Jump to content

Murdoch Empire's new low


NormanH
 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 161
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

That is a very honest thing to say, and touches the heart of the problem.

Media ownership confers power to form opinion by selecting information and deciding how to present it.

None of us can ever know the truth of most things we hear of and are at the mercy of our sources of information.

Just comparing French and Anglophone coverage of current affairs confirms this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems that News Corporation Inc (the Murdoch parent company0 may be in breach of US laws against bribing foreign officials. This would apply of any employee of the company made payments to example the UK police. it seems what goes around comes around[:)]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Rabbie"]It seems that News Corporation Inc (the Murdoch parent company0 may be in breach of US laws against bribing foreign officials. This would apply of any employee of the company made payments to example the UK police. it seems what goes around comes around[:)][/quote]

Hoddy, exactly although in my case (of not liking him) it was robing my pension which I watched happen but thats a different matter but nobody deserves this sort of thing.

Rabbie, I was not paying attention but I am sure somebody said that shareholders of the company in the US are considering some for a legal action?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in the US he owns Fox News which is very supportive of the Republican party, so they will not want to rock the boat. The Democrats - well if they rock the boat he may campaign even more for the Republicans. Then of course there are his US papers.

But whay has he been allowed to control so many newspapers in the UK - surely it is uncompetitive?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="PaulT"]

And in the US he owns Fox News which is very supportive of the Republican party, so they will not want to rock the boat. The Democrats - well if they rock the boat he may campaign even more for the Republicans. Then of course there are his US papers.

But whay has he been allowed to control so many newspapers in the UK - surely it is uncompetitive?

[/quote]Because our gutless politicians want to keep in his good books. It wouldn't surprise me if generous contributions to party funds eased the way around the monopolies commission
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillan wrote :Rabbie, I was not paying attention but I am sure somebody said that shareholders of the company in the US are considering some for a legal action?

I think you will find that after paying out $673 million for his daughters film/TV production company and giving her a place on the board the shareholders are far from happy .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A suggestion that I heard was that Murdoch may consider selling off the newspapers and then play a waiting game for BSkyB.

According to the pundits print media is dying, people go to the internet for their news. Although the News International titles are profitable at the moment that may not always be the case - get rid of them while they still have value.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems Murdoch, senoir and Junior are not obliged to present themselves to the House of Commons as directed - Junior has expressed his willingness to be interviewed at a later date (oddly, in the Hof C recess).

Surely if they not happy to abide by the rules of the UK then they shouldn't be in business of the UK, my view is that you shouldn't be able to pick and choose, either you are 'in' or out and if you choose out then go take your business elsewhere.....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14148658

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"either you are 'in' or out and if you choose out then go take your business elsewhere....."

I couldn't agree with you more. I remember feeling very cross when the boss of Kraft would not attend to talk about the Cadbury takeover. It's one of the reasons I'm on a one-woman boycott of Cadburys.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well that's the right thing to do.

I believe the deputy or assistant Sergeant at Arms yesterday went and handed Murdoch and his son a 'summons' to appear at the HoC. I had heard elsewhere that they cannot be forced to appear (because they are not UK citizens) so I am not too sure of the significance of this. Perhaps if he left the UK he might not be allowed back in if he didn't attend when asked? Having seen the original letters his and he son sent saying when he could appear (on first name terms I noted with the Chairperson) I thought "bloody cheek", I don't think the tone bode well with the British public.

Now the FBI is to investigate in the US. Murdoch has made a statement to an American newspaper, one he owns of course, saying his company dealt with everything properly. I had a glance at The Sun, not a paper I would normally look at. It seems The Guardian has apologised over the Brown (Child) comments yet I can't find anything in The Guardian but |I didn't look too hard I must admit. Other than Brooks resigning there is little or no reporting on the issue, perhaps they also feel it will go away?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think that there is a question of the Murdochs not being allowed back into Britain if they don't appear before the committee. There was no mention of such a sanction when the boss of Kraft refused.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="NickP"]

[quote user="Russethouse"]Rebekah Brooks has resigned ![/quote] 

Yep! Probably spent the last two weeks working out her resignation pay off.

[/quote]

Well then lets hope that if she has done something wrong from a legal point of view and found guilty she goes to prison and the fine she gets equals her payoff. That would seem justice to me anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The likes of Ms. Brooks are much too clever to be caught doing anything illegal, and even if they did soil their hands there are plenty of underlings willing to be a sacrifice and take the blame. Although if morality or lack of it was an offence she should be hung drawn and quartered; slowly. But no, she will be well protected legally and financially to will continue her privileged life style
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mrs Brooks (or Miss Wade as she was) and her proprietor and their obsession for selling papers by appealing to the more base instincts of the population have done more than offend people by illegal phone hacking: they have demonised men.

Thanks to their reporting and headlining of the relatively small number of appalling crimes against children, they have managed to create the perception - among some people - that all men are potential hazards to children. In doing so, they have created a climate in which men are now reluctant to behave in a relaxed fashion among children. Lone men are treated with suspicion especially in places where children may be present - public parks etc.

When I was young, my mother would send me out to play. Mothers today do not let their children out of their sight. After all, there is a paedophile on every corner - or at least that is the impression these people have. Do you remember Miss Wade's attempt to "out" paedophiles?

She has now gone - but the damage has been done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...