|
12 Jul 11 - 08:07 PM (#3186347) Subject: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel Bottom line first; As News Corp drops 7 to 15% in the markets the Chairmanship will shift from Murdoch to the second largest owner, the Saudis. By then the US Fox News branch of News Corp will become suspect even in the eyes of the most Christian of supporters. The UK scandal is like Stalingrad for Germany when the great army of the "Mogulian Hoard" is stalled and begins to shrink. Murdoch the destroyer has held power over politicians worldwide and may now have more enemies than hired yes men and women. Fox NEws has called for the destruction of Media Matters for their political criticism of Fox and the removal of their non profit tax status. If they are successful, then the same could be said of the NRA. I can not foresee Rupert holding onto the reigns another 10 years when he will be ninty years old. Could FOX go unscathed? COuld the Koch Bros. outbid the Saudis for control of FOX? I don't know. Fair and balanced viewers want to know. |
|
13 Jul 11 - 11:06 AM (#3186731) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Murdoch has withdrawn his BSkyB bid as "too difficult in the current climate". The good guys DO sometimes win. Don T. |
|
13 Jul 11 - 11:15 AM (#3186740) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Jack the Sailor Bernstein has an interesting point of view. Watergate? Not Stalingrad? |
|
13 Jul 11 - 11:39 AM (#3186751) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: GUEST,Jon From that article: But perhaps just as troubling, authorities in Britain may respond to popular outrage at the scandal by imposing the kind of regulations that cannot help but undermine a truly free press. I am worried about this... |
|
13 Jul 11 - 11:47 AM (#3186754) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Bill D I am not sure whether I worry more about a 'truly free press', or about a scandal rag like News of the World being able to SELL 6 million copies to people who thrive on rumors, gossip and sleaze. |
|
13 Jul 11 - 11:57 AM (#3186759) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Stu In all honesty it's highly unlikely that draconian press regulation is going to be imposed; Cameron said as much in the Commons this afternoon and was still wittering on about that old chestnut 'self-regualtion', which is politician-speak for 'do what thou wilt'. It remains to be seen if the Dirty Digger will have lost his grip on the balls of the UK's politicos: remember that Brooks is a personal friend of Cameron and they move in the same circles. Hell hath no fury, and I suspect Dave is quaking in his boots at the thought of pissing her off. |
|
13 Jul 11 - 01:35 PM (#3186834) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: GUEST,livelylass Can anyone comment on how this story is being reported in the US? Anything about it on FOX for example? Most curious to find out how it gets dealt with once the scandal has started to touch matters close to the hearts of the US public, such as the victims of 9/11. And once the ball gets rolling over there, what if any repercussions there could ultimately be for Murdoch's US media empire.. |
|
13 Jul 11 - 02:02 PM (#3186856) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Jack the Sailor us coverage |
|
13 Jul 11 - 02:17 PM (#3186868) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Q (Frank Staplin) A temporary setback, but no threat to Fox and his other major money makers. The proposed investigation by Rockefeller will fizzle. An opinion article last week in The New York Times pointed to his revitalization of the print and other media industries, some of which would have failed if his companies had not taken ownership positions. His position in cable networks is growing (National Geographic, Hulu, etc.). |
|
13 Jul 11 - 04:24 PM (#3186964) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel Today Keith Olberman was on the air and told the complete story of the time 7 years ago when FOX news sports division blackmailed him with a letter from his doctor regarding his health. Keith was told by his doctor that he shoulc slow down or risk a heart attack. Keith told FOX news if there was any way to work 5 days a week instead of 6, they told him to get a letter from his doctor that he was ehalthy enough to work. He was given the choice to work 4 days a week with two cross country travel for interviews for an addition 2 and a half days, or work 3 days a week at a 60% cut in pay from his then current schedule of 6 days a week. He chose 3 days a week since his doctor said that his heart could fail working 6 or seven days a week. He went on to tell the story of how Rupert Murdoch personally fired him for reporting that Murdoch was in the process of selling the Dogers. Keith had permission and clearence from the PR staff to run the story but when Rupert found out he immediately told his staff to fire Olberman. It is already known that FOX hacked American victims of the 9-11 attacks. Ahh Q, I guess you think the disgust of hacking a dead girls phone is his hidious that trying to hack every 9-11 victim's phone. I think someone else could run the National Geographic channel with better programing. Have you seen it recently? Be prepared to be shocked. livelylass CNN and MSNBC are devoting about 3 hours a day on the UK media scandal. IT is in depth and scathing. Chris Matthews was the one who called this Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad. FOX has covered it only obliquely by screaming at media matter. org for linking FOX to the dirty deeds in the UK. I have not seen any real direct FOX coverage of the UK scandal except for mention on the FOX business channel reporting falsy that the BSKYB deal will not be effected. |
|
