Rupert Murdoch: A Personal Inquiry into his Ethics?

I’ve just moved to another place and just by impulse turned on the t.v. to see the Leveson Inquiry and in particular, Rupert Murdoch. I want to start this blog with some observations.

I noted he has aged significantly and he had a sad mouth. No news will report that as they will go for the politics and power. When he did smile it seemed unnatural to him. I sense he is a man who is thinking a great deal and not really enjoying life. I see Richard Branson by contrast here, a man who smiles easily and he says he is filled with joy when he wakes up.

The context of these observations is a room full of lawyers, Justice Leveson and the steady Robert Jay QC and live global media recording every word. Thus, he has to be careful what he says and the irony of this is that he is under the spotlight, the boot is on the other foot as they say. I felt it is a good experience for him as I doubt he would be questioned like this by anyone and made to deeply reflect on the discharging of his duties as Chairman of a global media empire and importantly questioning his ethics.

An amused Robert Jay QC detected discomfort in Murdoch when recounting the media scrum around him. He asked if it was appropriate, after a pause Rupert stated it is a game. The same can be said for the game of business across many playing fields. They are not called playing fields for no reason. It is the way it is played which is really the central question. Brings to mind the idea of umpires and rules to the game, which is really being aired through the inquiry. Indeed, the ethics of the game, is it a fair game? or is it loaded for one side to win with complete disregard for the other? The ‘other’ being those exposed by the media or slandered, used for gossip and jobs lost. Of course this is the real question. The inquiry is exploring in public view what is ethical and what is not. Do people know the difference or is it an open field where the ends justify the means?

Another interesting aspect for me was journalistic freedom. I found it interesting when the lawyer representing the National Union of Journalists raised that they had been locked out, in a sense, from News International. Thus journalist’s had no independent voice. Murdoch said the journalists were free to join if they want, they didn’t want to. I observed him tense when talking to this lawyer and his animosity towards the NUJ was visible. When raising the issue of bullying in News International it was stated that a journalist had nowhere to go. Murdoch said they could use the internal staff complaints system. He wasn’t able to see the importance of the independence of journalists. Moreover, the clause to allow journalistic freedom to refuse to do a story on ethical grounds was raised. Murdoch said he wouldn’t have an issue in contracts adding in the clause but it was clear he wanted nothing to do with the NUJ.

This animosity has a traditional history with management and unions and unfortunately there has not been many industrial cultures that see the benefit of having democracy in the workplace. What we have seen is dictatorial management practices of top-down where employees are not encouraged to speak up and are given tasks to fulfill. Increasingly these days job descriptions are loose and work hours are long and the power of employees at work is diminishing. Moreover, from the union perspective there have been unions with anti-management attitudes. I had some friends who were left wing unionists and admitted they had aggressive attitudes in the 1980’s but overtime those positions did change, more moved to the right. Increasingly unionists were wearing suits and ties as unions spread from manufacturing to the service sector. Although having said that the trend for unionism is in decline. The reality of this is that abuses can occur internally and staff have nowhere to go if they are unhappy. Internal processes will favour management as they are paid by management. So independence and a form of industrial democracy needs to be looked at, in my view.

Another interesting aspect of Murdoch’s testimonial was the many times he apologised about his lack of knowledge as Chairman and lack of interest in News of the World. It is difficult to know whether he is an incompetent manager or he is cleverly avoiding questions by stating ignorance. He has a team of lawyers advising him on how to navigate the inquiry. According to his testimony it appears he delegated to his management team and relied on the trust between them. However, the issue of a management culture was raised and how influential this was on journalists going for a story, hence the ends justifies the means. If there were strong codes of ethics, which it was admitted there were not, then journalists could be guided by what was considered as ethical and unethical behaviour.

In other business organisations the management are the cultivators of culture. They lead by example. I worked in 400 companies myself and it was clear when you were dealing with internal cultures that valued human resources, had high ethical standards and didn’t cut corners. Others of course did and I witnessed bullying many times. This is the nature of profit maximisation and competition. Rupert referred to competition on quite a few occasions and the friendly drink between blokes. It is a male culture, from my perspective as a female and the competition to be better, to achieve status, to gain bonuses is what drives them. I found women to be quite different in aspirations with more concern for relationships and in the study I did, they complained more if they thought something was wrong. The blokes go with the flow and fit in, keep their noses clean and say nothing. They don’t want to rock the boat. I have seen this many times. This is why ethics is important in all organisations, so that the level playing field is indeed level and ethics ensure people get a fair go, rather than favouring some over others and doing deals with a wink. The boys club is notorious for that. I noted when I worked in the UK there were boys clubs, particularly in the more elite professions such as law, politics, management etc. Moreover, the shift from traditional wealth to the nouvre rich, the new rich. Money does indeed talk.

So, in my view, the ethical issue is made more visible in the world of media, as we see the gossip splashed across the pages of tabloids, we see the lack of content in favour of sensation in order to increase circulation rather than informing the public. I posted in my previous blog a speech of J. F. Kennedy former US President in his speech to the media reminding them of their role to provide quality information to inform the public. This is of course what the public needs. Many read the tabloids because they are bored and on their way to work. I’ve been in many countries and it is the same story, they all read to avoid eye contact, to escape from the discomfort of living in a society where people don’t know or trust each other. That was clear in London for me. I clowned on the London Underground and I smile in recollection of the hiding, people burying themselves in books, papers or looking down. Anything but to look at the clown, as they feel uncomfortable and it is spontaneous they will draw attention to themselves or perhaps the clown will ask for money. That is how deeply disempowered they are. Thankfully for me, some kids were there with faces shining and I made a bee-line to play with them. I was not after money, I was seeking to bring joy. It was very interesting. I did the same thing in Bangkok and Russia. People do want to connect but they don’t know how as the numbers of people are so huge. They are not in small communities. So the newspapers are read to alleviate boredom and to try and relate to others at work. The content is just gossip and provides no nourishment for the soul of a person, where they feel they are learning and being informed about the world they live in.

Murdoch saw the vote of the people in circulation, I think if we did some real reseach into this we would find people are not that interested or inspired by the newspaper. That is why online circulations are increasing, people have more choice and they can find out information from a range of sources. So we are indeed witnessing the last days of mind control through the media and dumbing down populations through gossip and negative spin to feed the deep pain most people feel. We will move from this to more self determination where people start to deepen their interests and hunger for depth and content. I noted Murdoch’s respect for the publicly funded BBC, I would concur. We are not seeing better quality through profit motives, often it comes through public funding as it serves the public interest not that of the few. That of course is the secret to a media working for the common good.

We will discover more stories similar to the News Of The World drama as more and more truth surfaces about business dealings, political dealings and the myth of democracy. As a market analyst I always remember the lesson I learned after going through hundreds of transcripts from the public, there was common sense, and when we listen to the public fairly, you will find many of these social ills of corruption, sexual exploits, political witchhunts and so on, fade as the print surely will when exposed to the light of public inquiries. The phone tapping in truth tapped into the public desire for truth in reporting and created a empathetic experience for rupert Murdoch where he felt what it was like to be pursued by endless reporters and have his whole life exposed word for word, to find his privacy is lost and his reputation tarnished. That is karma returning, a universal law, and a powerful life lesson for him. He can go forward and learn from the illusion he lived in for a long time, and work for a media that serves society or he can retreat to privacy and feel the weight of defeat and humilitation. I sense he may wake up.

The truth always sets us free. Even Rupert Murdoch.