Rebekah Brooks

On the radio it's said that very few details are known about Rebekah Brooks' private life.
I wonder how many people private lives' she's exposed whilst keeping hers private





Tweet

More on phone hacking.

If this is true it's fair to say that some media organisations have too much power, they target people who oppose them. Very bad.

"The first thing News International did was try to have me removed from the committee," he claims.

"I realised then that these people were never going away. Something had clearly gone wrong with newspapers an...d somebody had to get to the truth.

"There weren't many MPs who were prepared to do that for fear of being targeted, so I decided I had to do it.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14043436






Tweet

media strategy and that

the Tories, sorry, coalition government, have a very disciplined media operation based around the simple message of 'it's all Labour's fault'. If people buy this the government will get more time, if people don't Labour could spend the next 5 years testing Prof. Nut's conclusions and still win.
cuts are going to start biting hard, but if people believe the line about it being Labour's wasteful spending and forget the role financial services played in bringing our country (and others) to it's knees, the Government gets credit.

red Ed and paper power

I saw a very worrying article in the FT blog.
Tabloids salivate at prospect of “Red Ed” in charge
Ed Miliband would "be easy to caricature as “Red Ed”, slave to the unions and champion of unreconstructed lefty-ism".
and
"Another tabloid hack told me weeks ago that Ed had tacked wildly to the left with his socialist policy agenda. Such as what, I asked? “Well, I don’t really know,” he admitted. “Does it matter?” Such is the reality of the Westminster village."

very worrying, and if the following policy positions are taken into account too:
"It may also be rather unfair given that on some issues there isn’t an obvious difference between the brothers.

For example David wants a higher banking tax, a high pay commission, a mansion tax and so on. Where he has set out a different stall is a] his more middle-ground rhetoric, b] his refusal to promise to joining anti-cuts rallies c] his refusal to apologise for Iraq d] his more firm commitment to Alistair Darling’s deficit reduction programme and e] his sticking to New Labour’s (not very liberal) policies on CCTV, ID cards and so on.

Both brothers are committed to the central principles of union rights, a distributive tax system and a fiscal tightening which falls far short of the coalition’s plan.
Further UPDATE (3pm): Friends of Ed Miliband point out that he doesn’t back his brother’s mansion tax nor his tax on private schooling."

so is David in fact to the left of Ed on policy?
i've been thinking for a while that i went for the wrong Miliband.

a mate of mine and i were discussing this over beer the other day and he's worried that Ed M could be characterised as Red Ed. i've heard people talking about him as a Benn-ite, which is rubbish but the fact people are talking about it is worrying from a truth point of view

"The Tory press have turned on Clegg because Rupert Murdoch will feel out of the loop if the Liberal Democrats end up having the balance of power, he says."

Sounds about right

James Murdoch and Rebekah Wade crash Independent's office

I really hope all this smearing helps the Lib Dems's position and weakens the Tories. That would be nice. I hope people can see through these for what they are: an attempt by the right-wing press to get their man into a position of power so that they can dictate the agenda.

"Why has a media organisation whose owner has a vested interest in the outcome of the result and whose newspapers present a slant biased in favour of the Conservative party, been allowed to broadcast tonight's debate exclusively? If this goes Pete Tong and Tory Boy is soft-soaped, it will destroy any credibility that Sky News have ever had."
Largely true, though the last bit is only to hope for

Nick Clegg will survive Fleet Street broadside

"Earlier this week the former Sun editor, David Yelland, described the extent to which the Murdoch papers and others are deeply invested in a Cameron victory and are trembling at the prospect of a political force in Britain that they don't control. Some may have thought that a conspiracy theory too far - until they saw today's clutch of front pages."

Oh I hope against hope the Tory press end up falling flat on their arses

Vanessa Perroncel phone-tapping allegations

So it seems we need not worry as much about state surveillance as the media doing it on their behalf.
Plus the conflicts of interest is worrying. The whole story is pretty scary.

BBC - David Bond's Blog: Ofcom and sport‏

"here's Richard Scudamore, chief executive of the Premier League, the competition with arguably the most to lose from the Ofcom ruling.

