The Murdoch Empire's Greatest Test

[Prospero]

Will people reply on BBC for news and entertainment? Not for entertainment for sure and - probably not for news. The web does it so swiftly. But for good drama, good documentary films... I hope so. Who does it better. In the US the last bastion of documentaries is HBO and PBS - and you pay for one and the other spends days every few months appealing for cash to keep going. It just like they said TV would kill radio and it didn't and i don't think e-books will kills real books. There is a widening horizon and some thing will fall away. But TV will be needed also for things like sport - though if Sky are allowed to expand their huge spending power will overwhelm the BBC. When your favourite sportgoes to sky you bite the bullet. (I have no favourite sport I'd pay for so i'm not bothered) But a mate just said he would now have to pay for sky because it has acquired Formula One. And so it goes.

[Stavros]

For anyone who is interested, Peter Oborne -a well-informed conservative- in todays Telegraph makes some interesting claims:
Tony Blair called Gordon Brown when the latter was Prime Minister, asking him to stop a Labour MP (Tom watson) from pursuing Murdoch in the House of Commons over phone hacking;
That the Conservatives are split into two camps: George Osborne, Chancellor is heavily pro-Murdoch and was instrumental in getting a cool David Cameron to warm to Murdoch and hire Andy Coulson;
Cameron's gut has always turned away from the Murdoch machine, his need for their endorsement in The Sun forced him to seeks its radiation; he is contaminated and can't get out of the situation;
fundamentally, Murdoch's 'values' run counter to the boring old values of old England -respect for the monarchy and the law, a belief that people with famly problems (as in footballers, actors, 'celebrities') should be allowed to sort them out in private...

I am trying to think of a greater political crisis to engulf this country since I was born -this is far bigger and more comprehensive than Blair's transparent lies over Iraq.

Oborne's article is here:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...sewer-yet.html

[Prospero]

This is excellent stuff. The founder of the Independent writes in today's paper warning that he believes this could led to Rupert Murdoch being extradited from the US to face trial.

[Stavros]

I wonder what Murdoch thinks he can do by flying in to the country. It would be naive to think that any seriosly incriminating emails and documents have not by now been shredded or destroyed, my guess his real motivation is not to appear contrite to the 'general public' but to have private conversations with Cameron and Osborne to make sure his attempt to buy the rest of BSkyB is not delayed or denied. The most toxic issue is the collapse of the trial of Jonathan Rees and the ramifications of News International colluding with the police to spy on the detective who tried to move it forward on Crimewatch a few years ago, before the trial was halted. Its big because its not just about News International's contempt for the law, but the Metropolitan Police's contempt for it also, and because Cameron was aware of these issues -and none of this would even be in the public domain had the News of the World not reported on Prince Williams' strained knee...how curious that some of the most toxic scandals begin with a bland, almost pointless story....but I'm still watching the share price, that's where the crisis for Murdoch will deepen, particularly if he doesn't get the BSkyB deal -as the other deep throat said: Follow the Money....

[robertlouis]

I wonder what Murdoch thinks he can do by flying in to the country. It would be naive to think that any seriosly incriminating emails and documents have not by now been shredded or destroyed, my guess his real motivation is not to appear contrite to the 'general public' but to have private conversations with Cameron and Osborne to make sure his attempt to buy the rest of BSkyB is not delayed or denied. The most toxic issue is the collapse of the trial of Jonathan Rees and the ramifications of News International colluding with the police to spy on the detective who tried to move it forward on Crimewatch a few years ago, before the trial was halted. Its big because its not just about News International's contempt for the law, but the Metropolitan Police's contempt for it also, and because Cameron was aware of these issues -and none of this would even be in the public domain had the News of the World not reported on Prince Williams' strained knee...how curious that some of the most toxic scandals begin with a bland, almost pointless story....but I'm still watching the share price, that's where the crisis for Murdoch will deepen, particularly if he doesn't get the BSkyB deal -as the other deep throat said: Follow the Money....

And let's not forget The Guardian's honourable role in sticking with the story when others had been intimidated or bought off. The paper was denigrated by none other than the Press Complaints Commission a few years ago for its dogged pursuit of a case which the PCC had declared to have no foundation - and if News International and the Met have serious cases to answer, so does that disgraced quango.

