No, Rupert is not indecisive - and insiders consider that the closure of News of the World is probably a strategic move.

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2011/07/08/3264814.htm

There is only so much news you can let out, maybe a link between hasaine and rup, Even news has got to comply to local laws.

Depends upon whether the people who are angriest demonstrate that they are unwilling to accept the current "sacrifice" (based upon expedience) as being full payment for what has transpired. The Royal British Legion, for one, seems unlikely to accept this, so advertisers will hopefully continue to avoid the solution.

Thanks everyone for your replies. I will attempt to do them justice.

Spindoc

Just didn't want topic to be derailed at outset - as for interpretation of "considerable" renumeration, I would posit that being paid in excess of 6 figures is "considerable". Therefore, we are not discussing the money nor even the behaviour of the IPCC - which compared to organisations I have previously used as examples is quite reasonable. I don't expect perfection, just accountability.

It is accountability to consequences that is the issue, not playing semantics.


Belly

For chrissakes, I merely asked that people be excellent to one another - would make for a change if the topic was played instead of the man.

To everyone:

No, Rupert is certainly not a ditherer, I would not expect him to be. And has he made a clever ploy by severing the News of the World? Well any further arrests to be made will be facilitated by the availability of sacked staff who, though morally bereft, were given tacit approval by the reigning executives.

In many ways capitalism resembles a war game - it is always the troops that are expendable, the occasional captain will fall on their sword, but the generals remain safely behind the lines. Capitalism without accountability is just another form of feudalism.

Unpropertied men and women did not receive the vote by remaining silent. Ergot, we are not "bleating" we are questioning.

Maybe we are all doomed. So what? I have never held back when threatened and am not about to start now.

I could say that it will be interesting to follow any repercussions to the Murdoch empire, but I believe that Rupert's swift amputation has taken much of the possible leverage the public could have used for greater responsibility. Loss of 200 jobs notwithstanding.

It is all about maintaining power.

So with whom does the buck stop?

Now it is possible that James Murdoch will face charges - but I am not going to hold my breath.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/08/james-murdoch-criminal-charges-phone-hacking

I agree with your position on this topic Ammonite.

There is some sad irony that those taxpayers in America who contributed to the bail out of the banks now find themselves evicted from their homes by those same banks.

Corporate responsibility is lacking but so is government leadership on this issue. The influence of large corporations on governments is far greater and the scales tipped against the ordinary citizen.

Too many issues to name but food security and safety is one area where government agencies, often headed by ex-corporate types with conflicts of interest (in the US) make decisions on food labelling, GM, food safety and vested interests in trading decisions.

Re-watching Food Inc. recently highlighted some of the worst cases of irresponsibility by some companies. The US government heavily subsidises the corn industry which has led to dumping of corn on countries like Mexico (Food Inc.) and ruined the once thriving corn livelihoods in Latin America. Similar pressure comes from logging companies, seed and pesticide companies who lobby governments into bullying other governments and organisations regardless of the impacts.

The ridiculous situation in the US where Monsanto can sue farmers and others where they believe the patent for GM seed has been 'stolen' when the neighbouring farmer has no control over his crops being contaminated by GM crop. The latest one is a seed cleaner who was taken to court by Monsanto for 'aiding' others to steal seed. It beggars belief.

Have most of us become complacent and accept this state of affairs as normal or do people just feel powerless to have any influence.

How do people mass together to ensure governments adhere to their mandate to represent the people in the best way possible - which may at times even mean kowtowing to corporations - but tipping the scales back to the balanced position does seem almost impossible.

Governments appear to think people are content enough as long as the middle class welfare keeps churning out to serve as distraction from some pretty irresponsible decisions by government and corporate goons.

Ammonite,

Any person in a position of “authority” also carries “responsibility” and “accountability”.

Absolutely nothing new there and you are stating a blinding glimpse of the obvious when you say “accountability and consequences” are the issue.

This is not semantics and has been the case in all hierarchical enterprises since year dot, well at least back to the ancient Egyptians and Chinese.

What you are really saying is why does our modern society NOT maintain this fundamental tenet? which is a very important and valid observation.

I then challenged your conditional characterization of “In all cases the people paid considerable incomes were not held responsible for their organizational practices and behaviors.”

Then “considerable incomes” becomes defined as “6 figures”. To which I might add, this nicely embraces absolutely any person with such authority.

Unless you embrace the same principal for all, your excellent thread is devalued by partisan interest in accusing only media and “big business” of such breaches.

Religious, political, commercial, industrial, scientific, sports, academic, media, charity and NGO management will all be in the “6 figure” salary bracket and are all bound by the same principles