Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
James Murdoch has just announced that they're going to pull the plug. Pretty wild.
i thought you were trolling. now i feel silly. not as silly as all the innocent people who've just lost their jobs though, eh
The Sunday Sun
it's true! according to beeb anyway.
Obviously we need to hear more, but are they just making hundreds of people redundant? Wow.
like you say, this level of information is pretty pointless speculating on but fuck it lets do it anyway!
will it be replaced by another publication? if so what's the point? if not that's just leaving a gap in the right wing press no? well not a gap in real terms - obviously the national press is dripping with right wing papers.
A week to think of a new name and get a header designed, website bought, and ported.
CTRL+H on all waiting stories to change the name in print and bingo...
So basically they've changed the name. Doesn't stop the News International legal activity (or the BSkyB takeover) at all, of course. So nothing has changed.
It was obvious they'd just kill the paper and the next week start the same paper up with the same staff and a new name. It's like those corrupt businesses that file for bankruptcy and then open again the next week or whatever.
did you say this yesterday? or even an hour ago?
I just assumed everyone was thinking the same thing.
Good to see you're on the same page, though.
might as well get it off your chest now to avoid any similar heartbreak.
but you're possibly (maybe even probably) right, and an analogous piece of uitter shit will rise like a Phoneix from the ashes.
I dont' care whether this is merely symbolic or not though- this is a good thing.
The whole of News International is a festering cunt-hole and as soon see it implode but for the vast number of people losing jobs who certainly don't deserve that.
There's not much that can be done- even if you disqualify Murdoch as a director, somebody else will step in and supply the demand of the gossip thirsty ignorant public.
I'm just not wildly bothered about this.
If NI got new management or something I'm sure it would help but with the Murdoch empire in charge it isn't about to happen.
they'll release a statement on Monday saying that in light of the support recieved from the british public in buying a gazillion copies of our paper, we've decided to keep printing, and will go daily.
Do you like apples?
Or what everyone else has already said
MY BIRTHDAY EVERYBODY!
The Sunday is blatantly gonna happen
Love the almost-immediate "yeah it was obvious" response of some. DiS, never change.
However embroiled in scandal it is/was, no-one seriously suggested that it was going to shut down. Especially not NOW. Maybe if it had kept running for a month or two and the ads had still not come in, maybe then.
But now?! Get out.
This is huge.
But sooner or later with the name tarnished it didn't really seem likely they'd keep making it, especially when NI have done a good job of making it seem like it's *just* NOTW that are the problem rather than the whole organisation.
And advertisers have followed suit it seems.
Knew it yesterday.
Sorry for happening to have thought that if you have a name tarnished you just open the same thing up under a new name and keep going. Clearly this is the first time it's ever happened.
not very original are you Theo?
I didn't anticipate a full shutdown, but when the question was asked yesterday, "Will this make any difference?" and the general response was "Nah, they'll just continue to plough along, cross-subsidising it with profits from other News International companies", I was a little surprised by the cynicism. Some repercussions were surely inevitable. Of course, there are still reasons to be cynical, as you've already covered, but yeah. I WISH I'D SAID THIS YESTERDAY AS WELL, THEO.
But also pretty pissed.
It's just a rebranding exercise to halt the slide in confidence across his portfolio. This better not make loads of people go 'Ok, well that's that then...'
They're preparing to hang someone out to dry on this one I sense, Step 1 was co-operating with the police. And this is Step 2.
It may have turned into something terrible, but this is still kind of sad.
Of course the Sun is going seven days, News International are never going to leave the Sunday paper field to everyone else, it's newspaper business sensed. What they've done is taken the heat off them so while everyone on Twitter celebrates they can rebrand, the government can leave off for the summer and approve the BSkyB takeover in September on the grounds the diseased arm has supposedly been chopped off, Rebekah Brooks can breath easier in her much more important current role and a lot of junior employees who had no involvement in the affair are sacked. Nice work, Rupert.
But cynically saying it'll go just like that is wrong. You lose NoW for 7 days, replace one day with The Sun. Whether this rebranding of the paper will work is very much uncertain - the BBC and The Guardian have got the bit between their teeth. And I don't believe this clears him to take BSkyB - he's now the owner of a newspaper forced to shut because of criminal actions.
What? NOTW is a Sunday paper.
Also, on the subject of redundancies, if the Sun goes to 7 days a week they'll need to recruit more staff. So the people being made redundant could effectively be rehired in the same jobs a short way down the line.
I didn't know that. In my defence, I'm remarkably stupid.
