Deal Or No Deal: the Murdoch factor and our democratic deficit | openDemocracy

by peterjukes

And perhaps this is the most surprising thing about the issue of a quasi-judicial approach: News Corp just didnt get it. They could not believe that their standard tactic of all-out political pressure was not just misguided, but counter-productive. Time after time they were told that it was pointless lobbying every Lib Dem they could find in the hope of influencing Vince Cable, and that Vince was making a personal decision, not a political decision.  They went right on lobbying, progressively alienating everyone they approached. Michel himself reported to James Murdoch that “there was absolutely no upside” ↑ in using anyone from News International publishers of the News of the World and The Sun to lobby: yet the chairman and chief executive of NI Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks continued to lobby like mad.It was surprising that the astute lawyers inside News Corp – who were copied on so many of the Michel emails – did not warn him that he was in danger of undermining the validity of the quasi-judicial process, such that it might be open to judicial review if the outcome were favourable to News Corp. Smith warned Michel, immediately after Hunt was put in charge of the plurality review, against giving News Corps opponents a chance to attack the fairness of the process. But the legal department dog failed to bark, and the demented behaviour Michel admitted he was a texting addict continued on its self-destructive course.

via Deal Or No Deal: the Murdoch factor and our democratic deficit | openDemocracy.