It may be a new week but the BBC is very clear on the need to STOP Rupert Murdoch taking control of BSkyB. Listen to this onslaught led by Robert Peston and were that not enough for you then try this from Nick Robinson. It’s remarkable to see the State Broacaster taking such an active and clearly biased role in this story as it seeks to buttress it’s own massive monopolistic power at our expense. One surreal angle that the BBC has been pushing is that the Murdoch evil empire is so big, so powerful, that it constitutes a threat to that all important “diversity.” A B-BBC reader informs;
But just who are thebiggest providers of web services? The United Kingdom Online Measurement Company Ltd. www.ukom.uk.net top web brands. While the profile of businesses populating much of the Top 50 has changed since2004, the Top 10 web businesses place the BBC 5th behind google, facebook, msnand yahoo. Sky is 15th, News Corp papers are 29th.
The fact is that it is the BBC which constitutes the single BIGGEST threat to democracy and diversity of opinion and it is relentlessly taking advantage of the (defunct) NOTW saga to try and nail Murdoch. This is the story that the MSM seems oblivious about and so you will excuse me if I harp on about it.
Danny Baker (weekdays BBC London, Saturday BBC Radio Five Live):
“Fuck off NOTW. If this had happened to other workforces you would’ve been out doing Murdoch & the Tory’s bidding to blacken their names.”
“the Tory’s (sic) bidding” – way to confirm the BBC lefty stereotype, Danny.
‘as it seeks to buttress it’s own massive monopolistic power at our expense’
Harp on, MacDuff.
Some, and mostly with integrity, prised open Pandora’s box, and that’s a good thing if the result is more openness and fairness.
However, mixing a a few metaphors, those who saw cynical opportunity must not be allowed to pop back the genie bottle stopper before reaping what they have sown.
If it’s about unaccountable monopolistic media influence on life, politics and policy to circumvent free speech and democracy, suck it up BBC.
And no amount of pulling the plug on a Peston-Robinson WUVI-centric daytime-only blog at 50 posts to become the ‘voice of the nation’, is going to stand up to much scrutiny.
Even if RT’d by the entire BBC twittosphere.
10k is not 60M. Much as you’d like to forget that.
I keep telling you guys that there is an unholy alliance between the BBC/Guardian. The BBC is trying to get Sky closed down or broken up, something that is unheard of from a broadcaster.
People like Peston, Robinson and I have to say Andrew Neal are all jumping in here.
The BBC are openly suggesting people should boycott Sky and cancel their subscriptions, shame the BBC don’t allow us to cancel our TV tax.
As I have also pointed out Murdoch is dead in the water, he doesn’t get new media, doesn’t really like it. Sky has a crap website and general online presence, most of his papers are pay walled so restrict information access.
Murdoch has been really shown up to be a Dinosaur. Cameron has also been shown up to be a complete tosser, by Ed Miliband, the modern day version of Michael Foot. God knows what Blair would have done to Cameron.
Spot on, Martin. Trouble is, most of us here knew that already. The difficulty is getting that across to the populace at large, as the so-called Tories simply aren’t interested in doing it.
I have a strong suspicion that Peston is a key figure here. He’s being roped in to pass comment on all manner of things relating to the hacking story – far more wideranging subjects than should be necessary for the BBC Business editor to comment on.
Peston IS central to all this hysteria. He’s a board member of the left wing pressure “charity” The Media Standards Trust. A look at the other board members shows it to be loaded with Common Purpose/BBC/ Guardian bigwigs and employees, past and present –
take a look at them:-
Julia Middleton – Founder and CEO of Common Purpose.
Sir David Bell – Common Purpose trustee.
Mary-Ellen Barker – Left wing journalist.
Amelia Fawcett – Chairman of the Guardian Media Group.
Roger Graeff – Left wing film maker.
Baroness Helena Kennedy – Labour Peer and left wing lawyer.
David Loyn – BBC journalist.
Charles Manby – executive at Goldman Sachs, a firm VERY close to New Labour.
Anthony Salz – Lawyer, sat on BBC Board of Governors and Acting Chairman in 2006.
Albert Scardino – journalist and past Executive Editor of News at the Guardian.
Sue Stapely – former BBC programme maker, media lawyer and litigant, currently head of media PR firm.
Surely Peston’s membership of this group shows a conflict of interest when he pontificates on the Murdoch organisation?
