The English have a problem, or better, now they have one more. His name is Rupert Murdoch and his family since the 80 year old mogul is properly preparing the succession to his daughter Elizabeth and son James, former chief executive of News Corporation in Europe. Here's what the problem is more. In late spring 2010 the group Murdoch has announced a desire to own entirely Sky (BSkyB, to be exact), which formally controlled only 39%.
Yes there was some opposition from the Liberal Democrats - and of course the Labour Party, but we will be back in a moment - and the negative opinion of Ofcom, the telecommunications authority in the United Kingdom, stated bluntly that the risks to the pluralism of information. But the overt friendliness with the Conservatives David Cameron has opened the door.
Even the European commission in December ruled that the control on Sky is not risky for the free press. If you say Brussels ... To understand the magnitude of the problem we want the numbers. With newspapers and Sky together, Murdoch's empire can reach a turnover of nearly £ 7 billion, doubling the 3.6 state TV BBC.
The extension is worldwide, including Italy, as is well known. Not to mention the giant TV and the Fox business newspaper Wall Street Journal in the U.S., Britain seems to concentrate its firepower of the lord of the media. The only News International, the publishing company that depends on the family group News Corporation, controls two of the most important national newspapers, the Times and the tabloid Sun.
Together, the printed word that refers to News Corporation alone accounts for 37% of the total. And to cut to the chase. Murdoch, who affectionately call Mr. M. in politics and how. Only it does not do it directly. And therein lies the cunning. Supports those who support him, red or black does not count.
The Times, dormitories today, pulled the sprint to the New Labour of Tony Blair, even if the media in the U.S. and Australia are firmly conservative targati Murdoch (which would be enough to inspire the irony on belonging to the left of Blair. But here the debate would be long ...). Well.
While Mr. B. - How to begin to call even in the Anglo-Saxon countries - is disgraced by two decades, Mr. M. prefer to constrain governments from behind. Different in style and strategies, it remains just a terrible doubt: which one is more dangerous? 
Yes there was some opposition from the Liberal Democrats - and of course the Labour Party, but we will be back in a moment - and the negative opinion of Ofcom, the telecommunications authority in the United Kingdom, stated bluntly that the risks to the pluralism of information. But the overt friendliness with the Conservatives David Cameron has opened the door.
Even the European commission in December ruled that the control on Sky is not risky for the free press. If you say Brussels ... To understand the magnitude of the problem we want the numbers. With newspapers and Sky together, Murdoch's empire can reach a turnover of nearly £ 7 billion, doubling the 3.6 state TV BBC.
The extension is worldwide, including Italy, as is well known. Not to mention the giant TV and the Fox business newspaper Wall Street Journal in the U.S., Britain seems to concentrate its firepower of the lord of the media. The only News International, the publishing company that depends on the family group News Corporation, controls two of the most important national newspapers, the Times and the tabloid Sun.
Together, the printed word that refers to News Corporation alone accounts for 37% of the total. And to cut to the chase. Murdoch, who affectionately call Mr. M. in politics and how. Only it does not do it directly. And therein lies the cunning. Supports those who support him, red or black does not count.
The Times, dormitories today, pulled the sprint to the New Labour of Tony Blair, even if the media in the U.S. and Australia are firmly conservative targati Murdoch (which would be enough to inspire the irony on belonging to the left of Blair. But here the debate would be long ...). Well.
While Mr. B. - How to begin to call even in the Anglo-Saxon countries - is disgraced by two decades, Mr. M. prefer to constrain governments from behind. Different in style and strategies, it remains just a terrible doubt: which one is more dangerous?
No comments:
Post a Comment