This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2013/jul/10/rupert-murdoch-sun

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
What Rupert Murdoch meant by a Fleet Street culture of commerce What Rupert Murdoch meant by a Fleet Street culture of commerce
(2 months later)
"Mr Murdoch welcomes the opportunity to return to the select committee and answer their questions. He looks forward to clearing up any misconceptions" - News Corp spokesman"Mr Murdoch welcomes the opportunity to return to the select committee and answer their questions. He looks forward to clearing up any misconceptions" - News Corp spokesman
Though it may be stretching things to say Rupert Murdoch "welcomes" being questioned once again by hostile politicians in public he won't be too alarmed at the prospect.Though it may be stretching things to say Rupert Murdoch "welcomes" being questioned once again by hostile politicians in public he won't be too alarmed at the prospect.
He is surely aware that the statements he made when addressing Sun journalists give him just enough wriggle room to brush aside any allegations of wrong-doing on his part. They don't furnish any proof that he was aware of any specific illegality.He is surely aware that the statements he made when addressing Sun journalists give him just enough wriggle room to brush aside any allegations of wrong-doing on his part. They don't furnish any proof that he was aware of any specific illegality.
All the same, the covertly-made tape recording is hugely embarrassing for him. The fact it was made at all is significant. Similarly, so is its leaking. Murdoch will view it as an act of betrayal.All the same, the covertly-made tape recording is hugely embarrassing for him. The fact it was made at all is significant. Similarly, so is its leaking. Murdoch will view it as an act of betrayal.
He is not alone in that view. The once-loyal Sun journalists were arrested - and, in some cases, have since been charged - on the basis of evidence provided to the police by their own company. So, naturally enough, they also feel betrayed.He is not alone in that view. The once-loyal Sun journalists were arrested - and, in some cases, have since been charged - on the basis of evidence provided to the police by their own company. So, naturally enough, they also feel betrayed.
Some believe they are facing the music for, to quote one of them who sent me a passionate text message last week, "going to work and doing my job."Some believe they are facing the music for, to quote one of them who sent me a passionate text message last week, "going to work and doing my job."
He, like all the others I have canvassed, genuinely believes he did nothing out of the ordinary in paying for information. It was, as Murdoch candidly admits on the tape, part of Fleet Street culture.He, like all the others I have canvassed, genuinely believes he did nothing out of the ordinary in paying for information. It was, as Murdoch candidly admits on the tape, part of Fleet Street culture.
But we need to stop at this point to explore that culture more closely and to place it in its historical context. I can best do this through my own experience. In the 1980s, I was features editor at the Daily Star and then assistant editor at The Sun. For just over a year (1990-91), I edited the Daily Mirror.But we need to stop at this point to explore that culture more closely and to place it in its historical context. I can best do this through my own experience. In the 1980s, I was features editor at the Daily Star and then assistant editor at The Sun. For just over a year (1990-91), I edited the Daily Mirror.
Paying police was acknowledged as a no-noPaying police was acknowledged as a no-no
On all three papers, I authorised payments of all kinds - to freelances, non-journalistic tipsters, PRs and agents (usually unknown to their clients), kiss-and-tellers of course, and even journalists on rival papers. Sometimes these payments were made through intermediaries (wives, partners, friends).On all three papers, I authorised payments of all kinds - to freelances, non-journalistic tipsters, PRs and agents (usually unknown to their clients), kiss-and-tellers of course, and even journalists on rival papers. Sometimes these payments were made through intermediaries (wives, partners, friends).
I do not recall knowingly authorising a payment to a police officer but in days when wads of money were sloshing around on popular papers I didn't inquire too closely where staff were spending the company's money.I do not recall knowingly authorising a payment to a police officer but in days when wads of money were sloshing around on popular papers I didn't inquire too closely where staff were spending the company's money.
It was acknowledged that paying police was a no-no and I sincerely believe it happened rarely. When, or if, it did, the sums involved were small. There were occasional rumours that reporters paid the odd fiver or tenner to a person - possibly a serving police officer - to obtain information from the criminal records bureau.It was acknowledged that paying police was a no-no and I sincerely believe it happened rarely. When, or if, it did, the sums involved were small. There were occasional rumours that reporters paid the odd fiver or tenner to a person - possibly a serving police officer - to obtain information from the criminal records bureau.
Even if it happened, the person's identity would not have emerged in expenses sheets in those days. It would merely have said "payment to contact" and would pass through the system without demur because the amount was so insignificant.Even if it happened, the person's identity would not have emerged in expenses sheets in those days. It would merely have said "payment to contact" and would pass through the system without demur because the amount was so insignificant.