Peston was the first at the BBC to talk about removing Sky’s licence to operate (which is what the BBC would like). The BBC are not happy that thier nearly 4 billion a year freebie is being cut back, Peston in particular ain’t a happy bunny.
Pleanty of other papers are involved in dodgy dealings the Daily Mirror being one of the biggest. You can understand why the Sun is quiet on this subject, but the Mirror? hmm, I look forward to the BBC/Guardian investigating the Mirror….NOT!
How interesting that Andrew Neal asked Tessa Jowell about Red Ed’s tabloid press man and Jowell got a right strop that it was unfair to make unfounded accusations. Of course Neal did reply that she didn’t have a problem with the allegation made against Coulson. This is te only time I’ve really heard Red Ed’s man come under the BBC spotlight.
Someohow I suspect we won’t hear any more despite Ashcroft’s accusations.
I could never understand why Peston talks in such a irritatingly slow manner. Then I realised the truth – he can’t read Alistair Campbell’s hand writing.
David (and assorted commenters)
The allegations against the NotW include phone hacking, obstructing a murder inquiry, perjury, lying to a Commons Select Committee, bribery (of the Met, no less) and destroying evidence of their crimes. It’s been suggested (by amongst others, Rebekah Brooks) that there are worse things still to be revealed.
Until we know the extent of what not just the NotW, but other News Corp papers (and non-News Corp papers for that matter – I’m sure they haven’t been alone in this behaviour) have been up to and what senior figures at News Corp knew of it and how they may have been implicated in it, their takeover of BSkyB should absolutely not be allowed. Are you honestly going to try to argue otherwise just because you imagine it’s what the BBC wants?
Or do you think the whole affair just some conspiracy by the BBC and Guardian and the NotW is just misunderstood?
Alfonso,
It is not a conspiracy. It is a transparent power grab by the BBC/Guardianistas. No one is doubting NOTW did wrong and I trust all involved are punished. But what about OTHER papers that use the same process to get their story? Why the disinterest in the Mirror Group, for instance? And, this is crucial, the BBC see no irony apparently in turning to Alistair Campbell, Hugh Grant and heavens above Prescott for ethical guidance. Much of this is self perpetuated media hysteria and I stand by what I have been saying.
Honestly, you can read/hear about what NI have been getting up to – the apparently ridiculous scale of the corruption – and what you get outraged about is who the BBC get in the studio to discuss the matter? Mad.
Also, Campbell, like the equally odious Mandelson, is good television. Similar to Clarkson et al, with their attention seeking columns of faux outrage at the Mail.
Also, “self perpetuated media hysteria”? They were buying off the police. They obstructed a murder inquiry – Milly Dowler’s parents gave an exclusive interview to the NotW in which they spoke about their hope that she was still alive because her voice messages had been deleted.
Alfonso Paulista.
You say: Do you think the allegations against the News of the World are “just some conspiracy by the BBC and Guardian”?
That is what is called a straw man.
I could be wrong, but I have not noticed anybody seeking to deny that some News International journalists were using illegal means to get/verify stories. I could complicate things and mention that this has not just been discovered this week, or that it has not been demonstrated that this behaviour is limited to News International, but I will keep it simple for you.
What I have seen is people draw attention to the manifest (financial and ideological) interest that BBC/Guardian journalists have in eliminating a competitor. You say this is irrelevant only because that is not something you want to hear. All you see and hear is the sweet music of journalistic neutrality in pursuit of truth. If this is the only thing you see and hear then you are – to put it bluntly – a very stupid man.
“That is what is called a straw man.”
Er, no. It’s what’s called a “question”.
“What I have seen is people draw attention to the manifest (financial and ideological) interest that BBC/Guardian journalists have in eliminating a competitor.”
So do you think it’s all a BBC/Guardian conspiracy? Or do you think that neither should report on this story (which only exists because of some actual proper journalism by the Guardian, in contrast to NI’s muckraking and criminality), in the interests of fair play?
“So do you think it’s all a BBC/Guardian conspiracy?”
You are simply repeating the same point. I refer you to the answer I gave you above. You are advancing a straw man argument i.e. attacking a claim nobody has made. How many times does this have to be pointed out to you?
Always interested in great services to news, AP.
