But this time about their own industry. Prime Minister David Cameron has asked a judge, Lord Brian
Leveson, to hold an inquiry into the oft-feared British press
and make recommendations for a new regulatory regime. This followed allegations that the News of the World, a
best-selling newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News
Corporation, had hacked the mobile phones of a string of
personalities in the news including a murdered schoolgirl and
paid money to the police for stories. One of Cameron’s predecessors, Tony Blair, famously attacked
Britain’s media as a “feral beast tearing people and reputations
to bits,” and some contrition was offered at the inquiry’s
opening debate. “We’ve been up to pretty bad behaviour throughout history.
It was fun” said Roy Greenslade, a former Daily Mirror editor
who now lectures on journalism at London’s City University. But less than an hour into the proceedings, it was Richard
Peppiatt, a tously-haired former reporter with one of Britain’s
most downmarket papers, the Daily Star, who stole the show with
a withering denunciation of tabloid journalism. In more than 900 stories for British popular papers, he told
the debate on the competitive pressures facing journalists: “I
can probably count on fingers and toes the number of times I was
genuinely telling the truth”. Peppiatt’s dramatic accusations, which were quickly tweeted
over the Internet, shattered the carefully crafted picture of
improved press standards painted by previous speaker Phil Hall,
who edited the News of the World from 1995 to 2000. “The publish-and-be-damned attitude has long since been
confined to the history books of Fleet Street,” Hall said
reassuringly, as some participants quietly muttered disbelief. Peppiatt was having none of it. Tabloid stories, he said, were ordered up from cowering
reporters by bullying editors to fit the newspaper’s
preconceived prejudices, regardless of the facts, under an
unwritten pact best described as “you tell us what we want to
hear and we won’t question too much your sources”. Editors of Britain’s best-selling newspapers, who fear the
Leveson inquiry heralds new press regulation which will cramp
their free-wheeling ways, struck back. Peppiatt’s “florid diatribe” was a “grotesque caricature of
the newspaper world”, fumed the former political editor of the
top-selling Sun newspaper, Trevor Kavanagh. A lawyer for the
Daily Express said the atmosphere described by Peppiatt was “not
a newsroom culture I recognise”. Earlier, Kavanagh admitted the popular press occasionally
erred but added: “You should see the stories we don’t print.”
“MEA CULPA” In a dramatic clash between editors that appeared to
reinforce concerns about tabloid standards, Greenslade
challenged former News of the World editor Hall to tell the
inquiry why Rupert Murdoch had sacked him from the paper. “Maybe Roy can tell us first how he fixed the spot-the-ball
competition when he edited the Daily Mirror,” retorted Hall, to
gasps from the audience. “It is an episode of journalism I feel absolutely terribly
sorry about….mea culpa, mea culpa,” bemoaned Greenslade,
admitting the lapse which critics said made it impossible for
anyone to win the 1 million pound prize on offer. The debate touched repeatedly on Fleet Street’s growing
obsession with the private lives of celebrities, ranging from
the late Princess Diana to adulterous footballers. The trend is
blamed by some press observers for a decline in standards but
seen by some editors as a good way to boost sales. “When Michael Jackson died, the Sun’s circulation went up by
326,000 copies in one day,” said Sun editor Dominic Mohan, who
is the paper’s former showbusiness reporter. “There is a public
appetite for celebrity journalism.” The noisy debate over tabloid ethics almost drowned out some
of the more sober voices calling for serious debate on the risks
to press freedom posed by over-intrusive regulation or the hard
financial numbers showing newspapers are a fast-dying industry. Alan Rusbridger, editor of Britain’s leading liberal daily
newspaper The Guardian, made an eloquent plea in a speech laden
with references to great political thinkers of the past like
Locke and Wilkes for Britain’s rulers not to forget free speech. “A free press is part of a larger right of free expression,”
said Rusbridger, whose newspaper exposed the phone-hacking
scandal, “- something to be jealously preserved and guarded,
regardless of the abuses of those freedoms by, or on behalf of,
a small number of people calling themselves journalists.” Veteran tabloid types, who grew up on Fleet Street mantras
such as “It’s never wrong for long” or “This story is too good
to check” muttered that all the fuss over tabloids was not new. Try the website gentlemenranters.com, one speaker suggested,
and you will see that not much has changed since the 1950s. The site features tales from the hard-drinking past of the
British newspaper trade, including a tale of one photographer
who died - shock horror - from a fall while going INTO a pub.