Even if something exactly the same replaces it it probably wont instantly be the biggest selling sunday, they might not want to tarnish the sun by using it in its place, its abig hit for murdoch though presumably not as bad as leaving it running otherwise he would have
and it seems to have got by only touched by association these last three days while all guns were blazing on its counterpart. We say "it's not as if people won't notice", but two days ago we were all assured that the news wouldn't affect this Sunday's NOTW sales one jot (though of course it will now, souvenir edition and all that) And of course the heat on them will dissipate, like it did when Egypt was overthrown (leaving protests in Libya and Syria to fend for themselves) and with superinjunctions (once Giggs was named who cared any more?)
Meanwhile, it's been noted that less than two weeks ago all Sun and NOTW activity was streamlined into one (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/jun/28/newsinternational-rebekahwade)
we think of this as being the result of mass Twitter activity, but throughout this week related tags have been trending below Cher Lloyd and now it's still not as popular as 'Wes Brown' or '#jlsnewcastle'.
but any brand being forced into rebranding is a huge blow though, might take them awhile to build the sales back to notw peak. Other media will be quick to point out notw connections with the new tittle, I am not saying it is a massive victory but it is definitely important
No? OK then.
But then I've never read it, and have no interest in it.
Never bought a tabloid, never really paid much attention to them.
ah well. the masses of morons probably don't even realise that it's always been the sunday sun anyway. even some scousers don't. a fight nearly kicked off on the train home from an away game when a fan picked up a NotW off the floor to read the back page and got it torn out of his hands.
PR: Thousands of redundancies!
Murdoch: We're back baby
"thousands of innocent employees being made redundant" is limited to say the least.
(With apologies to marckee).
That's not many. Acceptable collateral damage.
but it doesn't impress me. They knew who they were working for, they new what kind of organisation it was. You take the bastards' money, don't complain when it all comes crashing down on your head.
Your overly simplistic assessment of the people who worked there and their motivations for doing so is pretty petty to be honest.
Who do you work for, chap?
and I don't see what is overly simplistic about stating that they knew who they were walking for, and what the NoTW, The Sun and the wider NI group was all about. I'm not judging them for it, I'm just saying I don't have very much sympathy, can't really see what is abhorrent about that.
...local authorities have been known to do some pretty shaky dealings down the years. I'd hope to fuck that yours hasn't and you don't end up unemployed as a result.
Anyway, it's overly simplistic because you appear to be assuming that everyone working for the paper can afford to sacrifice their jobs for their ethics. This includes all admin staff, printers and other people who are far from decision makers, but people who are just trying to make ends meet. Some people would have doubtless had a choice between unemployment and working for News International. People with more tangible responsibilities than most of the people who can spend their days posting on this website... It's overly simplistic because I doubt you are aware of the sheer volume of job roles involved in the creation of news media. Not all of these people can make an ethical choice about where they choose to work, or have simply taken an honest risk because they have families to feed (to use a trite cliché...)
I just think that saying you don't have sympathy for 'thousands' of people losing their jobs (especially in THIS economic context) is a pretty dire thing to say and it shows a deeply immature strain of thought. I don't like the News of the World either, but let's not throw unnecessary sentiments around...
The people who I have no sympathy for are the people who made the decisions at the centre of the storm. If they lose their jobs, or get prosecuted, then they are the people who deserve repercussions. Not, I'd wager, most of the people you're talking about.
As it is, anyone on a permanent contract will be getting a redundancy payout.
...and the redundancy packages of said roles, yet?
And we don't know what the redundancy packages are, no, but the point is that they'll be getting *something*. So like I said, they're better off now than if they'd simply walked (though this isn't true of freelancers, obviously).
If I quit my job, I'd get 4 weeks notice. If I got made redundant, I'd get 4 weeks notice. I'd not really be any better off either way I don't think...
unless murdoch instead doesnt re-employ as many people on this project and 'saves on headcount' by just expecting more work from the current sum set up, supplemented 'here and there' by staff they want to keep on at news international
or the extent of my knowledge about the print media.
Characterising my opinion as childish (nice, pointless ad hom attack my the way) is pretty weak too - are you really suggesting that class should come into ethics? You have a fucking low opinion of the average blue collar worker if you think that. You also seem to have the idea that when they applied for all of those jobs as printers etc there were a) no other jobs, b) that their 2.4 children were one paycheck from the workhouse. It isn't true. Also saying I had limited sympathy was a reaction to everyone saying *but won;t someone think of the innocent workers, who have helped brought us stories of such magnitude as Kill all the paedos, David Beckham's penis's location, and all the great stuff the fake sheikh did*
No. Just no.
