John Ward September 2, 2011 The Murdochs' Blood Money

HACKGATE DAY 234: The fall and rise of Rupert & James Murdoch

“We’re in the money….”

The rises awarded by Rupert and James Murdoch to themselves are a blatant slap in the face for British Law.

As UK police arrested a 15th person yesterday in connection with the Newscorp Hackgate scandal, accounts filed in the US show that Chief Executive Rupert Murdoch’s total compensation rose by 47% to $33.3 million in the 2011 fiscal year. In what must have been one of the most humble days of his life, Rupert Murdoch boosted his own pay still further with an eye-watering $12.5 million bonus….and $8.5 million in stock awards.

Murdoch’s son James, who has been under pressure since the UK phone scandal erupted at Wapping-Liars-on-Thames (where he is the CEO, but cannot remember anything about the business) saw his total compensation rise by more than 73% to $17.9 million.

As he vernacular would have it, these people are taking the piss.

14Comments

Add yours

1

Tracksuit Dave (@TracksuitDave1) on September 24, 2011 at 12:23 am

Whilst you concentrate on the Euro Heist Bollox primarily can you spare a few lines for an update on Uncle Rupert & Family. As an aside Dowler brief Mark Lewis seemed 2 give Sky News first shot at the news that he had instructed US professional ambulance chasers to enter the fray. Whilst on TV he seemed pissed to me which I thought was a very good sign.

LikeLike
2

maxter on September 3, 2011 at 2:58 pm

At least its on your agenda and you are trying!

LikeLike
3

su on September 3, 2011 at 9:52 am

some delegation here:

enough of these public golden showerers.
i will sharpen the guillotine
someone needs to pluck the geese and warm the tar
and the tower – we are going to need access to it again.
the cops so corrupt, the press protecting them
let us ignore the legal system, do a citizens arrest
and lead them to the tower.
today.

anyone up for it?

LikeLike
4

Mac on September 3, 2011 at 9:27 am

I do understand your point BT and in many ways agree I just don’t think we should curtail the debate to include only the ‘isms’.
As for the point about the increases in regulatory compliance I think that has been shown to be what it was really about, exponentially increasing the numbers of compliance officers with scant regard to any sensible new regulation.

LikeLike
5

Nick Gligic on September 3, 2011 at 7:50 am

I think that the executive pay issue must be divorced from the hacking issue. The hacking issue affects the majority the executive pay should only be a matter for shareholders. That said though the problem is that the mechanisms that are supposed to control the markets and things like executive pay no longer work. The shareholders in the whole are part of the problem as huge blocks of shares are owned and controlled by banking institutions. They are all self serving. The biggest problem is that now we are faced with self correction in the market these buggers want us to bail them out and our governments bend over taking it up the arse passing on that pleasure to the taxpayer.

LikeLike
6

Bankrupt Taxpayer on September 3, 2011 at 7:48 am

Mac, you’re partly right …but many people popped up during the banking crises to demand that banks were taken over by government to bring an end to their casino games and plundering of the taxpayer purse. My own 93yo father was one of them (before he died) and he didn’t even think they should be compensated.

The real point I was making is that there are many examples of corrupt/greedy capitalism going on (banks and their casino games, corporate monopolies, News Intenational and their [insert whatever you like here] but we should be very wary of thinking that state ownership or control is the solution, as quite a lot of people do. The last govt already increased the cost of regulatory compliance to industry from £11 billion to £84 billion.

LikeLike
7

Bankrupt Taxpayer on September 3, 2011 at 7:37 am

Trying to avoid doing business with an organisation that you don’t like/trust is often more difficult than it seems at first pass.
– I detest the BBC and have long believed it’s an Establishment propaganda tool, charging us for the privilege. But how to boycott it?
– I don’t do business with Barclays Bank because I think they’re crooks.
How to avoid making a payment to someone who banks with them?
– Several other companies that I try to boycott but it’s difficult.

LikeLike
8

Mac on September 3, 2011 at 7:27 am

BT,
Now you are just using any situation to bang an anti-socialist drum! Extracting such a hypothetical result from blatant real life capitalist corruption would seem a tad excessive if not fanatical?

LikeLike
9

saucyboy on September 3, 2011 at 2:47 am

If you make the boycott decision and don’t buy sky tv, the sun, the times and other murdoch owned output, then why does it matter what the murdoch people earn?
The figures show that most couch jellies prefer to forget their moral ethics when it comes down to – actions speak louder than words.

LikeLike
10

rob on September 2, 2011 at 10:46 pm

Non executive directors are generally part of the circular motion of self serving members of the Directors Trade Union aka The Institute of Directors whose main object is to keep themselves and their fellow members ahead of the game i.e. a rubber stamp machine.

LikeLike
11

Bankrupt Taxpayer on September 2, 2011 at 10:40 pm

When blatant abuses of the capitalist economic system like this occur – and not forgetting the banks’ serious abuses too – and plenty of others, that people appear and demand that all these unruly outfits must be taken over by government ie nationalised to ensure they operate in the public interest. That is when the real corruption andf abuse starts.

LikeLike
12

william, on September 2, 2011 at 9:17 pm

And the non executive directors,who are in a majority on the directors ‘remuneration committee,in a public company where the founding family control well less than 30 percent of the share capital….

LikeLike
13

oldasiahand on September 2, 2011 at 8:23 pm

Gotta make hay while the sun shines!

LikeLike
14

rob on September 2, 2011 at 8:09 pm

That’s the reward for keeping it in “the box”. I think he might have meant coffin but then rewarding themselves for failure never did the bankers much harm, well individually of course. It’s everyone for them self.

LikeLike