But this time about their own industry. Prime Minister David Cameron has asked a judge, Lord Brian
Leveson, to hold an inquiry into the oft-feared British press
and make recommendations for a new regulatory regime. This followed allegations that the News of the World, a
best-selling newspaper owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News
Corporation, had hacked the mobile phones of a string of
personalities in the news including a murdered schoolgirl and
paid money to the police for stories. One of Cameron’s predecessors, Tony Blair, famously attacked
Britain’s media as a “feral beast tearing people and reputations
to bits,” and some contrition was offered at the inquiry’s
opening debate. “We’ve been up to pretty bad behaviour throughout history.
It was fun” said Roy Greenslade, a former Daily Mirror editor
who now lectures on journalism at London’s City University. But less than an hour into the proceedings, it was Richard
Peppiatt, a tously-haired former reporter with one of Britain’s
most downmarket papers, the Daily Star, who stole the show with
a withering denunciation of tabloid journalism. In more than 900 stories for British popular papers, he told
the debate on the competitive pressures facing journalists: “I
can probably count on fingers and toes the number of times I was
genuinely telling the truth”. Peppiatt’s dramatic accusations, which were quickly tweeted
over the Internet, shattered the carefully crafted picture of
improved press standards painted by previous speaker Phil Hall,
who edited the News of the World from 1995 to 2000. “The publish-and-be-damned attitude has long since been
confined to the history books of Fleet Street,” Hall said
reassuringly, as some participants quietly muttered disbelief. Peppiatt was having none of it. Tabloid stories, he said, were ordered up from cowering
reporters by bullying editors to fit the newspaper’s
preconceived prejudices, regardless of the facts, under an
unwritten pact best described as “you tell us what we want to
hear and we won’t question too much your sources”. Editors of Britain’s best-selling newspapers, who fear the
Leveson inquiry heralds new press regulation which will cramp
their free-wheeling ways, struck back. Peppiatt’s “florid diatribe” was a “grotesque caricature of
the newspaper world”, fumed the former political editor of the
top-selling Sun newspaper, Trevor Kavanagh. A lawyer for the
Daily Express said the atmosphere described by Peppiatt was “not
a newsroom culture I recognise”. Earlier, Kavanagh admitted the popular press occasionally
erred but added: “You should see the stories we don’t print.”
“MEA CULPA” In a dramatic clash between editors that appeared to
reinforce concerns about tabloid standards, Greenslade
challenged former News of the World editor Hall to tell the
inquiry why Rupert Murdoch had sacked him from the paper. “Maybe Roy can tell us first how he fixed the spot-the-ball
competition when he edited the Daily Mirror,” retorted Hall, to
gasps from the audience. “It is an episode of journalism I feel absolutely terribly
sorry about….mea culpa, mea culpa,” bemoaned Greenslade,
admitting the lapse which critics said made it impossible for
anyone to win the 1 million pound prize on offer. The debate touched repeatedly on Fleet Street’s growing
obsession with the private lives of celebrities, ranging from
the late Princess Diana to adulterous footballers. The trend is
blamed by some press observers for a decline in standards but
seen by some editors as a good way to boost sales. “When Michael Jackson died, the Sun’s circulation went up by
326,000 copies in one day,” said Sun editor Dominic Mohan, who
is the paper’s former showbusiness reporter. “There is a public
appetite for celebrity journalism.” The noisy debate over tabloid ethics almost drowned out some
of the more sober voices calling for serious debate on the risks
to press freedom posed by over-intrusive regulation or the hard
financial numbers showing newspapers are a fast-dying industry. Alan Rusbridger, editor of Britain’s leading liberal daily
newspaper The Guardian, made an eloquent plea in a speech laden
with references to great political thinkers of the past like
Locke and Wilkes for Britain’s rulers not to forget free speech. “A free press is part of a larger right of free expression,”
said Rusbridger, whose newspaper exposed the phone-hacking
scandal, “- something to be jealously preserved and guarded,
regardless of the abuses of those freedoms by, or on behalf of,
a small number of people calling themselves journalists.” Veteran tabloid types, who grew up on Fleet Street mantras
such as “It’s never wrong for long” or “This story is too good
to check” muttered that all the fuss over tabloids was not new. Try the website gentlemenranters.com, one speaker suggested,
and you will see that not much has changed since the 1950s. The site features tales from the hard-drinking past of the
British newspaper trade, including a tale of one photographer
who died - shock horror - from a fall while going INTO a pub.