13 Jul 11 - 07:33 PM (#3187104) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Tootler It was very interesting that the day after Murdoch announced he was stopping publication of the News of the World, non of the News International papers carried the story on their front page while all the other UK papers did. Indeed with large banner headlines. |
|
14 Jul 11 - 04:54 AM (#3187246) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: autolycus News International demonstrating that what is no doubt part of the conventional view of what a free press is all about. They are quite free not to print inconvenient stuff. |
|
14 Jul 11 - 05:49 AM (#3187274) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Don(Wyziwyg)T Let's just hope that we end up with a free press in the UK. FREE FROM MURDOCH AND HIS MINIONS!! We don't need to regulate the activities of investigative journalists, which would prevent the exposure of many a criminal activity (such as the phone hacking). What we need is for journalists who do indulge in those kind of activities to be made aware that if there is no genuine public interest, they will be jailed upon conviction. I'd rather like to see the Times return to the respected disseminator of genuine news it once was, and the way to do that is to increase the pressure on the government to remove Murdoch entirely from control of any UK Media, and never again allow foreign control of our news. Don T. |
|
14 Jul 11 - 06:18 AM (#3187287) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: GUEST,DirectFromBraggTowers(servants' quarters) I've no problem with Rupe being brought down to size, per se, and it's right that his rapacious empire be regulated. That said, in the interests of balance and true liberal pluralism in our media, a different voice *does* need to be heard as an alternative to the bias of the Beeb/Grauniad axis. Wrt the BBC, it needs to be constrained to properly-overseen political impartiality (as is mandated in its charter) or be disestablished altogether. What other country (apart from vile dictatorships or theocracies) has a state broadcaster which is funded by a tax imposed under threat of jail for all tv users (even if you never watch the BBC), which with Vatican-like resources unaccountability, is an entrenched extension of one political party and its imperfect creed, which insidiously legislates for same and actively undermines and militates against all alternative points of view? There must be no news anywhere else in the world at the moment because this hacking affair has had non-stop coverage on the Beeb (down to the Graun journalist who broke the story being the subject of a fulsomely-praiseworthy R4 programme). Could it be that they've been motivated by more than simple social justice? i.e. by defending against an insolent threat to their empire? |
|
14 Jul 11 - 07:54 AM (#3187358) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Richard Bridge Check EXACTLY what the BBC's charter and relevant statute say. Since its establishment the BBC has been a valuable resource, admired throughout the world. The BBC has since Thatcher been steadily muzzled and now IMHO could not in any way be said to be left-leaning, so to speak of the BBC/Guardian axis is folly. The pathway to a balanced set of media is to prevent media concentrations. It was Thatcher who started the roll away from that, not initially as an assault on the BBC but one on Thames TV for broadcasting "Death on the Rock". The best way forward for the media would be to return to the early days of Channel 4 (when there were truly regional TV companies) and tot he regulatory system that was dismantled by Thatcher - maybe adding Channel 5. What is most necessary is media plurality. Then the media (print media and broadcast ones) can be made subject to law as distinct from political muzzling. Since as a matter of economic theory the greater capital tends to drive out the lesser, regulation of concentration is essential. This story is one of the world's oldest constitutional democracy battling for its life. Small wonder it is a big story. |
|
15 Jul 11 - 08:42 PM (#3188534) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel The world includes an assortment of paradoxes. When a fact is mentioned on FOX it is wrongly considered to be unbalanced without a talking head presenting a quasi fact or out right lie to "balance" the original fact. Yes the world has its element of nonsensical quantum irrationalities but usually the fact-counter fact regieme on FOX is hooey and an unprofessional form of journalistic propoganda. ----------------------------------------------------------\\ Murdoch has bought full page apologies in every paper in the UK. His red headed right hand job pal is now fired. His US CEO who was with the Wall Street Journal and Dow Jones, has resigned, Hundreds of whistle blowers are waiting in line to expose criminal and tort offenses done against them by Murdoch corporations. Rupert is rightly apologetic and it makes me wish for the same from people like George W Bush. He lied and people died as a result. Rupert hopes to save his son from prosecution and have enough empire left to continue a dynasty. Right now FOX in the US is saying that all this scandal is overblown, besides this all happened a decade ago... Right now they have a panel of people all agreeing that Obama has lied and the economy died as a result. |
|
15 Jul 11 - 08:45 PM (#3188538) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: GUEST I wouldn't let Rupert Murdock carry my dead dog's jock strap... Bobert (no cookie) |
|
15 Jul 11 - 11:24 PM (#3188593) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Jack the Sailor Jock strap? Surely you men Nuticles. |
|
