@BarnabyEdwards....Louise Mensch [defends Rupert Murdoch [who owns HarperCollins [who publish Tilly Bagshawe [whose sister is Louise Mensch. #SmallWorld

He could lose a (presumably) lucrative position with News Corp.

News Corp could lose BSkyB, which would deplete the value of his shareholding.

He and / or NewsCorp could potentially suffer significant financial loss. Could NewsCorp / its shareholders sue the UK government if this report causes them to lose their licence?

No.
The question you need to ask is if this only went as far as the NoTW why on earth are the committee stating that Rups best mate and right hand man for decades has mislead them?
He doesn't work for NoTW he is employed rather higher up.

Rups has no one to blame but himself.
He has admitted he is at fault at Leveson, So how can he then say that the committee don't have a point?

He can't cause they do.

But the report includes:

"Tory MPs objected specifically to the line branding Mr Murdoch "not fit", with one, Philip Davies, telling a press conference the committee had seen "absolutely no evidence" to endorse such a "completely ludicrous" conclusion."

I wonder why? Because from all the evidence that I've seen he clearly isn't fit to run an international company. And he certainly shouldn't be given full control of BskyB. I don't suppose it's possible to take away from him that bit that he already owns, but he certainly shouldn't be allowwed to control any more of it.
Let's be honest, in 2009 James Murdoch criticised the BBC and Offcom. Shortly afterwards oily Dave stood up and said "me too" and lo and behold suddenly the Sun is backing the Tories.
All the decisions which have hamstrung the Beeb since the Tories came to power have been taken by Hunt, and Hunt is known to be pro Murdoch. All Hunt's denials and "it was my special adviser's fault" are rubbish. Special advisers do as their boss instructs them - that's what they are there for.
I reckon Cameron assured Rupert before the election that he was a shoo in to get the licence. If the information about Newscorp's antics with phone hacking and squaring the police hadn't come to light in the meantime it's be a done deal by now and our broadcast media would be dominated by Rupert, with the Beeb and Channel 4 reduced to a similar status to US's public broadcaster. I hope we've had a lucky escape.

All that's as may be. The issue is whether there was sufficent HARD EVIDENCE available to the Committee to form that opinion of RM personally.The Tories on it think not. The BBC report offers nothing to suggest there was. It seems all to be subjective, hearsay and (bias?) opinion. Doesn't seem much that would stand up in Court - unless they are not disclosing certain documented facts at this stage (although, given the stance of the Tory members, it would appear not).

It's irrelevant how things look, these people (MPs) should exercise their judgement / power (such as it is) thoughtfully and fairly. I think they could already have prejudiced the Ofcom enquiry, which may prove counter-productive to them (a la Vince Cable previously). I still think we're going to get a whitewash out of all this. The fact that Myler, et al are coming in for stick suggests that the Murdochs side of things is either true or being sided with.

But the reasons why the Tories won't criticise Rupert are crystal clear, they still hope that he'll be the guy to slay that evil dragon the Beeb, which they all hate with a passion.

the commitee are protected by parliamentary privileged. Furthermore any assessment of witness evidence is subjective, you hear what the witness has to say weigh that against other evidence you hear and reach a judgement. The commitee were perfectly entitled the judgment they reached and make the comments they did. Murdoch has overseen an organisation which has comitted criminal acts on an industrial scale, covered it up and then misled parliament. Id love to see uncle rupert sue, although he has had a good go at painting himself the victim so far.

Condom head cameron must be despairing that the fragrant miss mensch and her fellow brown nose tories voted agaisnt the reports conclusions. They have tied the tories ever closer to the mafia that is News international.

This feels just like Watergate and the more it goes on the higher this stink is climbing. It seems that its is inevitably going to end up at the door of number ten. I wouldnt be suprised if Coulson was using hacked info from opposition politicians to camerons benefit

Without wanting to be over-picky, I'm guessing that special advisers are there to advise.

The clue is in the title.

It doesn't matter it got passed by the majority or it wouldn't have been included.
So once again the naswer is NO

I reckon Mensch must've been the winning bidder for Hunt's News International cheerleader uniform, once he'd put it on eBay. She'll be lining up to take over from Kay Burley when she loses her seat in 2015. It won't be too hard to swing a majority of 1,900 back to Labour and she definitely won't be offered a safer seat, she's seen as one of Cameron's chicks complete with all the toxic baggage

Louise Mensch. #SmallWorld

Louise Mensch is also Louise Bagshawe, herself a far more prolific author than her sister Tilly. Her publisher is Headline, now owned by WH Smith. Does this fit into the jigsaw?

But who do they advise? Are they "special" because they do not advise their ministers, which would be quite usual and even ordinary, but rather people their ministers wish to advise?

Not sure TBH I have had a quick look and I can't see a connection is there one?
But you could still argue that both her and Tom Watson shouldn't have been anywhere near the comittee (sp).

2 Murdoch apologists on Newsnight. It's like the last round of Fighting Talk

I do find it strange that a MP who was part of this paper being released (Mensch) can be allowed to appear everywhere to defend Murdoch so strongly.

I also love the line 'Neither of the Murdoch's can be accused of misleading the committee'
Its not hard when they just repeated 'I can't remember' or 'I can't answer that as it is an ongoing case'.

NOt according to Ed Balls, who was a special adviser to Gordon Brown, and TBF Adam Smith was certainly doing more than advise

"Special advice".

The clue is in the title.

Confused by the presence of this thread tbh. I thought it had been decided years ago that the only possible reason to be opposed to Murdoch in any way was jealousy.

That's only if you accept Standee or Robinson to be the only arbiters of reason

I see that new leaf the Sun turned over is pretty much the same as the other one.
New England manager and what do the Sun do?
Yep they lay into the fact he has a speech problem.
Bravo I say Bravo.

Well, I do.

Thing is, you could wonder if it was just a "mistake" to publish it, but they've been caught out so many times there must be an element of wilfulness to it, as disgraceful as it is.

"There's no such thing as bad publicity" and "it's better to be talked about, than not talked about" must be framed above the editor's desk

'Bwavo', surely?