A second ship’s officer appeared in court in connection with the running aground of the Liberian-flagged Rena 12 nautical miles off Tauranga on the east coast of New Zealand’s North Island.Officials say that eight days after the accident, large splits have opened up down the middle of its hull of the vessel, which has lost up to 300 tonnes of heavy, thick, toxic fuel.Salvage teams took advantage of an easing in high winds and heavy swells to clamber back on board the 47,230-tonne Rena.”They will try to get a feel for how stable she is, what has changed, what’s going on out there, is she moving around much,” Matt Watson of Svitzer Salvage told Radio NZ.He said the teams would also see if the ship’s systems were working to allow a resumption of the pumping of fuel oil from tanks in the stern.The second officer, responsible for navigation at the time the Rena struck the reef, was charged with “operating a vessel in a manner causing unnecessary danger or risk.”The 37-year-old Philippine national was remanded without plea on bail. The ship’s captain appeared on the same charge and was also bailed on Wednesday. The charge carries a maximum fine of NZ$10,000 ($7,800) or 12 months in prison.Three tugs have been trying to hold the 236-meter (775-foot) ship on the reef and stop the stern breaking away. Authorities said an aerial inspection indicated the ship had settled further on the reef. Cracks in the hull do not appear to have worsened.CONTAINERS LOSTMore containers had fallen into heaving seas from the ship, which is listing at about 20 degrees. Eighty eight of the 1,368 containers have been lost and authorities said one was carrying ferrosilicon, a hazardous substance which can explode on contact with water.Police patrolled beaches to stop any looting of containers. One broken container had scattered foam insulation and hamburger meat patties all over the beach.Debris and oil have been seen inside Tauranga harbor, the country’s biggest export port, but operations were unaffected.More than 50 tonnes of oil have been recovered from 25 km (16 miles) of long, golden beaches, a magnet for surfers. However, each high tide was washing more on the beaches.”Our focus is on recovering oil from wherever we find it and we will go in day by day until this is over,” said Maritime NZ spokesman Nick Quinn.Hundreds of residents ignored warnings to stay away from the beaches and joined official clean up teams, including soldiers, to scrape up clumps of fuel oil, some as large as dinner trays, into plastic bags and large bins.Booms placed over some harbor entrances appeared to have kept oil out of wetland and wildlife habitats, but more than 200 dead seabirds have been recovered and teams of naturalists have scrubbed and treated scores more for oil contamination.
By Nick BrownOct 11 (Reuters) - Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc
accused JPMorgan Chase , its former banker, of mishandling
the sale of more than $27 billion worth of securities as Lehman
was collapsing in 2008.Lehman, in court papers made public on Tuesday, lobbed
myriad allegations at the bank as part of the companies’
ongoing dispute in Lehman’s bankruptcy proceeding.Lehman painted an unflattering picture of JPMorgan’s methods
for selling certain securities held as collateral for facilitating
repurchase deals for Lehman’s U.S. brokerage, Lehman Brothers Inc
(LBI).A spokesman for JPMorgan declined to comment. A lawyer for the
bank did not return a call seeking comment.In court documents filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in
Manhattan, Lehman said JPMorgan traders made improper profits
on the sales by “flipping” securities — selling them to
themselves at low prices and reselling to third parties at
higher prices, Lehman said.Lehman is hoping to avoid or reduce a $6.3 billion claim from
JPMorgan related to the securities.JPMorgan demanded roughly that sum from Lehman to help cover
$25 billion in losses it incurred through its role in the LBI
repurchase deals, saying the securities alone did not generate
enough cash to make it whole.But Lehman said the securities had a market value of more than
$27 billion, and would have covered JPMorgan’s losses if not for
JPMorgan’s improper sale process.”Perhaps because JPMorgan believed it could look to the
extra LBHI collateral it held as a ‘cushion,’ JPMorgan rushed
to liquidate the LBI collateral without any procedures to
ensure it was sold at a fair market price,” Lehman said in the
filing.Lehman, in the court papers, said JPMorgan dubbed the
liquidation process “Project Tassimo” in honor of one JPMorgan
employee’s coffee maker. The project was assigned to JPMorgan’s
“Special Situations Group,” whose members had little to no actual
experience liquidating collateral, Lehman said.The bank incentivized employees to make quick deals on the
securities rather than good ones by refusing to compensate its
traders, Lehman said. At the same time, it failed to
effectively regulate traders who sought their own profits by
flipping securities, Lehman said.JPMorgan also did not set a formal floor for prices, saying
only that bidders who offered a “fraction of a cent” should not
be considered, according to Lehman’s argument.Details of the filing had been redacted when it was first
filed in August. The parties disagreed about whether the
information should be made public, with Lehman filing a motion to
unseal.JPMorgan never responded to the motion. Lehman filed its
unredacted motion on Tuesday.The Lehman bankruptcy is In re Lehman Brothers Holdings
Inc, in the same court, No. 08-13555.
