It's Time to break up the Media

[Ry]

I saw that the other day actually. Good work man.

I started building new media her ein Japan. Fox and Sky and not here yet and I plan to keep it that way. I also got a camera now so this site can make videos.

My book call the lebanon invasion, the legalization of torture, and the criminal sexcapades going on in the whites house p25 and p54

I was really hpoing I was wrong. You all know what is next. War with Iran and probably 2 different false flag attacks one in America and one blamed on Syria who Israel may go after once the US mini nukes Iran.

My ground sources say we are already in Iran. Setting up target siteters.

[Eric-the-Read]

Thanks, Ry!

Very much hope you are wrong about Iran and the false flag operations, but I wouldn't be surprised if you turn out to be right, yet again. The news today is that the policy on Iraq will change soon. At least I can't see any change there as being for the worse. The Afghanistan situation really p****s me off too. It's hard to believe how ignorant these guys seem to be of history... until you realise that they don't care if people die because they're making big bucks out of it all The English language doesn't contain strong words strong enough to describe those despicable...!

[hopeforjustice]

You may be right about aljazeera not making it here to the U.S. My cousin got a job with them as a producer in D.C. and she says that every month they postpone the broadcasting till the following month. I think one cable company and one dish company agreed to air them though, but they are still working out the details.

[Eric-the-Read]

I just sent this to the Guardian, and a similar letter to Scotland on Sunday:


Last Sunday's Observer reported Rupert Murdoch's scornful description of Blair and Brown's competitive lickspittle solicitation of his company for a chat and a cup of tea whenever he visits London. Murdoch's words beautifully illustrate the point that I and others recently made in a letter published in the Scottish Left Review, and this is the first (and probably last) time that I will have cause to be grateful to that neo-conservative, nationality-swapping, warmongering propagandist and hypocritical tax-dodger par excellence. If Blair and Brown (apparently equally devoid of morality and divided only by juvenile rivalry) had an ounce of decency in them they would close tax loopholes for the super-rich, clamp down on cross-media ownership, and do something concrete to close the hideous gap between the rich and the poor in this plutocrat-controlled country (and world). I fear that Murdoch's power is such that he realises he can insult his craven servants with impunity. How much are you paying Blair for his biography, Murdoch? Cameron, prove that you are better and tell the likes of Murdoch to get lost. (Alas, I know you are already enslaved.)

[Ry]

I will write something up as well for the British press, we all know the US is a lost cause.

[Eric-the-Read]

Great, Ry, but there's no guarantee they'll publish our letters either. Fingers crossed anyway!

[Eric-the-Read]

http://hometown.aol.co.uk/rericswan/anyquestions.html

Murdoch Under Discussion...
Transcript of part of "Any Questions"

broadcast on BBC Radio 4, 24 November 2006 (repeated on 25 November)
35 minutes 34 seconds into the show


This says it all - please read!

Chair:
Jonathan Dimbleby

Participants:
Diane Abbott
Theresa Villiers
Matthew Taylor
A.N. Wilson

Jim Dean (audience member):
Should we be more concerned by Richard Branson or Rupert Murdoch owning a bigger share in the British media?

Jonathan Dimbleby:
This arises out of the fact that a deal that Richard Branson on the part of NTL was seeking to do with ITV was thwarted by BSkyB buying nearly a 18 % share in ITV. Do you follow these things closely, A.N. Wilson?

A.N. Wilson:
I don't. Although I write for the newspapers and I watch television and I appear on radio (only on the BBC, of course!) I am barely aware of these great monsters lurking behind but I think it's very sinister and I honestly do think… I don't know very much about Richard Branson though I've spent many an unhappy hour on his train - I wouldn't put him in charge of a fish-and-ship shop let alone a railway - but I do think Rupert Murdoch has poisoned the atmosphere of this country to the most extraordinary degree, and the way that politicians of all complexions - Mrs. Thatcher to start with and then Tony Blair - go and genuflect before this monster is terribly disturbing, and the fact that Rupert Murdoch, who isn't, as far as I'm aware, a British citizen, though he comes here sometimes, should have decided to come and just make money out of us and ruin The Times, which was an incredibly boring but wonderful old paper once upon a time, and feed our minds with filth from The Sun and all the rest of it, and this Sky TV… If I did believe, as Diane Abbott believes, in the state, I would want to have a kind of absolutest state which sent Murdoch and all his evil ways packing.