Expenses were largely a fraud anyway. It was tacitly accepted that a great proportion of the entries were entirely fictitious (another part of the culture at the time). And everyone was involved. Executives who rarely left the office concocted business lunches (by using blank restaurant receipts).Expenses were largely a fraud anyway. It was tacitly accepted that a great proportion of the entries were entirely fictitious (another part of the culture at the time). And everyone was involved. Executives who rarely left the office concocted business lunches (by using blank restaurant receipts).
Unless a journalist was thought to be overstepping the line (or was out of favour), there was hardly any detailed scrutiny of individual claims.Unless a journalist was thought to be overstepping the line (or was out of favour), there was hardly any detailed scrutiny of individual claims.
There were occasional "expenses purges" when managements felt things were getting out of hand. For a while, expenses would be cut by, say, 10% across the board. This practice was itself an admission that the system was fraudulent.There were occasional "expenses purges" when managements felt things were getting out of hand. For a while, expenses would be cut by, say, 10% across the board. This practice was itself an admission that the system was fraudulent.
The situation began to change after the early 1990s' recession. Managements became much more prudent, accounting systems were tightened and expenses claims were curbed. Managing editors, the editorial executives responsible for controlling budgets, expected staff to justify what they were spending.The situation began to change after the early 1990s' recession. Managements became much more prudent, accounting systems were tightened and expenses claims were curbed. Managing editors, the editorial executives responsible for controlling budgets, expected staff to justify what they were spending.
More rigorous accounting procedures meant that it was no longer acceptable to use invented names. Sources had to be identified. As the years rolled on, people came to expect ever greater rewards for their tips. So the cost of obtaining information rose.More rigorous accounting procedures meant that it was no longer acceptable to use invented names. Sources had to be identified. As the years rolled on, people came to expect ever greater rewards for their tips. So the cost of obtaining information rose.
The fact that the tipsters' real identities appeared in the accounts is indicative of managements' belief that their journalists were not doing anything illegal.The fact that the tipsters' real identities appeared in the accounts is indicative of managements' belief that their journalists were not doing anything illegal.
Underlying this culture is the undeniable reality that newspaper journalism is a commercial activity and, therefore, information is a commodity.Underlying this culture is the undeniable reality that newspaper journalism is a commercial activity and, therefore, information is a commodity.
The Sun was not the only paper to pay for informationThe Sun was not the only paper to pay for information
No-one understands that better than Murdoch, an unapologetic champion of the free market. He is not a hostage to the wheeling-and-dealing culture of news-gathering but an enthusiastic participator.No-one understands that better than Murdoch, an unapologetic champion of the free market. He is not a hostage to the wheeling-and-dealing culture of news-gathering but an enthusiastic participator.
As for The Sun's journalists, it's likely they would regard what they did as custom and practice. It was not a matter of concern. It was what you did, part of the job.As for The Sun's journalists, it's likely they would regard what they did as custom and practice. It was not a matter of concern. It was what you did, part of the job.
But let's not see The Sun in these terms as standing alone. Murdoch is right when he implies that what happened at The Sun was little different from what happened in rival papers.But let's not see The Sun in these terms as standing alone. Murdoch is right when he implies that what happened at The Sun was little different from what happened in rival papers.
None of this should be taken as a stamp of approval for payments to police or public officials. I am not condoning the trade. I am simply trying to explain the reality.None of this should be taken as a stamp of approval for payments to police or public officials. I am not condoning the trade. I am simply trying to explain the reality.
Nor, incidentally, should we see the commercialism of journalism as confined to popular papers. The Daily Telegraph paid a substantial sum to obtain the information about MPs' expenses and, incidentally, two large payments were made during the famed Sunday Times thalidomide investigation.Nor, incidentally, should we see the commercialism of journalism as confined to popular papers. The Daily Telegraph paid a substantial sum to obtain the information about MPs' expenses and, incidentally, two large payments were made during the famed Sunday Times thalidomide investigation.
In those two cases, there was a public interest justification - accepted by virtually everyone - for opening the chequebooks.In those two cases, there was a public interest justification - accepted by virtually everyone - for opening the chequebooks.
It may be that some of The Sun's stories would pass muster on similar grounds. We shall have to wait and see.It may be that some of The Sun's stories would pass muster on similar grounds. We shall have to wait and see.
Meanwhile, the police are investigating Murdoch's comments on the tape. As The Guardian reported:Meanwhile, the police are investigating Murdoch's comments on the tape. As The Guardian reported:
"It is understood that one of the offences being investigated by the force is conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office.""It is understood that one of the offences being investigated by the force is conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office."
Again, I don't see that standing up. But The Sun's journalists will take some pleasure in knowing that their boss is under scrutiny by the police. As one told me, at least Rupert has admitted knowing about the culture that has resulted in us getting into trouble.Again, I don't see that standing up. But The Sun's journalists will take some pleasure in knowing that their boss is under scrutiny by the police. As one told me, at least Rupert has admitted knowing about the culture that has resulted in us getting into trouble.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.