts with the PM.

The Telegraph reports:

The Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) announced that the former News International staff and a private investigator will face court on a total of 19 charges.

The hacking offences relate to the “voicemail messages of well-known people and / or those associated with them”, according to prosecutors. They said more than 600 people were targeted.

They are charged with hacking the phones of the late schoolgirl Milly Dowler, politicians Lord Prescott, David Blunkett, Charles Clarke, Dame Tessa Jowell and Mark Oaten, and a string of celebrities including Hollywood couple Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie, Jude Law, Sienna Miller, Sadie Frost, Sir Paul McCartney and Heather Mills and footballer Wayne Rooney.

All, with the exception of Mulcaire, are to be charged with conspiring to intercept communications without lawful authority, from 3rd October 2000 to 9th August 2006.

While Ed Miliband said:

“Everybody was very shocked at the revelations of the hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone. We said at the time we needed to get to the bottom of what had happened. It is now right that justice takes its course. This is now a matter for the courts.”

• David Cameron at Leveson: The best bits 15 Jun 2012

• Under fire over hacking? How do you prove you’re fit and proper? By mocking Roy Hodgson 2 May 2012

• MPs attack Murdochs in damning report into phone-hacking 1 May 2012

Andy Coulson has told the media that he is “disappointed” with the decision, while Brooks has released a statement  saying she “did not authorise, nor was [she] aware of, phone hacking under my editorship”.

Across the pond, the New York Times opined on what this may mean for Cameron:

With a general election due in 2015, the analysts said, Mr. Cameron and the Conservative Party are now potentially vulnerable to any new revelations that might emerge from the trials, in the form of hitherto unpublished e-mails or testimony touching on the prime minister’s dealings with Mr. Coulson or Ms. Brooks.

The prime minister’s judgment in the affair – particularly his recruiting of Mr. Coulson as the Conservative Party’s media chief in 2007, and his decision to take him to Downing Street after the 2010 election, long after the hacking that took place on Mr. Coulson’s watch at The News of the World became known – is already a major dent in Mr. Cameron’s political armor.

He has also faced extensive questioning as to whether his close relations with the Murdoch elite have skewed government policy favorably toward the media mogul.

Some commentators seemed to be distracted by the list of those who’s phones had been hacked, the Mirror’s Kevin Maguire tweeting:

“Delia Smith hacked! Never expected her in the phone hacking mix. What was the NoW after – a fish pie recipe?”

It was also revealed Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie were victims of phone hacking, triggering the interest of celebrity and entertainment websites.

E!Online reports:

Looks like Jude Law, Sienna Miller and Hugh Grant now have some high-profile company.

Brad Pitt and Angelina Jolie were revealed today to be among the victims of the sweepingNews of the World phone-hacking scandal, whose far reaching aftershocks led to the collapse of a historic British paper and to hundred of millions of dollars in payouts to its victims, including a slew of A-list celebs.

So now the Leveson Inquiry is over, it looks like the summer will be filled with another possible source of scandal to keep the press occupied…

The post Phone hacking charges: Reactions from around the web appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

.

As SNP leader Alex Salmond prepares to face the Leveson Inquiry this week, Scottish Labour have said he will no longer be able to avoid answering key questions over his and his party’s links with the Murdoch empire.

The opposition in Scotland has billed the event as a day of reckoning, pointing to the 25 questions published by the party in July last year and the 13 formal parliamentary questions tabled in April, all of which, Labour claim, have been unanswered.

Scottish Labour’s business manager at Holyrood, Paul Martin, says:

“There are scores of unanswered questions over the SNP’s links with News International and Friday will be an opportunity for full disclosure.

“Alex Salmond’s toe-curling fawning over Rupert Murdoch – even after the shocking Milly Dowler revelations – has shamed Scotland. On Friday he will have to start answering the questions he is clearly desperate to avoid.

“Throughout the entire phone hacking scandal Alex Salmond has ditched his usual megaphone diplomacy and has been uncharacteristically silent. Being summoned to give evidence on oath will force him to break cover.

“In public, the SNP were critical of Rupert Murdoch’s takeover of Sky, but papers already published at Leveson show Alex Salmond was acting as his private cheerleader.

“His claim that he was just trying to promote Scottish jobs is so patently absurd it is insulting. He was trying to curry favour in return for acting as a Sky lobbyist.

“He would clearly rather we all ignored the fact that he personally met with James Murdoch, wined and dined the editor of the Scottish News of the World, provided advertising to News International newspapers worth thousands of pounds, and sent his closest ministerial aide Joan McAlpine to the Bahamas to supply puff pieces about Sean Connery.

“Friday is the day that answers start.”