Jonathan Dimbleby:
Who are you more concerned by, Richard Branson or Rupert Murdoch - Theresa Villiers?

Theresa Villiers:
Umm, I don't have a strong view on either one of them. I'm happy to let the market decide here, as long as competition rules are complied with I'm not going to venture into having a go at either of these two. I don't think it's going to make a significant difference one way or the other.

Jonathan Dimbleby:
And that has no relationship at all to the prospect of having a favourable press in any of the news…?

Theresa Villiers:
Well, certainly, it's a very brave politician that has a real go at Rupert Murdoch. In this…

A.N. Wilson:
Well, exactly! You've put your finger on it: it's a brave politician that attacks Rupert Murdoch! We don't want to live in a country where politicians are frightened of spivs who live in Australia or New York!

Jonathan Dimbleby:
Matthew Taylor?

Matthew Taylor:
Well, we're not frightened of Rupert Murdoch because we gave up on him a long time ago! But the short answer is that there is nothing in a democracy more important than diversity of press and news, and the idea that either Rupert Murdoch, who already commands so much of the news in this country, or, indeed, Richard Branson, who is simply attempting to assemble effectively a rival to that, should own it is, in my view, quite wrong. Rupert Murdoch should never have been allowed to own so many newspapers. We should have very strong competition rules to ensure that actually these people cannot command the kind of dominance in the press that they already have, and Rupert Murdoch should most definitely not be allowed to command any more.

Jonathan Dimbleby:
Diane Abbott?

Diane Abbott:
Well, it's worth saying, I think, that ITV was equally frightened of both of them, actually. One of the problems with the Richard Branson bid was that the company he was with - NTL - is hugely overburdened with debt, and ITV was worried that they'd be taken over and have their pension fund stripped out, and a whole asset-stripping operation… But, of course, there is the question of Murdoch. Theresa made an important point when she talked about competition laws - absolutely vital point - but the point about Rupert Murdoch's career in this country is that at every point he has smashed through and abused what competition legislation there was. Back in the day when he took over The Times newspapers… that should have been referred to the Monopolies and Mergers Commission. In fact, politicians, who even back then were frightened of him, did not make that referral. That is why, if you look at print media alone, Murdoch owns 40 %, in terms of readership, of the British print media. That should never have happened if politicians had done their jobs and actually made the competition laws function.

Jonathan Dimbleby:
Do you detect that in that ownership it is exercised in a way that limits the range of discussion and debate that the media has?

Diane Abbott:
I think so. It is no coincidence that both The Sun and The Times support the Iraq war. And both The Sun and The Times, despite, you know, what individual commentators may say, remain broadly Blairite papers. I think it does narrow the range of discussion, to the detriment, I think, of the British media. I think [accused?] should be The Sun. I think The Sun was the first step which just dragged tabloid press… I grew up reading The Daily Mirror in the days when you could read a tabloid paper and it was still a proper paper - it was short, it was punchy, but it was a proper paper. With the way he ran The Sun, I think Murdoch prostituted the tabloid press in this country and we're still living in the consequences and the type of tabloid press we have today. But then I sat on broadcasting bills, where the Sky lobby was putting enormous pressure on us to make sure that the legislation that emerged enabled Murdoch to buy Sky. Murdoch has far too much pressure in the British media [on] politicians in both parties… The first thing someone seems to do, when they become the leader of a political party in Britain is run to see Rupert Murdoch and ask for his blessing. You cannot run a democracy like that! You can't run a democracy like that! And, I'm not, you know… I think that ITV had something to fear from both of them, but I think British democracy and British politics has a lot to fear from Rupert Murdoch.

Jonathan Dimbleby:
Rupert Murdoch, if you want too respond to that, Any Answers is available to you either directly or to any of your vicars on earth!

[Ry]

Thank You BBC