A deathly silence in Bangkok

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

Hacked To Death.

nary a word..not a peep from Andrew Drummond on the News of The World.

Why do I get the feeling that you don't like Mr..Drummond?

[Thai Dyed]

Good to see you back Lunchtime, and in top form at that!
I like that "Glitter's Revenge". I like that very much indeed.

[Khor tose]

Well if you aren't hearing from him in Bangkok, he is alive and well and just wrote this article for Chiang Mai City Life. Basically it is a story of all of his accomplishments and trips up North. No mention of Ms Brooks or the News International.

http://www.chiangmainews.com/ecmn/viewfa.php?id=3228

Not a bad photo of him.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

Why do I get the feeling that you don't like Mr..Drummond?

the feeling is mutual..he had a go at me on his blog ! :glasses7:

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

Mr Andrew Drummond quite rightly tells a sordid tale on his blog about the shocking News of The World and the awful things they asked him to do which eh declined.
his banner though there has been a change from a fortnight ago..

[thonglor55]

Drummond is a great example of why the British public now find these hacks to be total hypocrits.Speaking of hypocrisy, can anyone explain why it's OK for the Grauniad to publish material obtained illegally via Wikileaks but not OK for NoTW to publish material obtained illegally by phone hacks??

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

Drummond is a great example of why the British public now find these hacks to be total hypocrits.Speaking of hypocrisy, can anyone explain why it's OK for the Grauniad to publish material obtained illegally via Wikileaks but not OK for NoTW to publish material obtained illegally by phone hacks??

It's not a bad question and there probably is no difference !

however the hacking by the News Of The World was illegal and commissioned by them..ie : they commissioned a crime.

The Guardian would say it received Wikileaks in a 'brown paper bag' as Julian Assange says..drop your material to us..we don;t assist in getting it !

in the end..tell it to the judge !

...Speaking of hypocrisy, can anyone explain why it's OK for the Grauniad to publish material obtained illegally via Wikileaks but not OK for NoTW to publish material obtained illegally by phone hacks??

Yes, the Guardian was publishing material which they deemed to be "in the public interest"(any polls showed many agreed) - not hacking into the mobile telephone of a murdered child, deleting voicemails (thus makng the parents believe the child was still alive), and generally interfering in the police investigation of that case.
It is that particular case and the public reaction to it which forced Murdoch to pull the plug - not the general hacking of celebrities and politicians, about which I suspect he doesn't give two hoots.

To second O'Booze's observation - I too noticed that Mr Drummond (or Saint Andrew as he is known on SGT) has (finally) removed the NOTW strapline from his site.
In a new article, he claims he walked out of NOTW, disgusted, 25yrs ago.
Quite why he went on to advertise their name on the front page of his website, every day for years, remains a mystery. :rolling:

[thonglor55]

It is that particular case and the public reaction to it which forced Murdoch to pull the plug.I suspect that the polticians have found a bandwagon on which to jump so as to rid themselves of someone they don't have the guts to stand up to under other circumstances. "Kiddies" is always a popular topic with a gullible and sentimental public, whether it's sick kiddies, dying kiddies or kiddy-fiddlers.

[thonglor55]

I see the Murdochs are saying they're ashamed and embarassed. My guess is the words they're leaving out are "that we were found out". Much as I despise the politics of Murdochs and their media outlets such as Fox News, reporters who don't do what it takes to find and break a story simply aren't doing their job. The problem with many "journalists" today is that they think "the story" is re-hashing whatever press release lands in their Inbox unquestioningly.

Another problem with many "journalists" today is that they mistake sensationalism for news.

:occasion9:

[thonglor55]

Another problem with many "journalists" today is that they mistake sensationalism for news.Unfortunately that's very much the Murdoch philosophy - "news" = "entertainment" is, I believe, an equation Murdoch has explicitly made.

[Lunchtime O'Booze]

...Speaking of hypocrisy, can anyone explain why it's OK for the Grauniad to publish material obtained illegally via Wikileaks but not OK for NoTW to publish material obtained illegally by phone hacks??

Yes, the Guardian was publishing material which they deemed to be "in the public interest"(any polls showed many agreed) - not hacking into the mobile telephone of a murdered child, deleting voicemails (thus makng the parents believe the child was still alive), and generally interfering in the police investigation of that case.
It is that particular case and the public reaction to it which forced Murdoch to pull the plug - not the general hacking of celebrities and politicians, about which I suspect he doesn't give two hoots.

To second O'Booze's observation - I too noticed that Mr Drummond (or Saint Andrew as he is known on SGT) has (finally) removed the NOTW strapline from his site.
In a new article, he claims he walked out of NOTW, disgusted, 25yrs ago.
Quite why he went on to advertise their name on the front page of his website, every day for years, remains a mystery. :rolling:He's removed more than the News of The World banner , The Sun and The Daily Mirror have vanished !..perhaps his site was hacked.. :rolling:

His front page tale of how he left the disgusting rag 25 years ago and never went back is somewhat undone by his own claims on the site of how he was hired by the News of The World to track Garry Glitter (and why ?..at that stage GG was just a man who had left prison)


Drummond is typical gutte rag hack who re-writes the storyline...as in the story mentioned above...he wonders what ';went wrong' at the News of the Screws over the past few years...WRONG..the illegality started over 10 years ago long before Drummond was still pedaling smut to them.

Like all creeps he picks on only small Thai targets as well..knowing full well if he wrote about the really heacvy Thai criminals he wouldn't last one week..alive.

anyone who worked on Fleet Street had to be deaf, dumb and blind not to know about hacking..it was an open secret (which is why you will be seeing not one or two but dozens of reptiles and police going to jail)

[Marsilius]

The problem with many "journalists" today is that they think "the story" is re-hashing whatever press release lands in their Inbox unquestioningly.

You are too generous to them! Having worked in PR for many years, I can assure you that very many local media outlets don't even bother with the rehashing bit but merely print word-for-word what we send them. They rely on the fact that if you live in place X and buy the X Gazette, you won't be interested in buying another place's Y News and so won't spot that the very same story appears in both, even though the names of different individual "authors" are attached to each one.

Of course, national media outlets - available for purchase everywhere and so able to be compared - do, for the sake of their own credibility, make the effort to greater or lesser extents of rewriting what we send them...