Don't let Murdoch and Hunt stitch it up!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by cupoftea, Jan 13, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Email your MP

     
  2. I don't really get the Murdoch hatred thing, his market share is considerably less in the UK than the BBC and, unlike the BBC, if people don't like him then they don't have to pay for Sky or his newspapers.
     
  3. Hell I don't pay for the BBC either.
     
  4. Like ths you mean

    BBC - Guy Fawkes' blog

    If You Want “Media Plurality” Break Up the BBC
    The Guardianista campaign against Murdoch, Coulson and all their works is spearheaded by Dan Sabbagh, a former Labour councillor and campaign manager for Oona King, who now covers media and technology for the Guardian. He produced a chart yesterday based on industry data showing that the Sky/News Corp. group controls 22% of our news consumption.

    This is a threat to something called “media plurality”. This is, we are told by Dan Sabbagh and all their less successful media rivals, a bad thing. Look down that list and you’ll notice that the BBC controls 39.3% of our news consumption.



    The BBC must therefore be an even worse threat to “media plurality”, particularly when one considers that it is protected from fair competition by a state subsidy via taxation. Somehow this doesn’t worry the Guardian, which is hardly surprising because BBC News often feels like the broadcast arm of that paper. When one considers that the BBC overwhelmingly recruits from its pages the Guardian-BBC axis is abundantly clear.


    The monolithic BBC is too big and the news weltanschauung is only one of many inherent problems. The Beeb’s size is a result of the massive over-funding that we’re forced to provide for it, it is as if we had to pay a state detergent manufacturer a tax on owning a washing machine.

    One example problem out of many is that the BBC undermines regional competitors, we would have a thriving local commercial TV/radio culture if the BBC didn’t crowd out competitors and make them unfeasible – it is hard to compete with a business that doesn’t have to make a commercial return.

    The BBC should not have a monopoly on public service broadcasting – if the licence fee has to continue funding public service broadcasting it should be distributed to other providers besides the BBC.

    The decentralisation of our broadcasting culture would really create a more plural media.


    I wonder if cupoftea is actually one of these Labour Bloganistas - Left Foot Forward or Labour List - cupoftea, do you come from any of them ( we can see your IP address, so no fibs now
     

    Attached Files:

  5. rampant

    rampant LE Reviewer Book Reviewer

    Agreed, it's the depth of his Media Empire that is of real concern, not simply broadcast media, but printed media too, Newspapers, Magazines, Publishing Houses if Murdoch were to succeed, he would have an unparralled dominance of media & information dissemination in this country.
     
  6. What's your view on the depth and dominance of the BBC??, web, all the radio and TV stations etc, magazines, bookshops
     
  7. Well if you have an issue with the BBC simply stop watching television and don't pay for the licence again.
     
  8. I simply think that Murdoch is a power hungry, king-making **** who is totally inimical to the interests of the free and right thinking - we shall know them by their fruit and all that - and I wouldn't mind doing what I can to frustrate him, that's all.

    Maybe you think Murdoch's alright? Maybe you think Fox news is a welcome and objective antidote to Aunty Beeb and is absolutely brill. Do you?
     
  9. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    I detest the BBC. But I don't want a prison record, so HAVE to pay for them.

    I don't like Sky. I don't pay for them.

    BBC = no choice, monopoly, wasting MY money. I resent that a great deal.
     
  10. That's the point of the OP . . . broadly speaking, if we're not careful we might end up paying for Sky or one of it's stablemates whether we like it or not.
     
  11. cupoftea - just seeing if I could get a bite. Personally, and I don't know the full brief, but I wouldn't like to see more concentrated media ownership. I like regional news and a broad range of ownership. Happy with Fox to provide an alternate to entrenched ( and generally publically funded) media from the other side of the political spectrum.

    I do get a bit hacked off by the default setting of "ogre Murdoch" from media like the Guardian and the BBC, who are clearly looking after their own political-financial interests - what are the numbers for public sector advertising in the Guardian, what proportion of BBC jobs are advertised in the Guardian? If the Guardian is such a supporter of openess and free trade, then why is their parent company based in offshore in a tax minimisation scheme - IIRC correctly, HMRC would love to see the £50m avoided by the Guardian's parent company.

    I deeply distrust dithering fools like Vince Cable willy wagging at someone like Murdoch, whilst actively ignoring the hypocrites on the other side.

    Vampireuk - I would rather stop paying the licence fee altogether and be entitled to operate a TV for free like most other countries in the world. Why do I need to pay for the BBC if I wish to watch the hundreds of other channels on offer?
     
  12. The thing is, with the BBC there's always the option of Sky or any of its competitors. Hands up anyone who thinks the same would be true in reverse?
     
  13. Incestuous bunch aren't they

    Andrew Marr - Dating, Gossip, News, Andrew Marr Photos

    Andrew Marr - BBC Political Journalist

    Andrew William Stevenson Marr (born 31 July 1959) is a Scottish journalist and political commentator. He edited The Independent for two years, until May 1998, and was the political editor for the BBC from 2000 until 2005. He then began hosting a political programme called Sunday AM (now The Andrew Marr Show) on Sunday mornings on BBC One from September 2005 onwards. In 2007 he presented a political history of post-war Britain on BBC Two, Andrew Marr`s History of Modern Britain.

    Andrew Marr was born and educated in Scotland at the High School of Dundee, Craigflower School and at Loretto, an independent private boarding school in Musselburgh, East Lothian. He went on to study English at Trinity Hall, Cambridge.

    He was once a member of the socialist group Socialist Campaign for a Labour Victory and reportedly a seller of its newspaper Socialist Organiser while at Cambridge, where he acquired the sobriquet of `Red Andy`.

    Marr lives in East Sheen, London, with his wife, the political journalist Jackie Ashley of The Guardian, whom he married in August 1987 in Surrey. She is a daughter of the Labour Life Peer, Lord Ashley of Stoke. The couple have a son, Harry Cameron (born Camden, London, 1989) and two daughters, both born in Hammersmith, London: Isabel Claire (born 1991) and Emily Catherine (born 1994).He is also the father of a child by Alice Miles, a journalist at The Times, with whom he had an affair while married to Jackie Ashley of The Guardian. He has succeeded in surpressing conventional media coverage, see below, but it was revealed by the Guido Fawkes political blog.

    A Story You Won’t Get from the BBC, Guardian or The TimesThe Secret of Three of Westminster’s Media Gate-keepers - Guy Fawkes' blog

    Naughty Naughty Andrew, now I wonder why that wasn't covered by the BBC/ Guardian/ Independant - is that the sort of stitch up you were thinking about??
     
  14. OldSnowy

    OldSnowy LE Moderator Book Reviewer

    Nonsense. There are plenty of other stations/broadcasters/media outlets out there (with the internet, more every day). The ONLY one I am FORCED to pay for is the BBC.

    When Murdoch introduces a Tax and enforces it with the threat of prison, then I'll complain about him.
     
  15. If Murdoch has his way you'll be FORCED to pay for his business through more and more of those other stations/broadcasters/media outlets unless you want to rely totally on the internet or the original 5 channels . . . but even they're not safe. You won't have to pay directly but the channels will still have to increasingly buy their broadcasting material from Murdoch, as has increasingly been the case. Then we'll have two Aunties. Fantastic.

    Free media should be free media, not free to control media.

    Frankly I find the attitude of some posters puzzling. Is it one of "well if the Beeb can get away with it then why not Murdoch"? Why does every Murdoch discussion turn into a Beeb slagathon?