"Quite simply we are extremely vexed by the whole proposition. We think its outrageous that there should be an intervention at all... it's a market that doesn't need fixing.""

By which he means it's a monopoly he's doing very well out of thank you very much

Ofcom v Sky‏

"The media watchdog has today ruled that Sky has to sell its sports channels to rivals at prices that are between 10.5% and 23% below the existing wholesale prices "

Good. It would be nice to have some football available to those of us not in love with Sky.

"It will appeal against the decision, on the basis that the regulator has been out to get it in a way that is an unfair punishment of the risks it has been taking for 20 years in making substantial investments in sports and movie rights."
That would be because Sky has a huge monopoly that it is fair eager to protect

Ofcom v Sky: The epic business battle of 2010‏

Just so we all know how it works:
"here are three facts - and you can decide whether they are related or not.

James Murdoch, the chairman of BSkyB and the presumed heir to Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation throne, has argued with some passion that Ofcom intervenes excessively in the media market and could do with neutering.

David Cameron, the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition, and a nose ahead in the race to be Britain's next prime minister, has announced an intention to scale back Ofcom and take it out of what he described as "making policy".

This is what Mr Cameron said last July: "with a Conservative Government, Ofcom as we know it will cease to exist. Its remit will be restricted to its narrow technical and enforcement roles. It will no longer play a role in making policy."

Also, News Corporation's most-widely-read newspaper, the Sun ("wot won it"), has switched allegiance from Labour to the Tories - and is currently heaping opprobrium on the government in its pages with what reads like undisguised relish.

All of which lends more than just a frisson - perhaps a better metaphor would be "earthquake" - to an investigation by Ofcom that represents the first attempt by any British regulator to argue that BSkyB as currently constituted has excessive market power and needs a bit of reining-back."


I'm remarkably surprised and impressed by the comments:
* 1. At 12:06pm on 26 Mar 2010, copperDolomite wrote:
Banking, groceries and pay TV: do they cover the main ingredients for a thriving economy and the good society?

Well, if by good, you mean a society of over-fed, pigged-out, unhealthy, couch-potato, over-spenders who fail to think for themselves, what else is there?

Wouldn't have any of Murdoch's muck in my house, not even in the loo! And as for supermarkets they're only any good for frozen peas or soap powder
Complain about this comment
* 2. At 12:09pm on 26 Mar 2010, copperDolomite wrote:
David Cameron, the leader of Her Majesty's Opposition, and a nose ahead in the race to be Britain's next prime minister, has announced an intention to scale back Ofcom and take it out of what he described as "making policy".

Oh no - we're getting the vitriolic Fox then! Please, no, no, no, no.... He'll deregulate and we'll never have Attenborough. Right, the telly will have to go if he gets in and dares let Murdoch have any more of this country!
Complain about this comment
* 3. At 12:21pm on 26 Mar 2010, Horned_Devil wrote:
As an (ex) employee of a business that used to operate on the Sky platform I understand how Sky's monopoly position is abused (in a slightly different area to the one mentioned above) and stifled innovation around the interactive TV market (which the UK was the world leader). I have no problems with them being run as a business but at certain times there needs to be a some control over Sky as a platform and Sky as a broadcaster
Complain about this comment
* 4. At 12:36pm on 26 Mar 2010, ghostofsichuan wrote:
Those with controlling market share use political influence to restrict competition...it is what captialism has always been. The development of media applications to computers and cell phones is simply a response for those wishing to get into markets that have become restricted by regulation and governmental patronage. Like the fossil fuel industry, alternatives will be developed because they have been shut out of any real resources for development and political interference. The big corporations and their taxes bind them to governments like a calf to a mother cow.
Complain about this comment
* 5. At 12:42pm on 26 Mar 2010, desabled wrote:
IOam a sky subcriber and have every sympathy with points raised by Ofcom
one is left wonering whether nullifyingOfcom in traditional tory abdication of responsibility through deregulation will be added to conservatives splitting up the bbc in a the quid pro quoexisting between the Murdochs and David Cameron as a reward for tory bias in it's tv and printed media,lately they seemed to have suceeded inplacing at least a couple of moles in the beeb too!
Murdoch is disliked nearly as much i australia ,among ordinary folk as he is here his unbridled power is developing intomedia world domination which is why he hates the bbc, so much quality never was his strong suit
Complain about this comment
* 6. At 1:09pm on 26 Mar 2010, lacplesis37 wrote:
Are you saying that Cameron is actually in Murdoch's pocket? Or will it just feel like that? Are you implying that the Tories decision to scale back Ofcom is in some way linked to Murdoch's subsequent decision to support the Conservatives? If so, perhaps - given all the stuff thrown at Blair about his Ecclestone connection - perhaps this should be consideered by the BBC as a more important newsworthy issue? For myself, I'd like to see much tougher rules on media ownership which prevents foreign owners (& non-residents) not just involving themselves in UK politics, but covering such a significant share of the market. Though I may not agree with the BBC, at least I know you are trying to be balanced & unbiassed - but the Murdoch media have no such inhibitions & let us say "mislead" their viewers/readers without scruple.

Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Labour's revenge on Britain's hard workers‏

""A budget of envy and spite", is the Daily Express verdict which accuses the government of unleashing a savage new tax onslaught against Middle Britain. "

wankers

BBC News - Budget analysis dominates news pages‏

From the coverage reported here it's safe to say Darling has taken a proper battering today from the silly papers, while I bought the FT to get a more economic view which is cautiously supportive but would like some detail on how they're going to fix the mess the country is in. I think they, like me, are frustrated by the party politics dominating, while the silly papers have embraced cheap party politics wholeheartedly

Carlo Ancelotti the latest to find José Mourinho's shoes hard to fill | Richard Williams | Football | guardian.co.uk‏

Even the Guardian are going over the top. The other day Chelsea were going to thrash inter and Italian football was dead, now Ancelotti is a dead man walking.
I hope that Ancelotti gets the time and money to bring in some players, some young and very quick wingers for a start

Steve Bell: Bulger mother backs Straw on secrecy over Venables | Comment is free | The Guardian‏

I certainly agree with one of the posters that events like this show us society and people at their most bare.
Mel Phillips piece in the Mail attracted the usual nasty responses about how poor people should be neutered or the welfare state should be removed so that people starve, the usual level of comment I expect from the Mail. Mad Mel's article was about how we didn't need mob rule, we needed mob rule. Though with more exclamation marks and moral outrage.
I came up with a really good idea for a post about this last night, but can't remember beyond what I've put above.
We need a just society, and a compassionate society. Compassion not only to perpetrators, but to victims also. Easier said than done.
As usual the Mail's commenters have not shown our society or humanity in a good light

Andy Coulson comes under fresh scrutiny over News of the World activities | Media | guardian.co.uk‏

The whole thing stinks, and not just coz he's a Tory. I don't like Labour people involved in this, and I don't think anyone, much less those with significant links to top party people and positions should be involved in this.
It's all allegations and all that, but tabloids are a dirty lot.
I don't want to get all party political (Labour = good, Tory = bad), but this does no one any favours. Except maybe the lawyers

Andy Coulson: 'I do not know. I do not recall' | Media | guardian.co.uk‏

Interesting. Selective memory? Lying bastard?

The Sun and the Times keep quiet about phone hacking | Media | The Guardian‏

Interesting the way media report certain stories for their own ends.
The Sun said of the report "Labour committee members "abused the report for petty party political advantage"
Someone no Murdoch publication has ever done in their history, and certainly isn't doing to deflect attention away from their own dodgy practices

Tim Bell calls general election TV debates 'pointless'‏

I think he may have a point. If we're going to do it at all then the whole cabinet and their shadows should be involved. We don't have a presidential system, we have parties. If people want a presidential system (I would be in favour if the president replaced the monarch) then that's a whole other issue.
As it is, we are far too focused on one individual as leader. Hardly surprising if they then take all the power for themselves is it?

John Terry

Just listening to the new, and Gordy has been quoted giving his opinion on Terry's sacking by Capello.
I give not a shit about the Terry thing, nor what Gordy thinks about it. Why's it on the bloody news?