But we have differing opinions. You think that people who lose their jobs for being a tiny cog in a media machine which has done some pretty questionable things don't deserve a great deal of sympathy. I do. And I do because most of these people aren't Murdoch brand guardians, they are people who just need a job. And I strongly disagree with strong, spiteful opinion contrary to this. Simple.
And plus there are FAR more execrable employers out there who do FAR worse things than NI/NotW does/has done. It's all just a wee bit over the top...
Believe me, I'm glad to see the paper go and I'm glad to see Murdoch taking a kicking. I feel sorry for the people being laid off though... it's not nice.
a lack of sympathy is not the same as being glad they are losing their jobs, or laughing about it or anything your implying I'm feeling.
And yes there are much worse employers, but why is that relevant to this example? I'm happy to be consistent in my lack of sympathy if those companies go under.
I bet loads of people buy it on sunday just to be like I GOT THE LAST EVER NOTW
is Murdoch striking a bargain to abandon NoW to get BSkyB. But I really believe that Cameron would be insane to support that now. It could get kicked around some "listening" sessions - hopefully we're paying attention when it comes up again in a few months.
i worry that you overestimate Cameron.
Let's hack it's phone.
i'll have to get The Sunday People instead, although it has too little phone tapping for my liking
Come on...we all know it's a gimic.
As the advertisers and then the columnists jumped ship they had no choice. Its obvious they will launch the scum on sundays, but their hand was forced, no-one wants to close down the biggest selling UK newspaper unless they have to.
JUSTICE AT LAST.
From talking to hacks I know, it seems Murdoch had known that hacking went on and told certain individuals to put a sock in it, they hadn't, and now it has come to this. Whilst shutting it down is not going to cause him too much pain (he bought it for £34m over 40 years ago and it's paid for itself umpteen times over and will have few liabilities that he can't handle) I still think that either he has taken this very seriously indeed (as well he might) but also makes me wonder what else his invesgiation uncovered that we don't yet know about *music from twilight zone*
well we're only really on week one of this as far as big news revelations go.
BREAK Sky #NOTW source: "there is mass anger in news room. All directed at Rebekah. Colin Myler absolutely furious. Staff devastated."
yeah good. there have every right to really say some very rude things indeed to her.
this is a cesspit entirely of their own making. News Int can get fucked as far as I'm concerned.
is coming across as just that.
pots and kettles everywhere! :-)
it'll be a fucking travesty.
He's not going to tell you it's obvious now - he'll reveal his hand after the fact!
The though that Murdoch has sacrificed a paper and its staff only to keep her safe is just gross.
who knows? i think the fact that if she's go, the pressure then turns to James is a pretty convincing reason why he's so desperate to keep her tho.
maybe to some extend that allowed Murdoch to focus on that paper, when really the blame is not the current incarnation of that paper at all, but should all be on the News Int. that allowed it to happen in the first place.
don't know why I find that surprising but still, bloody hell.
The Guardian newspaper were out to get us, and they got us,' Rebekah Brooks reported to have told staff this afternoon at tearful meeting.
What a cunt of the highest order.
ummm. i wonder if she knows really, and put that on to justify the sackings and is just a cruel pyschopath. or if alternatively she is just an incredibly self-deluded person. i guess a large part of getting that amount of success is having to block out any criticism. hmmm. be interesting to find out.
after all, the NOTW circulation is only 917% more than the nasty Guardian's. That's clout right there
My maths is wrong. The point stands
Registered on Tuesday
just reported by BBC.
The registrant is a non-trading individual who has opted to have their
address omitted from the WHOIS service.
Webfusion Ltd t/a 123-reg [Tag = 123-REG]
Registered on: 05-Jul-2011
Renewal date: 05-Jul-2013
Last updated: 07-Jul-2011
Registration request being processed.
If they really are planning to do this, hopefully they'll be impeded by being rumbled already.
News will eat itself.
blah blah decency, blah blah the right thing to do....*cough* must save News International's share price *cough*
it feels like a mob movie...sure you could try to work through things, but why not just give the problem a bullet in the back of the head and throw it to the fishes.
"If you're a shower of cunts you deserve to be sacked". I think they've been pretty savvy and saved themselves from a large problem.
it's definitely a clever move.
like something from the art of war....a sacrifice to make you stronger in the long-run yadda yadda
Thats right, BAD MEAN ONES.
as Rupert Murdoch has always struck me as a deeply spiritual man
...if we're interested in continuing to apply the pressure and make sure that Murdoch doesn't get away with this diversionary tactic, or is it just a question of leaving it up to the MPs...inquiries etc.?
