Sunday, January 02, 2011

Murdoch too powerful?

I have mixed feelings about Murdoch his newspapers along with Eddy Shah's Today newspaper broke the print unions stranglehold on newspaper production which revolutionised the print media.

However the share of popular news titles and broadcast media owned by Murdoch companies is not good for democracy, such is Rupert Murdoch's influence he has no problem in accessing government, I believe shortly after the coalition was formed Murdoch was allowed in through the PM's back door at Downing Street. 

Anyhow it's always bothered me, that papers like the Sun, News of the World, come up with "stories" which the public swallow wholesale, but even setting that aside, most of us who view subscription telly have to do so through SKY, I've never understood how this monopoly has never been investigated by government to see if it offers a fair deal.

Why Labour didn't do anything over the years, you would have to ask Blair perhaps Murdoch made him an offer, before the 1997 election around the  time the Sun dumped the John Major's deadbeat conservative party.

Anyhow  an online petition gives you, your chance ask the government to act impartially, clearly Vince Cable is a politician who has pre judged as might Jeremy Hunt so lets leave the competition commission to deal with this fairly.


  1. The Times owns the Sun and I think you will find they are all in bed together alongside the government no matter who appears to be running it..

    For the real news you have to search elsewhere unfortunately

    Local Authority Agenda 21

    ‘If you think this isn't already happening in the United Kingdom I invite you to think again. Agenda 21 is being pursued by most Local Authorities and a 'google' search on LA 21 and sustainable development reveals just how deep rooted the Agenda 21 programme already is.’

  2. Murdoch has his tentacles in Agenda 21 too, of course, being a globalist, he would.

    His media outlets were pushing the deadly swine flu vaccines last year for all they were worth, while at the same time having an sizable interest in Glaxo Smith Kline, one of the manufacturers of the stuff.

    It is a crying shame that so many people are still being hoodwinked by this ghoul.

    Though, as he admits himself, they (the corporate media) are losing control of the minds of the public, who have had enough of being lied to and are increasingly showing their discernment by embracing the alternative media.

    What do they expect? The deception is becoming cartoonish.

  3. Whilst it is evidently undesirable for one man, or his organisation, to control such a large slice of the media, I also feel the resultant influence is sometimes over estimated.

    Newspapers, in particular, struggle to maintain circulations and more will disappear in due course. Even TV declines in influence as people turn more to the internet yet, within that source, popularity swings from email and blogging to facebook and twitter. It is an ever changing scene so that moguls and their empires will inevitably find it harder to hold sway.

    It is not so much people waking up but, the speed of modern communication technology that keeps us all better informed. The information is there now if you want to find it although, I believe that, most of us could not be bothered. That is also why so many do not even bother to vote, regardless of what Mr. Murdoch says!

  4. I don't think voting will do any good Bluenote, except provide them with a ready made list of dissenters, because they stopped listening to us a long time ago.

    Just stop watching the damned telly, it is pure mind control, it always has been. Cash in your TV license and spend your valuable time on more constructive pursuits would be my advice.

  5. OMG, another conspiracy theorist who responds without reading what he/she is responding to. I said TV influence was in decline, not that I watch it, and that the public's failure to vote is indicative of a lack of interest, not some naive belief that voting is somehow the answer to all our problems.

    I am quite happy with my pursuits, thanks, and suggest you stick to your opium wars and power cliques rather than criticising the interests of others.

  6. News Corp like many other private owned companies including the BHS group that operate in the UK do not share the tax burden that falls on most of us. For many years they paid zero. Thats why they like to cosy up to what ever party is in power.

  7. Tony what have you done here? I dislike the hold murdoch has and as for Sky it is ridiculous that one company can have the monopoly but that is what we have and whilst Vince Cable was right he should have worded things in a different way, now he has played into the hands of Murdoch' he can cry impartiality and win every time from now on.

  8. Spot on, Don. Cable's ill-chosen outburst has handed the advantage to Murdoch on a plate. Of course in passing Cabinet responsibility to Hunt, Cameron has put Murdoch's future in the hands of one who has publicly praised him and his role.

  9. Vince Cable,was tricked by the media, Vince was having what he thought was a confidential private heart to heart talk to one of his Constituents,Now the media have severed that link between Members of Parliament of all political shades and their Constituents to be able to talk honestly on a personal level.
    Shame on these dispicable reporters, Having been a reporter myself I an disgusted ,they have sullied the name of reputable reporters.
    I hope that Mudoch (sorry Murdoch)does not get his hands on Google etc. otherwise you will be in touble yourself Tony!

  10. Google has strong ties to the CIA and NSA, it is a major player in the full spectrum dominance spy-grid that we enjoy so much. I can't see them wanting Murdoch involved.

  11. Seriously scary stuff, Google tied in with counter intelligence and spy chappies. Must really watch what I write in future.

    Mind you, the stuff available on this site for cloak and dagger novels is quite amazing. Never realised such folk actually existed in real life but then, perhaps they don't?

  12. It is not so much scary as f*cking irritating. Whatever happened to our rights to privacy?

    These people are seriously paranoid about something, otherwise why would they need to keep tabs on everything we do?

  13. Freeworld thanetlibrary, I was only joking when I said it was scary but you seem to take it all seriously. I would suggest that it is you that is paranoid rather than your mythical big brother spies. Just who the heck do you seriously think is spying on who? What freedoms have we lost?

    The only one I can think of is yours to think straight. Frankly you will drive yourself nutty with all this conspiracy stuff. Cut your strings and free yourself from the puppet master in your mind.

  14. Don't patronise me please Bluenote, even a blind man can now see what is going on.

    You may think I am obsessed with this thing, but I am perfectly sane. To tell you the truth, I don't want these greedy psychopaths getting away with it, and they won't, believe me.

    If you have any sense, you'll switch sides, because you are a potential victim too, whatever they might have promised you to the contrary.

  15. freeworldlibrarythanet

    You are right in what you say unfortunately there are some who would prefer that the public stay fast asleep ...but of course we know it is far too late for that !

    We should all remember that we don't live in a 'Democracy', what we live in is a 'Parlimentary Democracy'. That means that we can only vote in the 'Commons', the Lords and the professional civil servants are chosen by the ruling elite.

    Best and only way to change the system is not to vote.

  16. 12:21AM and 7:54PM If you really are two people, which I doubt, you are both off your trolley and if that is patronising then so be it. Thanks for the offer to switch sides before it is too late but I prefer to take my chances with the Cavaliers.