• Salmond to be dragged before Leveson as ‘Wee Eck’ refuses to say if he’s been hacked 2 May 2012

• The Murdoch stench lingers around Salmond 2 May 2012

• Under-fire Salmond has “lost his sense of smell” over the “stench of Murdoch” 26 Apr 2012

• Leveson: Salmond and the Lib Dems implicated in Murdoch emails 25 Apr 2012

• Grubby Murdoch goes Salmond-fishing 3 Mar 2012

• Slimy Salmond courts Murdoch 28 Feb 2012

• The 25 questions over the SNP’s Murdoch links 19 Jul 2011

At the heart of the matter is a simple question, namely what, if anything, Alex Salmond promised in return for the support of the Scottish Sun ahead of last year’s Scottish Parliamentary Elections.

The mass of emails (pdf) between Fred Michel and James Murdoch, published last month, show:

November 1st 2010:

Michel tells Murdoch Salmond was prepared to press Vince Cable, then the minister responsible for the BSkyB decision, to make the economic case for the takeover by News International and brief the Scottish press to that effect.

February 11th 2011:

Michel tells Murdoch:

“I met with Alex Salmond’s adviser today. He will call Hunt whenever we need him.”

March 2nd 2011:

Michel tells Murdoch that after Salmond had dinner with the Scottish paper’s editor:

“The Sun is now keen to back the SNP at the election.”

He continued:

“On the Sky bid, he will make himself available to support the debate if the consultation is launched.”

March 3rd 2011:

A written answer from UK culture secretary Jeremy Hunt confirms Salmond’s office began contacting him on this day to organise a phone call between the two.

A further question remains over whether Alex Salmond or anyone else in the Scottish government, had their phones hacked.

Whilst it has emerged that former Labour first minister, Jack (now Lord) McConnell is suing News International for hacking his and his children’s phones, the current first minister has failed to confirm or deny if his own phone has been hacked.

The denials have led Scottish Lib Dem leader, Willie Rennie,  to call for answers from the permanent secretary of the Scottish government  Sir Peter Housden, and Detective Superintendent John McSporran, head of Strathclyde Police’s phone-hacking investigation, Operation Rubicon, about whether any official or minister in the Scottish government have had their phones hacked.

Sign-up to our weekly email • Donate to Left Foot Forward

The post Time for slippery Salmond to answer for his “toe-curling fawning over Rupert Murdoch” appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

.

David Cameron is referring Sayeeda Warsi to the adviser on the Ministerial Code. David Cameron is not referring Jeremy Hunt to the adviser on the Ministerial Code.

Spot the difference? (Here’s a picture in case that helps…)

It was a subject that solicited much attention on Twitter yesterday – here are some of the best Tweets on the PM’s double standards, saving “JH” while knifing the Baroness:

“So Cameron orders ministerial probe into Warsi but not Hunt. Is it cos she is black? Or cos she wasn’t in charge of BSkyB bid?” – Alastair Campbell

“Yep, Warsi referred, but Hunt cleared. Asian, Muslim & female, enough to make you A List, but not a real member of the club.” – Henry Bonsu

“Hunt:White, Public School, Male. Warsi: Black, Comprehensive, Female. Tricky call.” – Paddy Briggs

“Jeremy Hunt: son of an Admiral, Charterhouse, Oxford. Warsi: daughter of immigrants, State School, Leeds Uni” – J Fraser

“So comprehensive-educated Warsi is investigated but former Head Boy at Charterhouse public school Hunt is in the clear #helooksafterhisown” – John Prescott

“The contrast in the treatment of Hunt (clear breach of ministerial code) and Warsi (nasty tittle-tattle) is terrible for Cameron.” – Stefan Stern

“Warsi v Hunt. Female v male. New v old. Not part of the club v establishment. Sorry – but all inescapable thoughts of obvious Tory bias” – Richard Murphy

“Clearly not all breaches of ministerial code the same. Warsi referred to Sir Alex Allen. Hunt not. Warsi considered disposable, Hunt not?” – Nick Robinson

“I appreciate I’m on other side of Atlantic but can’t work out why Cameron has referred Warsi to ministerial code but not Hunt.” – Andrew Neil

“I’m no fan of Baroness Warsi, but she’s entitled to feel angry when Cameron launches investigation into her but not Hunt. Incredible.” – Iain Martin

“Clearly a tory elite stitch-up job.” – James Weston

“BREAKING NEWS: The rest of the Cabinet finally notice that Baroness Warsi hasn’t got a winkle and the suntan’s not fading. #whiteboysclub” – Boris Watch

“Warsi allegedly fiddles £175 and gets referred. Hunt greases the wheels of an £8 billion deal and gets nothing. I see.” – Alex Andreou

“Warsi = ethnic woman. Hunt = british bulldog. You scratch tory policies/actions you find racism/sexism. Victorian politics.” – An Owl

“Jeremy Hunt lobbied 4 a £7000000000 monster corp (NewsCorp) that hacked dead peoples’ fones. Warsi didn’t declare rent. Who goes? U decide.” – Dr Éoin Clarke