There's already a regional title called the Sunday Sun.
Apparently, www.sunonsunday.co.uk & www.sunonsunday.com were registered two days ago by 'persons unknown'.
(On mobile, heard it on R4, and hadn't seen it upthread.)
Why would they need a new domain though? Probably squatters?
different editors etc.
It'll be the NotW staff.
The .co.uk one was by Mediaspring (same as thesunonsunday.co.uk)
The .com one was by a Marco Milani, of Via I Fondi 12, Monghidoro, Italy.
I feel like I've out-Wozza'd the Wozza.
It's an actual site: http://www.sunonsunday.com/
I wonder how many hits they've got in the last hour or so. They're not that bad, actually.
why would register a proper website and then keep the worst possible design - myspace
could they please clarify which Murdoch they're talking about? Thanks.
how can Rebekah Brooks think her career is going to remain intact after this? She should know, after all, about the power of populist sentiment and public outrage. The upswell of vitriol and hatred in Britain right now - probably exacerbated by her persistent attempts to deny wrongdoing - will surely ruin her? If News Int. want to avoid further sullying their legacy and poisoning themselves publicly with her toxic presence then isn't the smart thing to let her go?
is there that level of outrage? i hope there is? but are people going to stop buying the times, are people going to stop seeing fox movies etc. society exists on the premise that people will forget about their ethical objections to massive corporations for that one bit of chocolate. i worry that enough people are going to *want* to follow Murdoch's reductive approach of 'Oh it was the notw', to buy his 'Oh we're helping with enquiries now*' to allow themselves to enjoy these things they love without the tricky ethical implications of. if that's the case it NI can escape relatively unharmed. i hope it's not.
even tho they're continuing to spin and lie, see releasing only papers specifically related to Coulson or Brooks claiming on Tuesday to be surprised about Dowler revelations when they've appeared in the press and investigations three times before.
sorry their should be a star before that last bit to link it back to now.
(yeh. no-one cares. whatever.)
Literally TWO of my facebook friends have statuses related to this, and one of them is even a negative one. Murdoch* better watch out for lampposts or he'll be doing the Mussolini Mambo before Christmas.
*Rupert or his son, not the one from Thomas the Tank Engine who is, afaik, unconnected to this affair.
Please do, and take a photograph. Cheers.
They all read The Observer or The Times
Shit paper kills it self.
he was a private investigator. why would he would he be doing interviewing? and why would he illegally obtain their ex-directory phone numbers instead of just going and knocking on their door?
STOP TALKING SHIT NEWS INTERNATIONAL
Need the help of a News Corp headline writer to turn this into something workable... and relevant I suppose.
I remember a mate of mine at school would come in on a Monday (he was an Arsenal fan) proclaiming the NOTW's transfer rumours as fact... "Ron de Boer's signed for us lads!" and "We're getting Batistuta, it'll be done tomorrow"... every Monday. Every Monday.
The transfer window has also killed it off, mind...
and was already in the pipeline - not sure whether as a pre-emptive strike or simply as a commercial streamlining
this from June 28th
You can tell it still hasn't even registered in his head how horrible a thing it is to have done. Absolute twat.
It's 200 people and you'd have to imagine most will be kept on for whatever replaces NotW anyway.
I just liked the proper thickos thing in tandem with effects.
But still, if people DO lose their jobs over it then that'll be pretty rank... let's hope the number's low.
Of course, the people who SHOULD be losing their jobs will still survive... but that's the way of the world.
Again, I can't be certain, but I'd imagine the people affected will get decent enough redundancy packages. It sounds cruel, but I say this as someone who has been made redundant twice in a very short career so far- 200 people isn't a huge deal.
I've been made redundant twice as well. Second time I got made redundant you had to have been there 6 months to get your redundancy package. I'd been there 5 months and 3 weeks so I didn't get it. THAT was fun...
But yeah it is a small number in the grand scheme of things, and if they get fairly renumerated then the impact will be merely that of your average company re-structure... No cruelty detected in your post either.
most of whom weren't at the paper during the hacking scandal, have been thrown under a bus to protect Brooks and Murdoch. It just typifies the ruthless amorality of news int and news corp.
But then they are tabloid hacks, and even if they weren't involved in hacking they were still doing the devil's work so it's hard to feel that sorry for them.
they cant be seen to just have exactly the same set up as notw, newspapers arent selling well in general and the new title is bound to not be as popular striaght away might have to cut costs etc would be surprised if they didnt use the oppurtunity
I can never tell these days.
