Sorry for what?

Can't pretend that it wasn't with a wry grin and a touch of relish that I read Murdoch's personally-signed apology yesterday (in full here if you're interested, complete with a touching header; "We are sorry" in a carefully selected, >72-point serif typeface in order to get across just how deeply, deeply sorry the whole News International group is about the whole thing) - in parts it sounds like a cross between the Penitence Prayer and the intro to AA's Twelve Steps, and whether released at the behest of an expensive PR-advisor or not, it's not the kind of press release Uncle Rupe's accustomed to putting out:

"...We are sorry for the serious wrongdoing that occurred.
We are deeply sorry for the hurt suffered by the individuals affected.
We regret not acting faster to sort things out.
I realize that simply apologizing is not enough..."

But what is enough? And what is the apology for?

See, the sneaky, nasty, underhand tactics used by Murdoch's papers, the accessing of a murdered teenage girl's private voicemail messages (though how this in itself differs substantially from accessing the voicemail of, say, an MP is utterly beyond me - but that's another issue in itself) to pick up information? "Serious wrongdoing" indeed, and a deep and fulsome apology very much in order.

Mind, I don't see Murdoch's apology for the past 30 years of pushing British political culture in a nasty, grabbing, faux-populist direction, or for his tabloids' consistency in twisting debate away from the causes of problems and toward a lazy, in-a-vacuum appraisal of issues which are by their very nature always going to be more complicated than a shouty The Sun Says leader. 

Nor do I see his apology for creating a media climate in which political leaders in the UK are in effect forced to kneel at the News International altar, and where necessary amend policy accordingly, on pain of electoral defeat. 

Nobody seems to have asked him to apologise for that though, have they? Well, nobody who's going to be looking to the Murdoch press to support them at a future election, anyway - seems there's much too much at stake to risk it.As Nick Clegg said recently, "In recent decades the political class has consistently failed to stand up to the media, seeking to curry favour with powerful media barons or prevent their own personal lives from being splashed across the front pages".

Which is a very good point; indeed, given that he's proof positive that a good working relationship with the media makes all the difference, it would be churlish not to "agree with Nick".

So just don't expect an apology that counts anytime soon.