News International.
8/7/11 19:33![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
johnny9fingers.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
talkpoliticsIn the wake of the Murdoch empire in the UK seeming like it might actually get something like its deserved comeuppance, I find myself experiencing a feeling of what can only be described as schadenfreude.
www.guardian.co.uk/media/phone-hacking (Too many pages to list individually.)
www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/08/phone-hacking-emails-news-international
This is potentially the biggest story in the UK since the MP's expenses scandal, and has significantly altered the nature of the British political system, whereby political parties no longer feel they have to kow-tow to Rupert and his minions: and many, myself included, would regard this as a good thing.
However, it may be that Roops, with his customary skill, will evade his accusers, and find some foxhole in the media equivalent of the Tora-Bora cave complex, and still pull off one last audacious feat: gaining complete control of BSkyB with its annual revenue of some £6Billion.
Nevertheless, if this does not happen, because the UK watchdog that grants licenses for broadcast finds him, or his organisation, not a fit person/organisation to own BSkyB, he will have to retire and lick his wounds.
But it leads me to some overwhelming question (as always)....
What do folk in the US with its first amendment privileges think about such a situation? Is this censorship and an abrogation of free speech? Or does possible criminal behaviour (the suborning of the Metropolitan Police, phone hacking etc) change the picture?
I mean, when Conrad Black gets out, should he, if the question were to arise and he were to be backed by, for example a Saudi billionaire, be allowed to take over NBC? For that matter, for the sake of argument, should the Saudi billionaire be allowed to take over NBC, even if his name was Adnan_Gulshair_el_Shukrijumah? (Though actually he isn't a billionaire, but a terrorist.)
I've used these rather silly and extreme examples to illustrate that there may be limits to free speech, even perhaps in America. My question to the panel is: has Rupert and his organisation overstepped the line in this matter as far as you are concerned?
www.guardian.co.uk/media/phone-hacking (Too many pages to list individually.)
www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/jul/08/phone-hacking-emails-news-international
This is potentially the biggest story in the UK since the MP's expenses scandal, and has significantly altered the nature of the British political system, whereby political parties no longer feel they have to kow-tow to Rupert and his minions: and many, myself included, would regard this as a good thing.
However, it may be that Roops, with his customary skill, will evade his accusers, and find some foxhole in the media equivalent of the Tora-Bora cave complex, and still pull off one last audacious feat: gaining complete control of BSkyB with its annual revenue of some £6Billion.
Nevertheless, if this does not happen, because the UK watchdog that grants licenses for broadcast finds him, or his organisation, not a fit person/organisation to own BSkyB, he will have to retire and lick his wounds.
But it leads me to some overwhelming question (as always)....
What do folk in the US with its first amendment privileges think about such a situation? Is this censorship and an abrogation of free speech? Or does possible criminal behaviour (the suborning of the Metropolitan Police, phone hacking etc) change the picture?
I mean, when Conrad Black gets out, should he, if the question were to arise and he were to be backed by, for example a Saudi billionaire, be allowed to take over NBC? For that matter, for the sake of argument, should the Saudi billionaire be allowed to take over NBC, even if his name was Adnan_Gulshair_el_Shukrijumah? (Though actually he isn't a billionaire, but a terrorist.)
I've used these rather silly and extreme examples to illustrate that there may be limits to free speech, even perhaps in America. My question to the panel is: has Rupert and his organisation overstepped the line in this matter as far as you are concerned?
(no subject)
Date: 9/7/11 08:35 (UTC)