The Silver Screen Oasis

Stuart, we do get the Sunday Post here, it's a very reputable paper. I had books of the Broons when I was little, an old uncle liked them, I had lots of fun reading them. It might not effect Tommy Sheridan's sentence but I'm sure his defence team will be looking very closely at it. I think too the Sunday Sun will get launched pretty soon and according to the paper today rebekah Brooks has said there is worse to come, what worse I don't know. I wonder if at the bottom of all this is a corporate culture that makes demands of it's journalists and contacts to get the news and create the headline at whatever cost, I'm sure it's something that Rebekah Brooks has known about and probably too, Rupert Murdoch. It will be interesting to see of it holds up the BSB bid that is being looked at by the monopolies and mergers commission. Ultimately I don't think Murdoch has taken this decision through shame but through corporate need and culpability, I just hope that he is not dodging the compensation owed to many by taking this step.

moirafinnie wrote:Murdoch's News Corp. footprint on American news has grown far beyond Fox News. His corporation controls The Wall Street Journal through Dow Jones & Co., and that has always seemed like too much power to me--especially since these organizations help to shape perceptions of economies worldwide.

Didn't James Bond take out Murdoch a few films back?

MichiganJ wrote:

moirafinnie wrote:Murdoch's News Corp. footprint on American news has grown far beyond Fox News. His corporation controls The Wall Street Journal through Dow Jones & Co., and that has always seemed like too much power to me--especially since these organizations help to shape perceptions of economies worldwide.

Didn't James Bond take out Murdoch a few films back?

I just love your sense of humor MichiganJ!

MichiganJ wrote:

moirafinnie wrote:Murdoch's News Corp. footprint on American news has grown far beyond Fox News. His corporation controls The Wall Street Journal through Dow Jones & Co., and that has always seemed like too much power to me--especially since these organizations help to shape perceptions of economies worldwide.

Didn't James Bond take out Murdoch a few films back?

If only it was that simple.

Some of the latest in the story. Perhaps the mighty may fall.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/

Anyone know if Fox is covering this?

Don't know exact details yet, but Murdoch's sister paper The Sun is now under investigation. There's something to do with former P.M Gordon Brown.

I've heard one expert advise Murdoch to seel off his UK newspapers

You English are so lucky. Why can't we get media scandals here across the pond?
We could use a little house cleaning in the information distribution department.

I hope this link works. It's about what a Murdoch newspaper did to Gordon Brown. Though funnily enough it's from Sky News. I've added a 2nd clip

Is this scandal going to mean Murdoch won't get the BSkyB deal?

The latest thing I've heard is that there is cross party support for asking Rupert Murdoch to withdraw his bid from BSkyB, no one here is supprting him, the public and the governments opinion is to want to deny him more power, he's got to be very savvy about how he plays his cards. I just hope our Government shows it's teeth in this matter and doesn't let his lawyers wheedle their way around it.

The story concerning Gordon Brown is that Gordon Brown alleges that The Times the NOW sister paper paid criminals to obtain his bank details and also that of his youngest son who suffers from cystic fibrosis. The Murdoch empire took a stand against Gordon Brown in the last election and supported David Cameron, his papers inhabit the floating middle ground and who his paper's support always obtain power. I'm not sure if this is because people who read his papers like to be told what to think or that the people who read his paper are the people who are floating voters.

charliechaplinfan wrote:The latest thing I've heard is that there is cross party support for asking Rupert Murdoch to withdraw his bid from BSkyB, no one here is supprting him, the public and the governments opinion is to want to deny him more power, he's got to be very savvy about how he plays his cards. I just hope our Government shows it's teeth in this matter and doesn't let his lawyers wheedle their way around it.

MichiganJ wrote:Is this scandal going to mean Murdoch won't get the BSkyB deal?

Kingme Thoughts: For what I've hearing and understanding is that Murdoch will not get the BSkyB deal because my friend and I were talking about it this morning over a cup of coffee that cross party support is getting stronger by the day and Rupert Murdoch will be denied getting BSkyB period.

The story concerning Gordon Brown is that Gordon Brown alleges that The Times the NOW sister paper paid criminals to obtain his bank details and also that of his youngest son who suffers from cystic fibrosis. The Murdoch empire took a stand against Gordon Brown in the last election and supported David Cameron, his papers inhabit the floating middle ground and who his paper's support always obtain power. I'm not sure if this is because people who read his papers like to be told what to think or that the people who read his paper are the people who are floating voters.

Kingme Thoughts: When charliechaplinfan written "The Murdoch empire took a stand against Gordon Brown in the last election and supported David Cameron, his paper inhabit the floating middle ground ... are the people who are floating voters" ... to me, something rotten here that is why I don't like the Press getting too much power and there is a old saying "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men." ... this is how I view Murdoch. I don't trust him at all ... period.

This Scandal is hurting some of my friends that lives in Eastern Canada, London, and New York City who loves reading articles from News Of The World faithfully every Sunday. They sent me e-mails about this my thoughts sums up their feelings about the whole mess. Giving the Press too much power is not a good thing ... In the past dozens years ... my feelings about the press that they do not preach accountability, truth, and their opinion should be unbiased beyond reproach. This is how I feel the press should operate ... period. I have been thinking about this a lot in the past few days ... charliechaplinfan & MichiganJ helped me to put together my frame of mind on this latest press scandal that occurred in England.

Don't forget that it was the Press that exposed this scandal in the first place. More, not less, power to 'em.

To me, more of the problem arrives when there is too little competition. It's interesting that we perceive, particularly with the internet, that there are endless sources of news. The truth seems to be, more and more, that media outlets are owned by a choice few. Not so great for democracy.

Glad to see that Murdoch has dropped plans to acquire Sky News:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/14/world/europe/14hacking.html?_r=1&hp

Good points about globalization and mergers, gentlemen. I've been through five corporate marriages in my working life in the last 25 years. They are not fun and not profitable for working people in the short or long term in my limited experience. Sadly, the hope of going back to a time when one corporation was not able to control an entire industry within a country or internationally seems quite dim. Bigger may be better for some people. I just don't know them.

The Sun has said a man gained access to information about Gordon Brown's son's illness and handed it over to the paper, so folk could become more aware of the illness. They've even provided a vidoe of the man, his back to the camera sayingas such. I don't get it. If he or the paper wanted to make its readers aware of the illness, why didn't they just run an article about it without having to bring Frazer Brown into it. I also don't get that Rebecca phoning the Brown's to tell them the paper was going to print the article about their son regardless. Why didn't she ask for their consent?