Former Editor Says Murdoch Personally Gave Order to Have Someone Tailed

[Hissyspit]

Source: ABC News (Australia)

Former editor says Murdoch personally gave order to have someone tailed
Posted on 08.22.11
By David Edwards

News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch personally told one of his former tabloid editors to have someone followed, according to a documentary that aired Monday night on Australian TV.

Ita Buttrose, former editor-in-chief of Sydney’s The Daily Telegraph, told ABC’s Australian Story that Murdoch instructed her to have a subject tailed because legitimate reporting techniques were not producing the desired results.

“I assigned a reporter to do it but wasn’t happy with the result and said, ‘No, that wasn’t good enough. Have you followed this person?’” she recalled.

“I can’t give this instruction,” Buttrose later told then-News Limited chief executive Ken Cowley. “I’m not having anybody that works for me, for whom I’m responsible, follow anybody. I don’t want to be a part of it.”

Read more: http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/former-editor-says-murdoch-personally-gave-order-to-have-someone-tailed

---

Original Link: http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/08/former-editor-says-murdoch-personally-gave-order-to-have-someone-tailed

Murdoch told me to have someone followed: Buttrose
Australian Story
Updated August 22, 2011 20:31

Media figure Ita Buttrose says Rupert Murdoch suggested she have someone followed while chasing a story in her time as editor-in-chief of the Sunday Telegraph and Daily Telegraph.

In Monday night's Australian Story, Ms Buttrose said the media mogul asked her to "go beyond what I thought I should do".

Ms Buttrose said the request came while working on a story at Mr Murdoch's request.

[Guy Whitey Corngood]

1. K & R. nt

[RKP5637]

2. K&R !!! n/t

[muriel_volestrangler]

3. "someone"? That could be perfectly acceptable

What if the 'someone' was a politician meeting with a suspected criminal? Then tailing them would be a good idea - justifiable 'in the public interest', and almost certainly legal (it would be in the UK, for instance, and I'd expect in Australia too). Until we know what the story would have been, this is trivial.

[pipoman]

5. I agree..

What is the difference between this and paparazzi tactics? While the paparazzi are demonized, they are a reality and quite legal on nearly every corner of the planet. Certainly Murdock's tit is in the wringer, as it should be, some of the accusations have been accepted practice by reporters for decades.

[SusanaMontana41]

17. self delete.

[cstanleytech]

13. Agreed, this on the surface isnt damning so I'm confused why the OP posted it at all.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[fascisthunter]

6. K and R (nt)

[Kingofalldems]

7. Kick and Rec for all the Fox News fans stopping in

[stonecutter357]

9. fox

fox is not news.:toast:

[begin_within]

8. Sounds like a mafia

[PatrynXX]

10. that is what tabloids do, it's just that it's not a news organization

tabloids paparazzi tail people. to provoke something. hence create the news

[Spider Jerusalem]

11. Which is interesting but also irrelevant

as it has nothing to do with the phone hacking in the UK...and it's also rather context-free (have who followed and why? And as noted above there's a strong public interest defence for certain actions which may not be acceptable in the absence of said public interest).

[JDPriestly]

28. The point is that Mudoch himself ordered that the subject be followed.

And there is no suggestion that the subject was a criminal or the potential victim of a criminal.

Whether this is legal in Australia depends on the law there.

Here, ordinary people have a degree of a right to privacy.

[pipoman]

29. There is no suggestion the subject was

an "ordinary person". In fact it is highly unlikely it was, why would murdock care about the activities of an "ordinary person"? The problem with this story is, that it draws away from the actual wrong doing he has done. 60 Minutes, Dateline, and virtually every other magazine news program has followed people to get their stories, unless something more specific than what is in the OP proves otherwise, this has been going on at every news bureau for decades. It is called investigative journalism.

[JDPriestly]

32. The point is not whether people are followed for a news story.

The point is the extent to which Murdoch involved himself in the process of news gathering, the minutiae of how information for a story was collected.

It isn't that it was necessarily illegal to follow someone. It is that Murdoch himself told the woman how to gather the information. So it was Murdoch's personal involvement that is important in this story. If he told her specifically to follow someone, then it makes it more possible that he also was involved in telling people how to collect the information for other stories.

It is not "evidence" of misbehavior. It is "evidence" of Murdoch's close involvement in the instruction of reporters.

[Citizen Worker]

12. If the Murdoch thread is pulled on long enough I think it's going to lead to the revelation that

Murdoch's organization, at the behest of Karl Rove, was behind the hacking of Elliot Spitzer's phone. We'll see.

[defendandprotect]

20. Interesting ---

[Firebrand Gary]

14. K&R

[Enthusiast]

15. This is the way fascists operate.........nt

[Ikonoklast]

16. "Ita Buttrose" sounds like a Bond villianness.

Sorry, I can't past that name without commenting on it.


Oh, and Murdoch is toast.

[nolabear]

19. It brought out my worst Beavis and Butthead features too.

And I DO hope you're right about Murdoch.

[rooboy]

21. Her name does sound funny but she's a highly respected figure in Australia.

Ita Buttrose pioneered women's magazines in this country and is one of our most successful businesswomen.

Her credibility is pretty much beyond reproach - if she said Murdoch told here to do it, then he did.

[Esra Star]

22. Not to forget the "Chisel" endorsement

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUONdYMPbXs

[defendandprotect]

18. k&r

[on point]

23. No news here. Classic reporting technique, not illegal immoral etc.

Not the same as hacking into phones, which is illegal etc.

Only helpful if it shows a pattern of privacy invasion of which this is a part.

[Sarah Ibarruri]

24. I hope they throw the a-h in jail. nt

[tcaudilllg]

25. Ya'll don't get it.

It's what it says about his character. Ultimately arbitrary interpretations of the law, not precisely worded interpretations, are what will get him in the end. His problem is not the legal system... his problem is the sentiment which shapes it.

[DeSwiss]

26. K&R n/t

[avaistheone1]

27. k&r

[leveymg]

30. 100th rec. We get the significance of this - pattern & practice violation, RICO, Foreign Corrupt

Practices Act prosecution, conspiracy, wiretapping.

Rupert's empire crumbles. Fox News, a cost center, cast off its money lifeline. Saudis have to look for another paid RW mouthpiece. Assuming Obama's DOJ actually does something to prosecute - assuming too much?

[Hubert Flottz]

31. The wealthy are unregulated, so it's okay for them to do as they...

please.

Money trumps everything else but more money.

[BlueIris]

33. Ugly. Not shocking anymore, but ugly as all hell. nt