Yes, the diffusion of media and the immediacy of the net have certainly transformed the production, reception and interpretation of news, but we must not lose the longer-term work that dogged and principled print journalists perform in all of our best interests. Well done Alan Rusbridger and his team for keeping one light shining in an otherwise stygian and filthy gloom.

Am I a Guardian reader? Yes, I get the paper on subscription, and its Sunday sister, the Observer. And I have never bought a single Murdoch product either, whether in print or on TV.

[robertlouis]

I broke for coffee, as I do every Saturday lunchtime, to listen to The Now Show on Radio 4, and enjoyed an impassioned speech by John Finnemore (who, incidentally writes and stars in one of Radio 4' s finest comedies, Cabin Pressure), in which he made the point that this could be one of the sadly few occasions in which those who rule us actually listen to what we are saying, and taking it seriously. He then urged everyone to keep the noise alive for as long as it takes for fundamental changes to occur in the relationships between the media, politicians and the police. I hope we follow his advice.

It's available on the Now Show podcast, by the way.

As for Murdoch flying in, for once he's on the floor, and it's in the interest of a free press and a continuing broadcasting polity in the UK that we keep kicking him till the old bastard cries "Enough!", because if NI does gain total control of BskyB, make no bones about it, one of the touchstones of Britain's well-earned reputation as an independent voice in the world, the BBC, could be silenced for ever.

I'm now listening to the repeat of Any Questions from Friday night, which is devoted entirely to the NoW/NI scandal.

Oh, and Rebeka Wade is still in place. *SMH*

[Stavros]

RLS your praise for The Guardian on this story is more than deserved, it could be as historically important as the Washington Post's determination to get to the core of the Watergate Scandal in the 1970s. I turned against The Guardian some years ago because of the lies Suzanne Goldenberg told about the Palestine/Israel conflict when she reported from there, and also another story which featured a company I worked for which was full of factual errors a simple search on Google could have corrected -a fault mostly, I admit, of commentators presumably freelance journalists: I also turned to The Independent to follow Robert Fisk but generally feel British print journalism leaves a lot to be desired.

However, in this case, The Guardian has regained my respect, if not my money, for both its determination, and the scope of its coverage. The Times, by contrast, is quite simply a disgrace. These days I read The Daily Telegraph with more interest than The Times -even five years ago I would never even have glanced at it.

[robertlouis]

RLS your praise for The Guardian on this story is more than deserved, it could be as historically important as the Washington Post's determination to get to the core of the Watergate Scandal in the 1970s. I turned against The Guardian some years ago because of the lies Suzanne Goldenberg told about the Palestine/Israel conflict when she reported from there, and also another story which featured a company I worked for which was full of factual errors a simple search on Google could have corrected -a fault mostly, I admit, of commentators presumably freelance journalists: I also turned to The Independent to follow Robert Fisk but generally feel British print journalism leaves a lot to be desired.

However, in this case, The Guardian has regained my respect, if not my money, for both its determination, and the scope of its coverage. The Times, by contrast, is quite simply a disgrace. These days I read The Daily Telegraph with more interest than The Times -even five years ago I would never even have glanced at it.

Thanks for that, Stavros. These days I tend to tolerate the Torygraph a little more - it has become less slavish over the years.

The paper in the UK that I despise more than any other, however, is the Daily Mail. Still owned and run by the family that openly supported Hitler and the fascists right up to the break of war, and with an agenda out to demonise every minority in the UK and terrify its readership. What the NoW did behind the scenes was beneath contempt, but for its editorial and general content, the Mail is in a disreputable class of its own.

[Stavros]

The paper in the UK that I despise more than any other, however, is the Daily Mail

It remains to be seen how wide the hacking scandal goes and what media outlets in addition to Murdoch's used tainted goods. What would really hit Murdoch would be evidence of hacking into the phones of American politicians or celebrities, in America or the UK...Murdoch may have a soft spot for newspapers, but his empire is built on tv (if not TV's ha-ha) and a threat to the American market would truly rock his world...who and or what was in the frame in America from say 2001-2007?

[Prospero]

Twitterati today posting this 07900675949 as the mobile number for News Int chief Rebekah Brooks.

Sunday Times cyncically say the whole furore is a plot by Lab, Lib Dems and the wider media to attack the sainty Rupert and that he has been the greatest and most important force for good in british media in recent years.

And they try to spread the blame - claiming that the misdeeds of the news of The World are surely common among other papers.

That's the blurring being pursued also by the Conservatives.