As an assorted other, I can’t speak for anyone else (despite the hive constantly failing to gets its mind around that concept), but as far as i am concerned some individuals in the NoTW did great wrong, the NI management possibly also (and certainly didn’t earn their market rates in handling it), and even some pols too. And, for sure, some plod. Nicer blokes to happen to it’s hard to imagine.
All should reap the consequences of criminal acts. I could care less for Murdochs, and Cameron is shaping up as a truly dire PM, until you look at the alternatives.
However, in totality, other than being a very slow news month, the effort devoted in certain quarters to making this on par with some truly momentous events surrounding some very dire deeds, seems at best ‘excessive’. Not to mention a little selective and narrow in focus.
Not a peep out of the cherry vultures on any other areas, and now very high horses are being mounted.
I know only you and the rest of the glee club ask ze questions, but do you think the choice of Prescott or Campbell was smart to lead the charge on cleaning up polictics and media? The best representatives? or did they just barge into the studios, elbowing truly high integrity spokespersons out of the way?
And why is the multi-decade BBC monopoly OK to so many, when in recent months there have been many instances of individuals screwing up in areas of great responsibility to the public, with management going into bunker mode over subordinate transgressions and then simply being seen as ‘loyal’. Dr. G weighed in, but was reduced to mumbling that one can always do without a TV if you don’t like it before exiting stage left. Sad.
There’s a slight problem at play. I could care less about NI or Murdoch as they are private, and market forces can do what they do best with them. And are.
But what, precisely, is there in place to address the swelling boil that is the BBC’s naked attempts at trying to lock down the media influence of the UK under one, uniquely funded banner? With no counter-critique allowed. Especially from those doing the funding.
From Newsnight ‘panels’ comprising various Guardian dysnasties and little else, to QTs overseen by the BBC’ own dynsaty, to so-called ‘free’ debate blogs that only run during the working hours of the Westiminster bubble, there is something stinking to high heaven.
Especially when, in the name of addressing localised criminality, so much pervasive that is pertinent gets neatly sidelined while facile tribal calls go out hourly via in theory impartial news, on blogs or unrestrained twitter feeds. That I am compelled to co-fund.
Are you going to honestly claim that all of that has not occurred, and that it does is not worthy of a bit of comment in complement to any legitimate investigations that are, currently surrounding still alleged acts? The law is an ass, but there is process. The BBC has acted like judge and jury and is in danger of allowing truly guilty folk walk on ket charges by taking a petty political and selfish stance, using transparently insincere concern over truly terrible personal tragedies to push some nasty, greedy metrosexual agendas and shore up pension plan security fears.
“I could care less about NI or Murdoch as they are private, and market forces can do what they do best with them.”
They were paying off the Metropolitan Police to prevent a proper investigation of their illegal phone hacking. But yeah, that’s less important than whether you think the guests on Newsnight are too left wing. Fuck sake.
Mr. Paulista,
You started on a weak premise, dug a hole, grabbed at straw men and have cherry-picked your way up a dead end only to spray a poorly spelled obsenity when all else has failed.
So far, so typically CiF.
However, by joining that select band who demand reams of answers but seem unwilling to provide much in return, you are a very weak link.
Hence, good day.
“…a poorly spelled obsenity…”
You couldn’t make it up.
Alfonso Paulista
“…a poorly spelled obsenity…”
Today, 17:57:24 BST
ps: Thank you for, in one delicious sentence, showing the true priorities you and your merry band of cherry gotcha vultures stand for.
I do prefer a properly punctuated and spelt obscenity. There we are. It’s a personal preference. As I’ve had to point out before to one of the Beeboid Corporation’s defenders, mentioning one particular thing, e.g. a misspelling, doesn’t prevent one having concerns about other things. Funny that.
Take a look at the site banner at the top of the page. This blog is about the BBC not NI. Criticism of the BBC and it’s all pervading bias is what this blog is about – not the disgustingly venal recently labour supporting NI rags.
I don’t pay for NI. I have to pay for the BBC or go to gaol. End of.
“This blog is about the BBC not NI. “
This story is about NI and not the BBC. Unless you subscribe to the theory that there’s a conspiracy by the BBC/Guardian to get Murdoch and the whole thing’s just blown out of proportion, of course.
“ labour supporting NI rags.”
What do you make of yesterday’s revelations regarding Gordon Brown?
