The Slog assesses the fallout from yesterday’s arrests.

Four days ago, The Slog posted to point out how – more overtly with every day – the corporate and genetic dynasty that is Newscorp has begun to distance itself from the individuals who acted enthusiastically on its behalf in the pursuit of news. The arrest of Ian Edmondson and Neville Thurlbeck today on charges of illegal surveillance and conspiracy to intercept messages illegally saw the volume turned up on this policy of attempted isolation from infection.

From the minute Sky ironically led the pack by naming the two men, releases poured out of Wapping, each one containing the familiar phrases: ‘discovered new evidence of wrongdoing’, ‘handed over data’, ‘cooperating with the police’, ‘dismissed him immediately this was discovered’ – and so on.

For those of us who’ve been plodding through thick mud on this story for months, the hypocrisy involved in the strategy makes even the seasoned cynic’s flesh creep. At each stage of this saga, Murdoch’s sleazy corporate suits, hacks and straight-faced barristers have lied, obfuscated, put up barriers, sabotaged and smeared every attempt to get at the truth. Their lawyers have put up defences in Court so ludicrous that, after one session during February, Justice Vos was moved to haul one unfortunate barrister in to his chambers and tell him which way was up. Senior personnel like Rebekah Brooks have ignored legislator requests to appear before them – accompanied by what are alleged to have been threats to reveal the private peccadillos of Parliamentary committee members.

The company began with one rogue reporter as ‘the line’, then retreated to one isolated incident, one rogue title, and now – a renegade group of which it knew nothing. But The Slog’s research posted yesterday proved beyond any doubt that blagger Stephen Whittamore’s invoices were for the whole gamut of Newscorp titles as long ago as 2003. The defence has absolutely no credibility. It demonstrates only the visceral fear of a blood-sucking organisation scurrying back to its coffin, having been caught in the first morning shaft of truth’s sunlight.

There are innumerable factors that must be considered by all those who will inevitably be involved over the coming months. First among these has to be a rethink about Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt’s outrageous decision to allow Murdoch’s BSkyB bid to go ahead. I have no doubt that this bounding but essentially silly man will bluff his way through with more empty visions of plurality; equally, I fear that the Prime Minister will continue to insist that he isn’t involved. But as time goes on, none of this will wash: the Watergate saga proved above all that, in the age of mass media, most cover-ups get uncovered. In the digital FOI age, all of them do – if journalists are persistent. Those ignorant of history, as the saying goes, are doomed to repeat it.

The Metropolitan Police too must put the survival of the organisation’s non-political status first. Already dragged into the muddled mire of political correctness by blind ambition at its senior officer level, the Force now finds itself with two choices: to let Sue Akers proceed with her Operation Weeter unhindered – or stop her at some point convenient to the reputation of certain senior officers.

Having been used as the scapegoat in the Charles de Menezes shooting, retired anti-terrorist chief Andy Hayman must realise that he now has little chance of avoiding at least some degree of disgrace. I am at present trying to compile and illuminate the history of Andy Hayman’s relationship with former Newscorp heavy and Cameron aide Andy Coulson. The one thing shining through from this process is the way both of them typify aspirational Essex man’s obsession to be the best at all costs.

We do well to mark this similarity. For we are being asked to believe that two men – driven to be professional in every way – respectively led a slipshod police investigation, and showed sloppy checking of source material on major stories involving everyone from Sienna Miller to the Royal Princes. Once again, it simply isn’t believable for anyone with an ounce of commonsense.

On a bigger canvas still, the Met needs to get real on just how far behind it is on hacking and blagging technology. In yesterday’s Slog piece on this, I hinted at the degree to which the means to knowing what you shouldn’t know are now very straightforward processes for polished criminals of all nationalities. I am told by two informants that hundreds of millions of Pounds are being made on the London market via this racket day in, day out, by the simple process of (effectively) tuning into tomorrow’s papers. This too is a credibility issue the police must address.

Ever since my own pc was blagged in 2006, the question of how hopeless the Misuse of Computers Act is has been a particular hobby-horse of mine. But even I never imagined my fears would be realised at quite this level. Without doubt, the Russians and Chinese lead the world in this field; one wonders exactly where MI5 is on the issue.

The media themselves need to take a long, hard look in the mirror. Only an idiot from outside the profession could entertain the idea that this is a unique Newscorp disease. The use of illegal surveillance is yet another symptom of our horribly debased culture, which says ‘get results, do what’s required, don’t get caught’.

Murdoch’s hounds have now been caught, and old Rupert will have no qualms at all about putting them down. But many remain in very senior positions in other news organisations. Some even continue to use illegal surveillance in the arrogant belief that the media’s power is now far, far beyond the long arm of the Law.

It is the law’s job – the police, the judiciary, and the legislature – to prove them fatally wrong. Once this initial horde of bent Murdoch lowlife has been sprayed, however, the Met must move on to those who have not covered their tracks quite as well as they think – and whose reticence in reporting the Hackgate scandal now looks increasingly suspicious.

Finally, our elected representatives as a whole must revisit the way politics interacts with money, and especially the monied media. I believe there is a growing case for taking the French line: that foreign, unelected non-taxpayers should not be allowed to make media purchases in Britain. Some will find this an extreme view, and I am the first to admit that it will not get rid of censorious editorial policies. But the corruption of law officers and lawmakers by lawbreakers has reached epidemic proportions.

A free press has uncovered this trail of ignominy. But a press free from proprietor influence and interference would’ve done it better.

Our politics in 2011 are covered in the unsightly stains of powerful, irresponsible influence from rich entrepreneurs, banking organisations and news moguls.  It must stop before the reputation of our politicians is beyond help.

In the meantime, the search for truth continues. I will be very surprised – and equally suspicious – if Coulson, Brooks and Hayman avoid being cautioned and questioned during the coming months. And at some point, I think there is now little doubt that this misuse of surveillance technology will morph into an even messier scandal about cooperation between the media, the security services, and unscrupulous politicians.

Stay close to the action. This can only get more interesting.