And the future for News International??

@BBCLauraK

James Murdoch did offer another date to turn up in Aug - but cttee wouldn't accept it - they're issuing speaker's warrant to him + his Dad
2 minutes ago via web

carmen wrote:

Panda wrote:Carmen......excellent.

I love the imagination of these clever people , where did you find this?

the link was doing the rounds of twitter.

Here's the link for any potential bidders

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230646778819#ht_932wt_1167

And here is the text of James Murdoch's letter to the culture committee.


Dear John

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

Unfortunately I am not available to attend the session you have planned next Tuesday.

However, I would be pleased to give evidence to your committee on either the 10 or 11 August. Naturally, if neither of these proves suitable I would be willing to consider any alternative dates you suggest.

I hope this is of help to the committee.

Yours sincerely,

James Murdoch


Rupert Murdoch's US holdings account for a dominant part of its more than $32bn global annual revenue Photograph: Pool/Reuters
11.59am: Here's what Rupert Murdoch said in his letter to the culture committee chairman.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

Unfortunately, I am not available to attend the session you have planned next Tuesday. However, I am fully prepared to give evidence to the forthcoming judge-led public inquiry and I will be taking steps to notify those conducting the inquiry of my willingness to do so. Having done this, I would be happy to discuss with you how best to give evidence to your committee.

I hope this is of help.

Yours sincerely,

Rupert Murdoch

11.54am: Here is the full statement from the culture committee.

The Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee has this morning received letters from Rupert Murdoch, Chair and CEO of News Corporation, James Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive of News Corporation (International), and Rebekah Brooks, Chief Executive of News International, in response to its invitation to appear before the Committee.

Rebekah Brooks has accepted the invitation to appear before the Committee next week. Rupert Murdoch has indicated he is unable to attend to give evidence, and James Murdoch has indicated he is unable to attend on the specified date but offered to appear at an alternative date, the earliest of which was August 10th. The letters are attached.

The Committee has made clear its view that all three should appear to account for the behaviour of News International and for previous statements made to the Committee in Parliament, now acknowledged to be false.

Accordingly, the Committee has this morning decided to summon Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch to appear before the Select Committee in Parliament at 2.30pm on Tuesday 19 July 2011.

@julianhuppert

Formal summons are now being delivered to both Murdochs by the Deputy Sergeant at Arms #fb #live #phonehacking #notw

carmen wrote:

Panda wrote:There has just been a comment about the Meeting in Parliament next Tuesday where the Murdochs and Brooks are summoned to appear.
Since the Murdochs are not British there is no compulsion for them to attend but it would show signs of guilt on their part if they refused. Murdoch
is no pushover and will be closeted with his Lawyers no doubt and take the 5th Amendment.

According to Tom Watson MP, nationality isn't an issue - if they're on UK soil, they can be summoned, declared in contempt of Parliament and arrested by Sarjent at Arms - although what happens after that is a bit unknown!

And here is the full text of Rebekah Brooks's letter to the culture committee.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

I am writing to confirm that I am available to appear before the committee on that date and welcome the opportunity to do so.

As you are well aware, the Metropolitan police investigation into illegal voicemail interception continues and we are fully cooperating with that. Aspects of the work to which your committee may wish to refer are likely to be relevant to that investigation. Indeed, the police have already asked us specifically to provide information about those matters.

I understand that various select committees have approached the police over time in relation to this and other cases. The police's position has been to co-operate where this did not directly impact on the investigation in question. In those cases where it did potentially impact, the police have historically declined to comment at that stage. Our understanding is that this approach has not been challenged. Given that we are in the midst of an investigation, and we do not want to prejudice it, I hope you will understand why we feel it would not be appropriate to respond to such questions at present in order to be consistent with [the] police's approach, and that as a result this may prevent me from discussing these matters in detail.

I hope this is of help, and look forward to hearing from you to discuss exact timings and other details.

Yours sincerely,

Rebekah Brooks

@GeorgeMonbiot

explosive sggstn from @ChrisBryantMP: House shld consider emergency motion on Monday to arrest murdochs if continue to refuse to attend.

carmen wrote:

And here is the full text of Rebekah Brooks's letter to the culture committee.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

I am writing to confirm that I am available to appear before the committee on that date and welcome the opportunity to do so.

As you are well aware, the Metropolitan police investigation into illegal voicemail interception continues and we are fully cooperating with that. Aspects of the work to which your committee may wish to refer are likely to be relevant to that investigation. Indeed, the police have already asked us specifically to provide information about those matters.

I understand that various select committees have approached the police over time in relation to this and other cases. The police's position has been to co-operate where this did not directly impact on the investigation in question. In those cases where it did potentially impact, the police have historically declined to comment at that stage. Our understanding is that this approach has not been challenged. Given that we are in the midst of an investigation, and we do not want to prejudice it, I hope you will understand why we feel it would not be appropriate to respond to such questions at present in order to be consistent with [the] police's approach, and that as a result this may prevent me from discussing these matters in detail.

I hope this is of help, and look forward to hearing from you to discuss exact timings and other details.

Yours sincerely,

Rebekah Brooks

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2011/jul/14/nickclegg-phone-hacking#block-24

Margaret wrote:Do you think she's going to try 'can't comment due to investigation' issues?

Mike Naworynsky, the deputy serjeant-at-arms at the Commons, is on his way to Wapping now, we're told, to deliver the summonses to Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch ordering them to attend next week's culture committee hearing. Apparently he won't be wearing ceremonial outfit ("tights").