Alfonso, for starters this ‘hacking’ has been known about for years, why didn’t the Guardian and BBC kick up a stink when Liebore were in power?
OK Cameron employed Coulson and rightly he’s getting heat over that (but Coulson hasn’t been charged or convicted of ANYTHING yet) but none of this mess is Cameron’s fault.
Nu Liebore were sucking up to Rupert Murdoch for years even BEFORE the 97 election, you seem to be believing the BBC/Guardian lies that only Tories were close to Murdoch and Brooks. Stop listening to the BBC, Nu Liebore were in bed with Murdoch for nearly 15 years, so we know WHY Campbell, Brown & Bliar refused to dig deeper.
It’s a joke for Red Ed to make the hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone a political act, he really is a vile twat never mind having a face like some cheap cartoon character.
Yeah, but whatabout, whatabout, whatabout?
Nu Liebore? What age are you, Martin?
Also, the Guardian has been pursuing this for years. They didn’t suddenly start an investigation last summer.
Alfonso it was only since the election that all of a sudden the Guardian and the BBC got together in an unholy anti Tory alliance.
Your pather pathetic answer expalin clearly you’ve got nothing useful to say on this subject.
ALL of this hacking took place under Nu Liebore, a vile Government that murdered thousands of people in Iraq and even saw our own citizens blown apart on the streets and underground of London, something I will NEVER forgive any socialist shit for.
This hacking was ‘ignored’ by Liebore where was Red Ed and his brother? Where was Ed Balls? Brown, Bliar? Not one of them wanted to piss off Murdoch so it’s vomit inducing to see these retarded socialists now throwing hissy fits on the BBC every 5 minutes.
I’m reminded of Gordon the one eyed idiot gurning in that stupid way he does on GMTV a few years ago (before the 97 election) when he kept getting leaked documents from someone in the then Tory government, cut to when HE was in power and how he got his goon 5 bellies smiff to bust Damien Green’s office and home for the same thing using the Met Police.
It was Nu Liebore who turned the Met Police into political goons, using them to bring political pressure on politicians and the media.
It was Nu Liebore who got the plods to back the proposed 90 day detention plan, yes to be able to lock up any citizen for 90 days without a shred of evidence, it wouldn’t be Muslims getting locked up it would be people like Walter Woolfgang or anyone else who pissed off Liebore or the thick plods.
More excellent whatabouttery there, Martin.
The Guardian has pursued this story since Clive Goodman was jailed 4 years ago. It’s the only paper that did so. It’s got nothing to do with NU LIEBORE and TONY BLIAR, you infantile idiot.
Oh yeah it’s all a conspiracy Rupert subverted the whole justice system then he made every one in the country a sheep then hacked every phone of every famous person all the while the entire government of the time was totally blameless and with the BBC/gurbiuon were saving puppies in Iraq !
Yay! More whatabouttery!
Alfonso, yes it has. Blair and co could have acted on the hacking but they didn’t and the Guardian has been after Coulson for ages.
Jeremy Hunt stated in the Commons today that Nu Liebore could have acted on the hacking but they didn’t, I notice the Guardian isn’t giving anyone in Nu Liebore a hard time.Neither Tony Blair or Brown wanted to act against Murdoch, so it’s a bit rich Liebore getting all worked up now against the Tories, who have been left another curled up turd to clean up, one of many laid by Nu Liebore in 13 years.
Oh and I’m getting fed up with that twat Red Ed bringing up Milly Dowler for political reasons every 5 minutes just to score points.
This halfwitted tool is on the wrong side of every argument.
Yeah, but whatabout…
Alfsono, agree with what you’ve said till the last bit. People at the BBC are bigging up the case that the Murdoch Sky deal should be kicked to touch, not a decision deferred till the end of a Police investigation.
There is a very valid line of questioning to make to the Rt Hon Leader of Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition that his calls for a Judge led inquiry now before the new police investigation has concluded is completely irresponsible and political opportunism. I dont hear this line of questioning being pursued. What I have heard is Mr Miliband appearing on the BBC either making ex-catedra style statements and on at least one occasion a BBC journalist (Kirsty Wark – no surprise) prompting Ed Miliband what to say.
That said, some of what is read here does give the impression a significant chunk of B-BBCers make out the whole scandal is a got up job in itself.
My reply above was to Alfonso’s first post, which seemed reasonable and well argued. Unfortunately from his subsequent posts one can see it was just an act. Another BBC subversion enabling butter wouldn’t melt in my mouth Gramscian.
So the argument goes thus: a number of individuals have been jailed for creating a crisis, for unscrupulous practices and for not behaving to their own code of conduct – and for that the entire organisation to which they belong must be crushed and not allowed to function further.
hmmm…
Ed Milliband has just made an excellent proposition for dismantling the Labour Party.
“If Rupert Murdoch is too powerful, then so is the BBC”
(by Ed West)
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100096297/if-rupert-murdoch-is-too-powerful-then-so-is-the-bbc/
Interesting the few ‘defenders of the faith’ seem to have tried pram based toy ejection first, then when that’s not worked ad homs, finishing off with obscenity. And for their trouble got nil points from the audience they were trying to persuade. Who are deemed ‘thick’ for not see the gloriousness of their position.
So, more closing for comments and trying to circumvent democracy it is then?
No change there.
And the Beeboid Corporation. Don’t forget about it!
My comment was meant to relate to Robert Similar’s remark that MillipEd had just made a case for dismantling the Labour Party. It has become detached by a long way.
When I first saw Robert’s avatar, I thought we had been graced by a visit from Obama !
BBC Bonus: Gordon Brown is relevant again, and it’s a sympathy story. It’s like Christmas all month for them.
Yes I notice the BBC are playing the sympathy line for Brown, poor Gordon, never mind the halfwit trashed our economy and under funded the forces in Iraq and Afghanistan. Poor Gordon, he’s not a bully, he’s not thug, he’s a really nice chap…honestly.
Martin:
“I’m getting fed up with that twat Red Ed bringing up Milly Dowler for political reasons every 5 minutes just to score points”
Gordon Brown’s children are fair game though, eh?
Amazing isn’t it? Just at the very moment that Brown may be asked some awkward questions the BBC/Guardian axis manages to turn him into a victim.
The BBC/Guardian axis? Surely the News of the World, the Sun and the Times managed to turn him into a victim by hacking his voicemail, illegally accessing his bank account and illegally obtaining his childrens’ medical records?
Sorry – do you have any proof of what you just said? “..illegally accessing his bank account and illegally obtaining his childrens’ medical records?” Do you work for the BBC? where an alegation is actually a conviction?
“”Former PM claims medical records disclosing his infant son’s cystic fibrosis were illegally obtained by The Sun. ”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/
If you come from Spain then you probably do not know this, but we have had in this country what is known as “Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat ” look it up, it has served us well for hundreds of years.
Frank Furedi “‘We name and shame the evil tabloid hacks!’
The cultural elite’s crusade against News International is only a more erudite version of the News of the World’s war on perverts.
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php/site/article/10748/
Amzingly, given that he’s up against writers as dimwitted as James Delingpole, I think that’s the most retarded response to this whole situation I’ve yet read.
It beggars belief that when presented with an actual media conspiracy – phone hacking, obstructing justice, perjury, police corruption, like they’re the goddamned mafia, or something – anyone would try to blame the whole furore on a left-wing liberal cultural elite.
That could almost be a description of the Labour Government’s thuggery and skullduggery. I don’t know how the Beeboids don’t see what is wrong with having Thugs Prescott and Campbell on the tv pontificating about illegal, immoral or shameful behaviour. The Beeboid Corporation cannot be serious.
Even more whatabouttery! It’s like some Guinness Book of Records attempt.
Yes, you keep on saying that, parrotlike. đŸ˜›
But the question is: What About it? Tell us that.
“Yes, you keep on saying that”
Yes, I do. Because I keep seeing responses that amount to “yeah, but whatabout????”
Alfonso keeps prattling on about a media conspiracy. Conspiracy? How is it that illegal acts by certain journalists and the investigators they hired (acts that were likely happening elsewhere in Fleet Street) amount to a conspiracy ? Ileegal acts are illegal acts per se – but do not of themselves transmute in legal terms into a conspiracy.
How else would you describe colluding with the police to ensure that your crimes are not properly investigated, if not as a conspiracy?
Well, how about a bit of ‘sowhatery’?
You see Alfonso, in a democracy, alternative viewpoints are permitted. Only a defender of BBC bias could take exception to this.
Newspapers are indulging in bribery, blackmail, obstructing justice, data protection breaches, perjury, lying to parliament, etc. and your reaction is “so what?” Fair enough, takes all sorts, I suppose.
Can you point out, though, where I’ve tried to silence or disallow anyone else’s viewpoint? Why would I? It’s comedy gold watching the squirming and laughable attempts to somehow portray the BBC and Guardian as being in the wrong.
If nothing else, this line stood out to me:
Of course, all of us have a tendency to project our beliefs on to other people, and no doubt the vanguard of the anti-Murdoch camp has genuinely convinced itself that it is the authentic voice of Britain.
For “vanguard”, substitute “BBC”. This reflects exactly what the Beeboids always claim, especially for the past week.
So you think, like Frank Furedi, that the anti-Murdoch camp is not the authentic voice of Britain, but the likes of our Frank is? OK.
I think the BBC does not accurately reflect the authentic voice of anyone but a cosmopolitan, Left-liberal elite, just like Andrew Marr and Jeff Randall and Peter Sissons and Michael Buerk and Antony Jay and Ben Stephenson say.
Does anyone here ever give a straight answer to a question?
Yes, Alfonso. How is my answer anything but?
I didn’t ask for your view on whose voice the BBC reflects.
Alfonso, the BBC is the leader and primary instigator of the “anti-Murdoch camp”, and not the authentic voice of Britain. You asked about the “anti-Murdoch camp” being the authentic voice of Britain, and I said that it isn’t. And then listed several major BBC figures who agree with me.
Alfonso, are you auditioning for the TODAY programme? Where answers you do not want to hear are not answers?
??????????????????????????????????????
Johnny Nash:
There are more questions than answers
Pictures in my mind that will not show
There are more questions than answers
And the more I find out the less I know
Yeah, the more I find out the less I know
I’ve asked the question time and time again
Why is there so little of a moment
Oh, what is life, how do we live
What should we take and how much should we give…
Robert Peston again, this time passing comment on the alleged hacking of royal phones. “this morning I learned” who’s giving him this info, I wonder.
Interesting some are asking if his righteous stretching of what is by using what he ‘has been told’ may be in turn doing just what the the Axis of Weevils has claimed to be all in a lather over.
And now…
http://www.jamesbliss.net/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/dead-parrot.jpg
Do you honestly think that Robert Peston is hacking people’s voicemails to obtain his information? Or bribing the police? Or blackmailing politicians? You don’t think it’s more likely that someone’s spoken to him off the record?
And (just suppose) somebody is using unlawful means with which to obtain and then pass these allegations on to Peston “off the record”, would you consider that to be justified?
Peston has “been told” an awful lot of stuff these last few days, surely questions need asking?
Do you have evidence of any illegal behaviour? Do you actually believe that Peston is using illegal methods to obtain his information?
Do I have any evidence – of course not, but a lack of evidence doesn’t seem to be an issue in this witch hunt.
Do I actually believe that Peston is using illegal methods to obtain his information? Probably not, but then Rebekah Brooks would argue that she never used any illegal methods to obtain stories for the NoW – the people acting for them on the other hand……………………
Alfonso knows damn well that a lot of Fleet Street was up to the same shenanigans. But he – like the BBC – plainly hates or fear the Murdoch press – hence his wild allegations of “conspiracy”.
Indeed, Lloyd, until some actual evidence is put on the table for all to see, then this whole thing amounts to nothing more than “somebody claims that some phones and databases were hacked”. Well, I claim that I won the Eurolottery the other day, so on that basis, can I have my £115m please? …Huh? What do you mean, ‘show us the ticket’? Haven’t you been following the news this last week? I’ve just said I won, therefore it definitely happened.
PS, had to chuckle when Gordon Brown weighed in! If I were him, I’d be dreading to think what the evidence of his phone calls might reveal, judging by what happened the last time he forgot he still had a live microphone on him!!
“The BBC has a monopoly and it’s abusing it”
(by Tim Montgomerie)
[Opening extract]:
“Lots of nonsense is being said and written about how News International is undermining the diversity of British media. There’s only one dominant force in the British media and that’s the BBC. The BBC’s dominance is overwhelming when it comes to news.
The graphs below come from last December’s OfCom report into News International’s bid for BSkyB. The PDF of the report is here.
TELEVISION ACCOUNTS FOR 73% OF NEWS
Let’s start at the beginning. We know that News International are powerful in newspapers but people also get their news from the internet, radio and, of course, TV. Our first graph from OfCom shows that television accounts for 73% of peoples’ news. The internet, TV and radio are nearly equal in importance but all a poor second place and with the internet eating into newspapers at an accelerating rate…”
http://conservativehome.blogs.com/platform/2011/07/the-bbc-has-a-monopoly-and-its-abusing-it-says-timmontgomerie.html
It’s quite interesting that the BBC are spinning the line about plurality and newspapers. The BBC of course doesn’t ‘officially’ have a newspaper (other than the Guardian) but what the BBC does have is a massive online presence that has often been seen as a threat to local newspapers (and one can argue to other media forms as well). Perhaps in terms of plurality the BBC should lose its online presence (for news)
Very interesting article in the Mail about Peston. We know the Met Police are pissed off at all the leaks coming from News International, is Peston being used and if so should the BBC be having word with him? I’d be interested to know how close Peston is getting legally to the edge with this stuff, I presume the BBC lawyers are giving him the OK, but it also seems a bit rich for the BBC to go on about how News International is leaking stuff when it’s their man getting some of the leaks.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2013684/Is-BBCs-Robert-Peston-close-Rupert-Murdochs-man-Will-Lewis.html
Journalists up to no good to get the filth the public demand to read ? REALLY, what a supprise.
I’d like to think that the BBC were storing up a huge spanking fpr themselves with all this excessive hounding of a narthty, howwid wight wing organisation. Under a tough govenment maybe but one can only hope with this one.
‘Cranmer’:-“Fiddling around with Murdoch while Rome burns, along with Athens, Dublin, Lisbon… ”
[Excerpt]:
“Judging by the unrelenting BBC focus on David Cameron’s relationship with Coulson, Brooks, and Murdoch, you would think Labour had never sullied its hands with any such association and that the Prime Minister’s judgement were about to bring down the Government or cause a crisis which might deal a fatal blow to his own premiership.
“There is nothing, absolutely nothing more pressing in the Prime Minister’s in-tray than the contagion spreading around the Eurozone. Forget the U-turns; forget phone hacking; forget the failure of the ‘Big Society’: the euro crisis really could end the Coalition Government and terminate David Cameron’s premiership. And the BBC is mute. The story doesn’t even appear on the front page of its website. It doesn’t even appear on the page dedicated to politics and economics.”
http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2011/07/fiddling-around-with-murdoch-while-rome.html
“If Max Clifford deserves £1m, what price the Dowler family?”
(by Richard Littlejohn)
[Extract]:
“The BBC and others are using the scandal to prevent Rupert Murdoch taking full control of BSkyB. The loss-making Guardian and Independent seem determined to take down the rest of the British Press with them.”
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2013663/News-World-If-Max-Clifford-deserves-1m-price-Milly-Dowlers-family.html#ixzz1Rrtm30wk
Yet again Alfonso rants on about “conspiracy”.
as in “how else would you describe colluding with the police to ensure that your crimes are not investigated properly, if not as conspiracy?”
I can see there is plenty of evidence to suggest illegal actions by certain journalists or investigators they paid for information – but where is there evidence of collusion with police to ensure such crimes were not properly investigated ? Which police officers were nobbled, when, and can some media links be provided ?
“Conspiracy” is part of the Guardian/BBC paranoia about Murdoch. Alfonso is over-egging the pudding on this. If Alfonso cannot post some media links with cogent evidence of conspiracy, I suggest he shuts up about it.
Just a thought…
Labour Governments tend to fall with an economic crisis, while the Tories are defeated by political failures.
No ‘double dip’ and prospects for the next couple of years not looking too diasterous – so the left led by the unofficial opposition BBC are going all out for a political crisis.
Now anyone with a modicum of perspective knows full welll that this phone hacking scandal is the child of the last Labour Government.
But hey BBC keep up the shout….Murdoch! Murdoch! I’m sure that’s shifting the poll ratings in your favour.
By the way, if unbiased why do I keep hearing BBC telepromt readers and commentators alike using the perjorative term ‘Empire’ to describe Mr Murdoch’s companies?
“How the BBC makes me sick”
(by Peter Mullen)
http://www.thenorthernecho.co.uk/features/columnists/latest/9134541.How_the_BBC_makes_me_sick/