Abstract

 
 

References (60)



 


 



Press ‘Omerta’: How Newspapers’ Failure to Report the Phone Hacking Scandal Exposed the Limitations of Media Accountability


Daniel Bennett


War Studies Department, King's College London

Judith Townend


Centre for Law, Justice and Journalism, City University London

February 7, 2012

THE PHONE HACKING SCANDAL: JOURNALISM ON TRIAL, Bury St Edmunds: Abramis, January 2012

Abstract:     
Explanations for the non-reporting of the phone hacking scandal need to delve beyond simplistic, if valid, assertions of industry cover-up. In order to explain why the majority of national newspapers failed to regard phone hacking as newsworthy, it is necessary to unpick a tangled web of contributing factors. This book chapter explores competing professional, political and commercial interests; the failure of other organisations – particularly the Metropolitan Police – to investigate the matter thoroughly; and the intimidating power of News International.

Number of Pages in PDF File: 18

Keywords: journalism, phone hacking, accountability, press, news, newsworthiness, news values, sources, Metropolitan Police, News International, News of the World

JEL Classification: L82

Accepted Paper Series


Download This Paper

Date posted: February 10, 2012  

Suggested Citation

Bennett, Daniel and Townend, Judith, Press ‘Omerta’: How Newspapers’ Failure to Report the Phone Hacking Scandal Exposed the Limitations of Media Accountability (February 7, 2012). THE PHONE HACKING SCANDAL: JOURNALISM ON TRIAL, Bury St Edmunds: Abramis, January 2012. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2000768

Contact Information

Daniel Bennett (Contact Author)
War Studies Department, King's College London ( email )
United Kingdom
Judith Townend
Centre for Law, Justice and Journalism, City University London ( email )
Northampton Square
London, EC1V OHB
United Kingdom
HOME PAGE: http://city.ac.uk/lawjusticejournalism
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 857
Downloads: 126
Download Rank: 114,673
References:  60

© 2013 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was processed by apollo5 in 0.359 seconds