Stephen Foley: Murdoch keeps the job he shouldn't have got
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.Outlook It always seemed unlikely that the BSkyB board would push James Murdoch from his position as chairman, despite the furore that surrounds him. The good corporate governance boat sailed when they appointed him in the first place, so they ought to stick by him now on a principle that he is innocent of any complicity in the phone hacking cover-up unless and until proved otherwise.
Ironically, he will probably be moderately more effective as chairman now that the News Corp bid has gone away and he doesn't have to recuse himself from half the boardroom discussions.
It remains the case, though, that Mr Murdoch's appointment flouted provisions of the Combined Code, the bar on chief executives moving up to chairman (too clubby) and on a chairman having ties to a major shareholder (far, far too clubby). It is beyond time the Code's principle of "comply or explain" is changed. Just comply.
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments