The Telegraph revealed last week that the Metropolitan Police is now treating News UK, the newspaper corporation, as a corporate suspect in its investigations of alleged hacking and bribery at the News of the World.
...
...However, the potential case would “go away” altogether if the company News UK ceased to exist, in the same way as the CPS cannot press charges against a person who has died.
Neil Chenoweth suggests that this is nonsense.
News Corp & 21st Fox are separate companies they can't protect each other without shareholder suit
This is really about saving Rupert Murdoch's job.
For while Murdoch himself is not the target, the consequences of charging News International as opposed to charging News International directors including Rupert Murdoch himself may be indistinguishable—they would both spell the end of his control of at least the greater part of his split empire, 21st Century Fox.
Currently the odds seem to be against either of these things happening, but Murdoch must bitterly regret the comments he made to Sun journalists in March.
Who said it was meant to be journalism? It's my blog on computing. I write what I like. If you don't like it you can get your money back when you leave. If you want journalism then you shouldn't start from here.
Sorry you didn't like the article. I have written a few other pieces on UC on the blog and maybe they make it clearer (or maybe not! De gustibus non est disputandum).
For background in late 2010 the DWP announced at an Institute of Government seminar in Whitehall (that I attended) that they would use "agile" to deliver UC. The seminar was a real Emperor's New Clothes affair as lots of small development companies were in the room and they all thought/hoped they'd get a chunk of the action - nobody (including me - I was just a lowly computer science MSc student) dared to say what seemed obvious to me - that this was a massive mission criticial project that it was a mistake to use an experimental (for the government) development methodology on to meet a political - as opposed to evidence - defined timetable on.
My gripe is not with agile per se - strip away the corporate hoopla and it seems to make a lot of sense to me. My fear is that "agile" was seized upon by politicians who know nothing about software development as a way of solving their problems and defining themselves positively against the previous Labour government (declaration of interest: I worked in a political role for that government).
He has not acquired a fortune; the fortune has acquired him. -- Bion