No, it's not Dial M for Murder

Writers Tom Watson and Martin Hickman couldn't have selected a better title than Dial M for Murdoch, borrowing from Alfred Hitchcock, to accentuate the aura of the bizarre and the uncanny that surround Rupert Murdoch when it comes to owning and using media, and becoming a billionaire in the process. The media Moghul has hit the headlines himself many times for creating news of sorts and continues to do so. Starting as the owner of a small Australian newspaper, this wayward genius soon went on a frenzy of owning some of the large media establishments across the UK and the USA. He had the Midas touch to say the least. He has done everything required to own media houses, one after another, and has done everything to make them grow and keep them running. In the process he even allowed some of his fervent deputies to go for unconventional ways of collecting news thereby giving birth to some scandals of colossal proportion that are now parts of history. If we read some of the paragraphs from the book we'll have a clear idea of what Rupert Murdoch was and how he operated to create his empire. 

A paragraph in the preface of the book says:  "This book tries to explain how a particular global media company works: how it used its huge power to bully, intimidate and to cover up, and how its exposure has changed the way we look at our politicians, our police service and our press. Some political 'friends' have tried to portray the hacking and bribery which has exposed the workings of News Corporation as part of the price you pay for good tabloid journalism. They're wrong. Of course, tabloids sometimes get out of hand, but this is not (at least, not much) a story of harmless mischief, of reporters in false moustaches and rollicking exposes of hypocrites. It is not just the famous and wealthy who have been damaged, but ordinary decent people who happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time." 

Over the decades he earned the reputation of having used his power and powerful sources to manipulate news, to tap into people's phones, to intimidate people, politicians, to influence the administration and so on. But finally "he had been hauled before a parliamentary committee to do something peculiar for him: explain himself. In a single tumultuous fortnight, the global business he had accumulated over sixty bustling years had fallen into a deep crisis. His moralizing tabloid newspaper, the News of the World, had been caught systematically and illegally spying on the rich, the powerful and the famous. For years, his British executives had covered up its crimes. They had destroyed evidence, run smear campaigns, lied to Parliament and threatened and intimidated journalists, lawyers and politicians. Despite their efforts, the truth about the 'dark arts' of newsgathering at Murdoch's UK newspaper empire, New International, had slowly surfaced."

The list of excesses done by Murdoch and his gang seems like a never ending one. He used corrupt police officers and public officials to obtain private phone numbers, emails, vehicle registrations, and tax, income, employment and medical records. He however did not target the rich only. It has been said that even "the grieving and even the dead could be swept into the sights of his clandestine news-gatherers." Here is a poignant tale of what he could do to get his hands on news. Reportedly, on 4 July 2011, the News of the World gave birth to a very big scandal. It had hacked into the voicemails of a missing 13-year-old schoolgirl, and also those of parents of murdered children and survivors of terrorist bombings. It caused national revulsion." 

What was the reaction from the Murdoch camp? As usual Murdoch made all efforts to get out of trouble, but this time he had little luck. The outpouring of disgust was so intense that "Britain's political leaders, for so long servile to the Australian tycoon who took US citizenship in 1985, rose up against him and opposed his biggest ever business deal, the intended takeover of the BSkyB TV network, from which he was forced to withdraw." Thus wrote Watson and Hickman.  

What was the cost of such scandal? Let us see what the writers of the book have to say: "As the scandal swirled around Britain and the world, it cost Murdoch tens of millions of pounds, ruined the reputations of several of his most trusted lieutenants, and damaged the wider press, police, prosecutors and UK government. In London, the Prime Minister, David Cameron, announced a judge-led inquiry to investigate the delinquency of British newspapers. In the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation launched an investigation into the possible hacking of the victims of the 9/11 terrorist attacks. Shares in Murdoch's multimedia conglomerate, moored in a black skyscraper in New York, fell 19 per cent, wiping $10 billion from its value. Commentators began whispering that the octogenarian billionaire might be deposed and his quick-tempered son James might never inherit the crown. Shareholders might even force the sale of his British papers. In all his years in business -- mostly of breakneck expansion -- these were the heaviest blows to rain down upon Rupert Murdoch." 

Yes, it was costly enough, to see $10 billion disappearing in thin air is no light matter. 

Murdoch and his son were summoned to appear before a Parliamentary committee to defend their case. It was not something that Murdoch was used to doing in his long, long business career. The father and son were apparently humble and apologetic, but also 'defiant.'  They insisted they had not known about the crimes committed behind their back. They tried to impress the committee members by explaining what a tiny part the News of the World played in their media group. Murdoch said, "My company has 52,000 employees. I have led it for fifty-seven years and I have made my share of mistakes. I have lived in many countries, employed thousands of honest and hard-working journalists, owned nearly 200 newspapers."  It is at this point, when asked who did he blame for his tabloid's excesses and the loss of the BSkyB bid, Rupert Murdoch blamed his rivals and said, "They caught us with dirty hands and built the hysteria around it."

While giving an account of his worth Watson and Hickman wrote: "At the start of 2011, I billion people daily digested his products -- books, newspapers, magazines, TV shows and films -- and News Corporation, his holding company, had annual sales of $33 billion. His passion was not money, though, but business itself. He loved the piratical thrill of takeovers -- the brinkmanship, the deal-making, the constant expansion -- and the power. Both came most intoxicatingly in ink. In Britain, he had come to control 40 per cent of national newspaper circulation -- making him the most important proprietor in politics -- through his ownership of the best-selling Sunday paper the News of the World and The Daily Sun, and their quality stablemates The Times and The Sunday Times. In his native Australia his dominance was greater still: 70 per cent of the newspaper market; while in his adopted United States, through the New York Post, the Wall Street Journal and the most-watched cable news outlet, Fox News, Murdoch exerted a strong pull on American politics."

In his 90s, Rupert Murdoch "ruled over a media business mightier than any other in history." A biographer wrote about him, "The Man Who Owns the News." 

By all accounts Dial M for Murdoch is an interesting book to have around one's bedside.    

The reviewer is Special Supplements Editor, The Daily Star. He can be reached at shahnoorwahid@yahoo.co.uk