John Whittingdale said that Kevin Maxwell was the last person to receive a summons of this kind ordering him to attend a select committee hearing. Maxwell turned up.

Earlier (see 8.36am) Whittingdale talked about John Junor being ordered to attend parliament in 1957. To clarify: Junor was the last person ordered to attend the Bar of the House (ie, to come to the chamber itself) after being accused of a contempt of parliament.

If the Murdochs refuse to comply with the summonses they are receiving from the select committee, the committee could then report them to the Commons for contempt. At that point, the only sanction available to parliament would be to call them to the Bar for a reprimand.

@GeorgeMonbiot

This is now a straightforward power struggle between Murdoch and parliament. Democracy demands that parliament wins.

Phone hacking: Rupert Murdoch calls in PR firm Edelman
PR company will report directly to general manager of News International


Rupert Neate and Mark Sweney
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 14 July 2011 12.59 BST
Article history

Rupert Murdoch: the appointment of Edelman comes after 11 days of sustained coverage of the phone-hacking scandal.

Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation has called in PR and lobbying specialists Edelman to help the embattled company handle mounting public anger and political pressure over the phone-hacking scandal in the UK.

The PR company will report directly to Will Lewis, general manager of News Corp subsidiary News International, the publisher of Murdoch's British newspapers.

The appointment of Edelman comes after 11 days of sustained coverage of the phone-hacking scandal, which has forced News International to close the News of the World and News Corp to abandon its BSkyB takeover.

Robert Phillips, chief executive of Edelman's European and Asian operations, said the company had been providing News International with "ad hoc" advice since 20 June – before the hacking of Milly Dowler's phone was made public – and was formerly appointed to provide "communications and public affairs support and counsel" to its management and standards group on Tuesday. This group is handling the internal inquiry into the phone-hacking scandal.

The Edelman team will be run by Alex Bigg, its managing director for corporate affairs, and James Lundie, its managing director of public affairs. Lundie is the long-term partner of David Laws, the former chief secretary to the treasury.

Edelman will report to News International's new management and standards committee, which consists of Lewis, a former editor of the Daily Telegraph who joined NI in 2010, Simon Greenberg, the director of corporate affairs who arrived in January, and general counsel Jeff Parker.

Edelman recently hired Ed Williams, the BBC director of communications, to head its UK operation. Williams is due to join Edelman on 31 October and it is understood he will not be involved in the company's work for News Corp.

However, the BBC confirmed on Thursday that he will be leaving the corporation immediately.

Edelman last year hired the BBC's former director of news, Richard Sambrook, to head up its "crisis and issues practice". It is unclear whether he will be part of the firm's News Corp team.

Edelman, the world's largest PR firm, handles the reputations of brands including Starbucks, Pepsi and Burger King. The company, which has 51 offices around the world, was founded by Daniel J Edelman in 1952 and is currently led by his son Richard Edelman.

The public announcement of Edelman's appointment comes after rumours suggested that Matthew Freud, founder of PR firm Freud Communications and husband of Rupert Murdoch's daughter, Elisabeth Murdoch, had been advising News Corp on the phone-hacking scandal.

On Thursday a spokeswoman for Freud Communications denied this. "Neither Matthew Freud or the agency was advising NI on this issue, nor had Freud advised on the closure of the News of the World."

Panda wrote:Carmen the last link you gave to youtube has been whoosh clucked.

So, the Murdochs have hired their own PR Firm , I bet Clarence is seething !!

margaret wrote:

carmen wrote:

And here is the full text of Rebekah Brooks's letter to the culture committee.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

I am writing to confirm that I am available to appear before the committee on that date and welcome the opportunity to do so.

As you are well aware, the Metropolitan police investigation into illegal voicemail interception continues and we are fully cooperating with that. Aspects of the work to which your committee may wish to refer are likely to be relevant to that investigation. Indeed, the police have already asked us specifically to provide information about those matters.

I understand that various select committees have approached the police over time in relation to this and other cases. The police's position has been to co-operate where this did not directly impact on the investigation in question. In those cases where it did potentially impact, the police have historically declined to comment at that stage. Our understanding is that this approach has not been challenged. Given that we are in the midst of an investigation, and we do not want to prejudice it, I hope you will understand why we feel it would not be appropriate to respond to such questions at present in order to be consistent with [the] police's approach, and that as a result this may prevent me from discussing these matters in detail.

I hope this is of help, and look forward to hearing from you to discuss exact timings and other details.

Yours sincerely,

Rebekah Brooks

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2011/jul/14/nickclegg-phone-hacking#block-24

Do you think she's going to try 'can't comment due to investigation' issues?

widowan wrote:At least Rebekah gets points for having the b@lls to agree to show up without having to be "frog marched" and threatened into it.

We will see whether blood runs thicker than water.

Badboy wrote:AT 7.30 ON ITV1,THERE WILL BE A PROGRAMME ON RUBERT MURDOCH AND CO

wjk wrote:

Badboy wrote:AT 7.30 ON ITV1,THERE WILL BE A PROGRAMME ON RUBERT MURDOCH AND CO

Thanks Bb

Panda wrote:If you read her letter again. Rebekah is not saying she won"t attend, just that she can"t comment.

to respond to such questions at present in order to be consistent with
[the] police's approach, and that as a result this may prevent me from
discussing these matters in detail."