unsatisfactory, the collective amnesia. has been passed on to us, we refer to the nevelle email in there. when you were chief executive of news international at the time that report was published, did you read the report we published? yes, i did. i read a large majority of it. i particularly read the criticisms that were addressed to the company. i can only hope that from the evidence that you have heard from us today that we have really stepped up our investigation and, you know, that rupert and james murdoch have been here today being very open and hoffest with you as a committee. i was willing to come despite the fact that there are some
is the idea that anybody could intercept the voicemails of victims of crime. i think that s their overwhelming concern. there has been concern voiced over the closeness of the police and politicians and news of the world and news international. would you agree as a matter of fact? i have seen the news of the world has been singled out for that closeness. and i think if you were going to address it and you know this more and anyone on the committee because of your career as a journalist. it is wholly unfair in discussing the closeness of police and politicians with the media to single out the news of the world. it is a fact this has been a criticism, why it on your watch as chief executive of news international managed a triple whammy. you employed the former director
there are some thing here that don t stack up. we might not have any evidence. this is the sort of thing that s not quite right. did that prompt any activity on your part as chief executive of news international to say let s go back over this because there is something not right here. everyone at news international has great respect for parliament and for this committee. to be criticized by your report was something that we responded to, we looked at the report. about it was only when we had the information in december 2010 that we did something from it. you heard today from rupert murdoch who said this is the most humble day. we come before this committee to try to explain openly and honestly what happened. of course, we were very unhappy
proactively engage with those judicial inquiries and how we start to set a code of conduct and a code of ethics that we think and that it thinks is something that can both be a paragon for all of our newspapers but all of the industry, but also something that really has teeth and can hold the company to account. it s independently chaired, this management standards committee, and we think it s going to be a much better way to go in the future and we d like and we d like over the next six months and years to really be judged on the actions that the company takes to put that right and to put that in place. thank you. i d just like to say, if i may, that it doesn t take away at all from what we ve been saying about our apologies or our blame for anything, but this country does greatly benefit from having a competitive press and, therefore, having a very
he says he relies on his lieutenants, who would you trust? i think the newsroom, and any newspaper is based on trust. if you think about i m sure mr. ferry will agree with this. if you think about the way a story gets published, of course it s on trust. and you rely on the people that work for you to be to behave in a proper manner and you rely on the clarity of information that you were given at the time. so that is why i can be so absolute with the committee today about the interception of milly dowler s voice mail from my own personal view, again not commenting on what other people knew at the time. to really say who derives trust the whole newsroom and the whole basis of the newsroom is based on trust. for example, at the sun if trevor who is my political