I have written to Hunt (on his web-page) as follows, and somewhat similarly to my MP (mine is Mark Reckless, alas conservative, who replaced the wonderful Bob Marshall-Andrews when the latter retired at the last election). I would urge all of you concerned about the Murdoch power-grab to do likewise. Letter follows: -

"I am extremely concerned about the increasing influence of Rupert Murdoch in our media.

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. That plurality has already been badly impaired, and mass market avenues for information have entered excessive concentration.

Mr Murdoch already controls two major national print newspapers. A simple scan round the dial will show that there is a substantial commonality of a limited news coverage on terrestrial wireless broadcasts. The internet has 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 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. 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); and

Potentially to undermine democratic activity.

It would be very dangerous for this country.



It is known that there has been substantial public input to OFCOM, and it is known that OFCOM has recommended closer scrutiny of the sinister and foreign Murdoch's plans. Their report to says the Competition Commission needs to be involved.

But you have been is sitting on the report and refusing to make it public. You have been having secret and possibly unlawful meetings with Murdoch's representatives. It looks as if you he could be trying to cook up a way of giving the Murdoch power grab the green light. This is doubly sinister in that Vince Cable was disqualified from adjudication on the ground of bias, but you have long been known to be an avowed aficionado of Murdoch.

A secret deal between you and Murdoch would be undemocratic, probably unlawful, and remarkably redolent of Italian bad habits. The right thing(s) to do would be to publish the OFCOM report and announce that there will be a further Competition Commission enquiry".

By only showing the report to Murdoch's lobbying team you create an unwholesome impression of an intention to work with them to find a way round the OFCOM report.

That is not the English nor a democratic way of doing things.

Yours sincerely,

Richard McD. Bridge"