Usually, it's the press uncovering scandals involving the authorities doing dastardly deeds.
This time, News of the World, a British newspaper -- owned by media titan Rupert Murdoch -- is being investigated by the authorities for hacking into the phones of up to 4,000 people, including members of parliament, the royal family, and teenage murder victim and the families of 9/11 victims.
This is a PR disaster for Murdoch, News of the World -- which is ceasing publication -- and the journalists involved in the ongoing hacking, many of whom are being arrested.
They also allegedly paid £100,000 in bribes to police officers as part of their hacking and spying operation.
Murdoch's company, News Corp, didn't just close down a newspaper that had existed for 168 years.
In a single day, it lost $1.2 billion in value on the stock market. Then it backed away from acquiring a major British network.
Now U.S. Senators are calling for an investigation, because technically, as a company incorporated in Delaware, News Corp is subject to U.S. laws, including the ones against bribing foreign officials.
Why is this scandal so damaging, and what can we learn from it?
1) Once is enough, but 4,000 times is indefensible
It's bad enough to break the law once, whether you had too much wine at a dinner party and climbed into your VW or if you thought a story was so important, you hired a private detective to hack into somebody's phone.
When you've only done something bad once, you can beg for forgiveness and pledge not to repeat that mistake, and do so with some credibility.
That's not the case when you've done something over and over again, for years, and only say sorry when you get caught and handcuffed. Apologizing doesn't work so well and pledging never to do it again isn't credible at all. It's is a joke.
2) Avoid lame excuses and alibis
One of the defenses that was used for high-ranking executive Rebekah Brooks is that she was on vacation during one of the more high-profile hacks.
Other newspapers are reporting on this scandal, and anyone who's spent more than two minutes in a newsroom knows that editors don't print stories without asking reporters who their sources are, how they got such juicy information and when they could get more of the same.
Because they want more. Because it's news. It sells paper. And because they don't want to go all-in when they bet their newspaper's credibility on stories that turn out to be rumors, gossip, hearsay or nonsense.
Editors check these sorts of things. They need to know. It's their job.
So claiming that Brooks didn't know a thing while she was editor-in-chief of the newspaper boggles the mind. There's no credibility either in trying to pin all the blame on underlings, or on the former editor who already left the employ of Murdoch's empire.
If this was just one story, one time, and the reporter did an amazing job of finding legitimate ways to corroborate the information he got from hacking phones and bribing police officers, then OK, maybe it could slip by the editors.
But reporters don't make enough money to bankroll £100,000 in bribes to the police. Reporters and underlings can't siphon away secret stashes of dough to underwrite and organize a years'-long effort to hack into 4,000 phones.
The editors had to know. Somebody had to write the checks or put the cash in paper bags.
3) Credibility is everything
Of the three parts of rhetoric, the first, ethos, is most important.
Is the person credible? Are they sincere? Do they have any expertise or special knowledge of the subject? And do they have any self-interest in the outcome?
This scandal destroyed the credibility of a newspaper and everyone involved. A newspaper relies on trust. Readers have to trust that the newspaper's staff is being truthful. Sources who get quoted need to trust the reporters asking the questions.
What source would want to talk to a reporter who might be hacking their phone? Phones today are more than calls and voicemail. If somebody gets into your smart phone, they can read your email, get passwords to your online banking and do a lot of damage. Nobody wants to get hacked. Nobody.
Readers couldn't trust the newspaper anymore. Not when reporters and editors seem to be lying about what sneaky business they were up to for years and years.
This is one of those cases where the first piece of advice has to be, Don't do this. Ever.
Now that the sins are already committed, the parties involved could still do a better job handling the aftermath. By that, I don't mean using different tactics in the press for damage control. The only real option is a full mea culpa.
Trying to deny things will only drag it out, and with so many victims and so many players already in handcuffs, somebody will talk to the police. The truth will come out in painful dribbles, day after day. Be honest and get it over with.
Related links:
Handling bad news and scandals
News of the World paid bribes worth £100,000 to up to five Met officers
Phone hacking victims could number 4,000, says senior detective