The Core

>a long way to go yet I think

I think so, too. I read somewhere (wired?) that twitter has been responsible sustaining much of the pressure on the gov.  True?

Worth a watch:  http://www.rawstory.com/rawreplay/2011/07/actor-hugh-grant-confronts-news-of-the-world-editor-on-air/

blimey RC I thought Gurtie had appeared in the NOTW until I opened up the larger photo

>> twitter has been responsible...?

public opinion has been responsible, and its been very clear on twitter what public opinion is, but I wouldn't say that the twittersphere has achieved something which wouldn't have happened anyway, I think in this case people were so offended that social media didn't even fan the flames as much as it has with other things.

Facebook did (allegedly) have a direct input because the first company to say they'd donate their ad fee to charity rather than pay NOTW said it was a direct result of a customer suggestion on FB. Your take on that depends on how cynical you are I guess

>> thought Gurtie had appeared

my hair's not nearly that long Mick

I am surprised that anyone took NOTW seriously:  I thought it was sort of the equivalent to the National Enquirer in the US which is a trash tabloid newspaper that people know is a bunch of bunk.  People make fun of the Enquirer as crap...and its more of a joke than anything else.

So...and I understanding this correctly:  News of the World was considered a reputable newspaper by the majority of the public in the UK?

Not a reputable newspaper, but a well-read and powerful one. I'd compare it to something like the New York Post which Murdoch also owns. The Enquirer seems to me to be wholly made-up stories whereas a fair bit of what was in the NOTW was vaguely true but just trash. The current foreign secretary William Hague used to write for them so it did carry some weight.

Ed

Good stuff. Every Democrat should be all over this. They won't get a better chance to take down Fox News.