It sounds pretty permanent from his end
I've no doubt NotW as a brand is dead.
according to the Guardian. Not gonna reflect well on the tories.
are they hinting that Brooks is going to be arrested as well?
or has the whole title AND Coulson been sacrificed to keep the Brooks-Cameron connection alive until the BSkyB deal is sealed?
What has Brooks got up her sleeve that's enabling her to wield such influence?
on a) i don't think so.
c) we say so much, i doubt Murdoch has much affection for NOTW, it earned him money but was plausibly going to stop doing that in the future. i can't see it's that big a sacrifice for him. And certainly the money made by NOTW is nothing compared to bskyb. I don't whether it's just simple pragmatism, Brooks is useful, who would they replace her with? OR she's staying because leaving would focus pressure on James OR because Murdoch is a psychopath who can't accept that people outside of his own physical proximity have feelings etc. - this ones probs. definite but might be combined w/ a bit of the other two.
It is incredible that she is so far the only one not losing her job. So yeah she either has something protecting her or Murdoch likes her so much that he would rather shut down one of his biggest newspaper and sack 200 people than see her out of a job.
*see news international out of an effective ceo?
but I haven't heard any comment from him over the last couple of days.
then they'll hire Rebecca Brooks to replace her
probably not a company then.
assaulted Ross Kemp as well, this just gets worse and worse.
this the same Sun that was pleading with parents to scab during the teachers' strike, no?
it will probably be replaced by the sun on sunday
they are closing the notw to do damage limitation and prevent further publicity blows from further investigations into it causing further publicity blows
they obviously wouldnt be doing it if it wasnt the best decision for the company but it is still a big thing that shows just how much damage has been done
by getting rid of the notw, its almost like saying 'oh that was an errant branch of ours (almost like a subcontractor) and this way news international will have the spotlight on it turned down a little, so that the other things for them can go through alright (there are other concerns that news international are currently anxious about, and it depends on the UK gov/legislature looking on them favourably)
I think being basically forced to shut down your flagship paper due to public outrage is gonna reflect badly on your organisation and invite scrutiny for a long time, it is damage limitation but its good that the damage has been that severe
to save other aspects of news international.
Today I hear rumours that they are indeed going to gear up to running the sun 7 days a week.
The thing is there is even more serious issue here than just the salicious nature of newspapers, and that is 'the use of salicious sensationalism and gossip, to bring in the punters, and then, at the same time, feed them with easy baby crap comment on serious issues, that make the public have stupid dumb comic-like opinions on stuff'
seems that once the paper ceases to trade all the evidence can be disposed of
So Brooks/Wade is being kept on to do all the hatchet jobs while remaining the Murdoch's firewall
and the Mail http://i.imgur.com/oGrjZ.jpg
Express yet to declare. They'll no doubt opt to go with the big story: that "Immigrants give your kids cancer".
http://i.imgur.com/bdjF9.jpg Always room for a distracting photo of a lady though (cf: yesterday's Times).
Best of all though, by a country mile, is The Star. http://i.imgur.com/mjYLK.jpg :'-D Incredible. They literally couldn't give the slightest fuck about actual news, eh?
And just for good measure, their website front page: http://i.imgur.com/WuA07.jpg 'HOT! Phone Hacking'
to focus on one single part of that without your eyes being drawn off toward something else, like some kind of hideous newsy optical illusion.
putting a picture of Frank Gallagher above a story about benefit scroungers - unbelievable. Shameless, in fact
bet·ter 1 (btr)
adj. Comparative of good.
1. Greater in excellence or higher in quality.
2. More useful, suitable, or desirable: found a better way to go; a suit with a better fit than that one.
3. More highly skilled or adept: I am better at math than English.
4. Greater or larger: argued for the better part of an hour.
5. More advantageous or favorable; improved: a better chance of success.
6. Healthier or more fit than before: The patient is better today.
adv. Comparative of well2.
1. In a more excellent way.
a. To a greater extent or degree: better suited to the job; likes it better without sauce.
b. To greater advantage; preferably: a deed better left undone. See Usage Notes at best, have, rather.
3. More: It took me better than a year to recover.
1. One that is greater in excellence or higher in quality.
2. A superior, as in standing, competence, or intelligence. Usually used in the plural: to learn from one's betters.
Must be some hidden reason for them keeping her on - her credibility is shot, she's a liability...
But that's EXACTLY the kind of shit I'm talking about...
FINKEL IS EINHORN