Murdoch’s defense
by digby
This piece by Nick Davies on the Murdoch testimony yesterday is fascinating. He points out that on display were two separate tracks — the PR and legal defenses. This is always interesting because often in these cases, the two wind up being at odds. So far, they seem to be working in tandem.
The foundation stone of the PR strategy was humble apology. James Murdoch interrupted his first answer to say how sorry he was, how great his regret was. Rupert Murdoch interrupted his son’s apology to make his own. “This is the most humble day of my life,” he said. Twice. PR consultants around the planet would spot the soundbite there, uttered by Mr Murdoch but written surely by an expert.
They continued to apologise at all available intervals. Rupert, in particular, volunteered that he had been absolutely shocked, appalled and ashamed to hear of the hacking of the phone of Milly Dowler. This, in turn, proved to be part of a wider strategy – a non-aggression pact with everyone. The MPs on the committee; their tormentors on the Guardian; the lawyers who have hauled them through the courts: none were to be attacked. Murdoch Sr sat with head bowed and his hands clasped. Murdoch Jr – whose temper is globally famous – was a model of deference and courtesy…
But behind that gloss, there was an intensely serious and carefully organised defence. They allowed some moral blame to get through – hence the humility – but at all costs they had to repel anything that looked remotely like criminal responsibility.
For Rupert Murdoch, this was simple. Essentially, he worked too high up the ladder to see the ground. He had 52,000 employees, and the News of the World accounted for less than 1% of News Corp, he explained. Twice.
[…]
For James Murdoch, the defence was more complex. He was not so high up the ladder and was specifically responsible for minding the family business in the region which included the UK. He took a chronological approach, using a different blockade for each phase, to separate himself from culpability.
Read the whole thing, it’s really interesting.
Here in the US we call Rupert’s strategy the “Ken Lay” defense, which amounts to “I didn’t know nothin’ about anythin'” which has always brought to mind a big question for me: if they didn’t know anything about what was going on in their companies, why in the hell were they paid so much money? It should, by all rights, inspire some sort of re-evaluation of CEO pay if nothing else.
It’s hard to know if either of them will face criminal charges, but it’s clear their lawyers aren’t taking any chances. As for the PR, I’d have to say they did well yesterday. I only saw the highlights of the testimony, but between the pie incident (which made Murdoch look like a vulnerable elderly man rather than the rapacious snake he actually is) and their apology chorus, they came off looking pretty good.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Rupert nodding off wasn’t part of the strategy. (Look for him to show up in his pajamas next time.) And it all works nicely with the criminal defense strategy that Rupert had no idea what was going on around him.
James may be in bigger trouble.
.