I refer to the proposed takeover of BSkyB by NewsCorp. I confirm that I am English born and bred. I am also a solicitor who has practised to a considerable extent in the media field.
The basic premise of democracy is an informed electorate. Without information, or with skewed information, the electorate cannot take soundly based decisions. This depends upon media plurality and relatively low barriers to entry in mass media. Indeed, when I started practice in the medial field the UK had a plethora of competing terrestrial television stations using an officially neutral network hardware, and vigorous controls on cross-media ownership within regions. Likewise there were controls on control of an excess of broadcast media and also national print media. That plurality has already been badly impaired, and those avenues for information have entered excessive concentration.
Mr Murdoch already controls two major national print newspapers - the once proudly factual and independent "Times" and the redtop "Sun". By way of background local newspaper ownership is also now concentrated in a limited number of hands, and a simple scan round the dial will show that there is a substantial commonality of a limited news coverage on terrestrial wireless broadcasts. Also, alas, broad-spectrum mass-access information is hard to find on the internet. There is a mass of crumbs for those of short attention span, but apart from 140 character "tweets" which of their nature cannot base serious discussion there is little that has the penetration to balance potential bias across those two national newspapers plus a celestial television platform. Likewise market penetration of non-Murdoch celestial platforms is slight.
This already gives Murdoch excessive power over the quality of information provided to the public. The facts already show that he is prepared to use that influence - a Sun headline famously bragged of a previous election "It's the Sun Wot Won it". Indeed at the time there was speculation that his price for support for the relevant potential prime minister was a promise of relaxation of media controls. In the USA his "Fox News" is a byword for bigoted propaganda mixed with alleged news. He has demonstrated his opposition to democratic representation by his union-busting activities when the Times first moved from Fleet Street. All this is dangerous. The obvious corruption and venality in Italy show what can happen when political and media power are too closely entwined.
Moreover, Murdoch has already demonstrated his hostility to alternative media outlets. He and his family have made many and political attacks on the closest thing we have to unbiased media - the BBC. A comparison between the quality of output of the heyday of the BBC (and the heyday of the UK terrestrial TV franchises) with the lowest common denominator approach of Murdoch controlled TV shows a tendency towards circuses almost as basic as Roman circuses - without alas the bread, as in the famous phrase "bread and circuses". Total Murdoch control of Sky will reduce media choice and quality.
Yet further, he has already demonstrated his contempt for regulation by cynically taking US citizenship to enable his control of Fox.
Thus the effect of NewsCorp control would be:
To place excessive media control in the hands of one dangerous individual
To place excessive political power in the hands of one dangerous individual - consider the Fox news support for Sarah Palin and the Tea Party.
To reduce meaningful media choice for the individual
To reduce the quality of televisual programming (if you doubt this look at the Times and the Sun since his ownership).
Potentially to undermine the powerbase of democratic trade union activity.