16 Jul 11 - 11:23 AM (#3188789) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel We have special dog gift stores here. I have never seen a canine ballziere. However for those anting to limit nitrates from spoiling the Bay waters, one could by a CPR. A Canine Pee Recepticle is like a baggie connected to a handle that you hold just right when the dog takes a whiz. Seal it up and toss it in the trash where the landfill leeches the nitrates into the bay. |
|
17 Jul 11 - 08:40 AM (#3189370) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: autolycus Rebekah Brooks has been arrested. |
|
17 Jul 11 - 08:51 AM (#3189379) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Jack the Sailor For spelling her name that way? |
|
17 Jul 11 - 08:24 PM (#3189740) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel She had an appointment to answer Police questions but when she arrived at the station she was surprised to be arrested. Murdoch's son is being given time to fly to Rio. |
|
18 Jul 11 - 06:54 AM (#3189923) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Richard Bridge Now PC plod quits. Parliament is recalled in the vacation. Fun, innit? |
|
18 Jul 11 - 01:01 PM (#3190111) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel The News Corp-se stock has fallen 20% which is about a 6+ billion dollar loss. I said earlier that a 15% drop would trigger a new chairman would be named. That has not happened yet but the board has named two people to oversee the department of lieing cheating and stealing to institute new ethics rules. One is named Via Dinn who was (ironicly?) formerlly a co writer of the US Patriot Act. It is clear that FOX has only done simlar things that the Patriot Act does everyday. Rupert has pleaded not guilty by way of IM SORRY. He has joined the illustrious and exclusive group of corporations to offer an apology in the last year; BP (i want my life back) Japan Nuke Inc (oops) Goldman Sachs (You were cheated and lied to? we are sorry you feel that way) The US arm of newscorpse has reported that there is no connection to the UK over stuff that happened a decade ago. (actually between 1 to 9 years ago) Rupert has moved on from his " Stalingrad " and may soon go to his bunker after his meeting with Parliment. Which of these stories are true?... Roger Ailes is vacationing in Rio and is unavailable for comment. In broad daylight Chicago residents lynch a black man and sell hundreds of pieces of his corpse and thousands of photos. answer- one of them is true and the other is truthy. |
|
18 Jul 11 - 01:10 PM (#3190121) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Mrrzy Now the highest ranking cop in Britain has resigned - they're falling like ninepins! Or should that be kingpins? Amazing reach this scandal is having... |
|
18 Jul 11 - 08:42 PM (#3190384) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Jack Campin Now somebody who blew the whistle on Murdoch ends up dead: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-14194623 |
|
18 Jul 11 - 09:26 PM (#3190398) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel The dead guy gave information including the nature of business meetings at NEws Corp in which on many occaisions a movie clip was played of Al Capone beating a business competitor to death with a baseball bat. you can't make this shit up! |
|
19 Jul 11 - 03:51 AM (#3190507) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: GUEST,livelylass Don't know what caused it but I believe the police are investigating his death as a possible suicide, which would appear to rule out death by natural causes: "Hertfordshire Police said death was being treated as "unexplained, but not thought to be suspicious". The neighbour said the ex-NoTW reporter was worried he was being watched. Asked if he ever spoke about the Sunday tabloid, the man said: "Yes, he did. He talked a lot, but we never knew if he was telling the truth. He said he was in trouble and he was worried about people coming to get him."" http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/feedarticle/9750986 |
|
19 Jul 11 - 08:53 AM (#3190598) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Green Man OK Hands up anyone who really believes that there is such a thing as a free press? Now we have that out of the way we can start to take stock of what lies have been told and then we know who to ignore in the future. The fountainhead of news international is a corrupt source, need I say more. Anyone who has had any dealings with the press will know that no matter how the facts are laid out, the press will always find a way to distort and misrepresent things. The use of 'button words' such as SHOCK, HORROR, PROBE and the like is only designed to sell newspapers, the truth has always taken second place. If I camped outside of one of the paparazzis home with my campera snapping his or her family through the windows and generally making a sh*te of myself then I should probably be arrested. A press card can get you out of that. I do enjoy a good rant! Rant over GM |
|
19 Jul 11 - 09:52 AM (#3190635) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: kendall Time wounds all heels. |
|
19 Jul 11 - 10:04 AM (#3190642) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: GUEST I'm watching murdoch squirm before a commitee of british MPs as i post 1505 hrs bst. |
|
19 Jul 11 - 10:51 AM (#3190669) Subject: RE: BS: Rupert Murdoch's Stalingrad From: Donuel Touche' kendal This is big, today at 7:30 FOX and Friends Steve Douchy introduced a story about Tiger Woods paying a phone "pal" hush money 2 years ago. He concluded by saying, "I would have to say that if you have been given hush money, you should be quiet." the other male talking head then chimed in "I got the message!". They then smirkingly grinned at the camera. Seeing that it is proven that NEWS CORP has paid 755 MILLION DOLLARS in hush money to keep cases out of court thus far, I found the threat made by Steve Douchy to be huge. Particulary when the first whistle blower against Murcdoch was found dead in his home the day before! |