“Cameron needs to control the fate of Hunt. He’s happy to let others decide on Warsi. The contrast is so unsubtle all 3 are in more trouble.” – Steve Richards

“And there will be people (whose votes Tories need), barely follow politics, but clock that wasp guy saved, Asian lady not.” – Rafael Behr

“Sayeeda Warsi faces an inquiry. Jeremy Hunt does not. Is that fair?: David Cameron has asked for an investigatio… tgr.ph/Ls5ElD” – James Kirkup

“When the Torygraph are asking this you have to wonder what is going on Chez Cameron tgr.ph/KKhhGV” – Emma Kennedy

• MPs attack Murdochs in damning report into phone-hacking 1 May 2012

• Leveson and Mr Hunt 29 Apr 2012

• Is Jeremy Hunt a “cheerleader” for the Murdochs? 24 Apr 2012

Once again, as John Prescott observes, we witness an arrogant, out of touch Tory prime minister looking after his own, as witnessed in the budget; if you’re a rich boy, this government will thumb its nose at public opinion and go to the wall to defend you, they’re only “all in it together” with their own, if you’re one of them – and even if you’re a loyal Conservative cabinet minister, you’ll never really be one of them, one of the club, one of the team, one of Team Cameron.

Whether it’s incompetence, expenses or lies, you get the feeling Hell will freeze over before Cameron takes action against one of his public school chums. Dave, Gideon, Jezza and Govey, long to omnishambles over us… Pip pip!

The post So, Mr Cameron, why spare Hunt and knife Warsi? (As if we don’t already know…) appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.

.

Alex Salmond is to face a grilling from Lord Leveson over his links to Rupert Murdoch, it was announced today, as the first minister faced another torrid session of First Minister’s Questions at Holyrood, rounded on by Labour, Liberal Democrat and Tory MSPs.

The SNP leader – and long-time Murdoch defender – is likely to be called to give evidence on June 13th, a Scottish government spokeswoman told The Scotsman.

The news came as the clamour grew for Salmond to set up a Scottish phone-hacking probe, with Nick Clegg joining in the chorus today – laying in to the first minister’s “cosy relationship” with Murdoch and his closeness to other right wing billionaires like Donald Trump.

As STV reports, the deputy prime minister said:

“I’m slightly losing count of who Alex Salmond spends his time sucking up to. One moment it’s Rupert Murdoch and then it’s Donald Trump.

“He clearly has a fascination with very wealthy, very powerful men and is happy to trade, basically, with them in order to further his own political ambitions.

“I heard Alex Salmond trying to justify his strategy of ingratiation with Rupert Murdoch on the basis that it was for Scottish jobs. In fact, the only job he had in mind was his own.

“I think it’s time he put the public and the interests of Scotland before his own cosy relationship with Rupert Murdoch.”

• Under fire over hacking? How do you prove you’re fit and proper? By mocking Roy Hodgson 2 May 2012

• The Murdoch stench lingers around Salmond 2 May 2012

• McConnell sues News International as Labour call for inquiry into Salmond’s adviser 30 Apr 2012

• Under-fire Salmond has “lost his sense of smell” over the “stench of Murdoch” 26 Apr 2012

• The 25 questions over the SNP’s Murdoch links 19 Jul 2011

At the Scottish Parliament, meanwhile, Salmond refused to say if his phone had been hacked, as all three opposition leaders turned up the heat over his links to Murdoch.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson said:

“This first minister reports to this Parliament – so this is his big opportunity. Dodging the question now only to reveal all when he takes the stand later will look like media manipulation of the very worst kind.

“Was he hacked and didn’t speak out to protect his new best pal – or did Rupert not need to bother tapping his phone, because he was already on speed dial? Parliament is asking, Scotland is watching – first minister were you hacked?”

Joining in, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader Willie Rennie added:

“The first minister is responsible to this Parliament – why won’t he tell us whether his phone has been hacked? Despite all the excuses, we’ve heard the first minister manned the barricades to protect Rupert Murdoch from a Scottish inquiry.”

And Scottish Labour leader Johann Lamont asked:

“Given the further revelations we have seen in the last few days, why does the first minister still believe Rupert Murdoch is a fit person to run an international media company?”

In sum, Salmond responded by saying Leveson was UK-wide anyway, so why bother having an inquiry; that he’d be “speaking specifically about a range of matters under oath” at Leveson so needn’t bother telling mere MSPs if he’d been hacked; and claimed thousands of jobs were at stake if he slighted Murdoch, almost saying ‘so to Hell with ethics and principle’.

No excuse, it appears, is too small for Wee Eck.

The post Salmond to be dragged before Leveson as ‘Wee Eck’ refuses to say if he’s been hacked appeared first on Left Foot Forward: Leading the UK's progressive debate.