Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Thursday, 26 April 2012

Gordon vs the Digger

One the one hand is a ruthless, ambitious businessman who will go to any lengths to defend his business empire, on the other a failed politician mired in mendacity and whose brief and unsuccessful career was a litany of lie after lie after lie. The issue is not who to believe - Brown has a history of petty, spiteful and vindinctive acts and of not being in control of his reason, whilst Murdoch is quite capable of fabricating something consistent with Brown's known flawed character - but who to choose to side with.

Murdoch remains one of the very few media moguls still strong enough to be independent of governments. Without him, democracy would be at greater risk of abuse by a political class unfettered by the press, and the media would be smothered under the weight of the social-democratic-Marxian BBC. Though one may need a long spoon, Murdoch is worthy of our support.


Barnacle Bill said...

It's not so much the failed Reichsf├╝hrer frae Kirkcaldy I would worry about if I was in Murdoch's shoes.
It more his attackdog Untersturmf├╝hrer Watson I would be concerned about.
He's certainly ensuring the searchlight shines more in Cast Iron's direction than nuLabors'.
Which is why I would offer Murdoch my support.

Anonymous said...

Why do you need to choose a side? Isn't that a false choice?

Brown had no redeeming qualities, in my view - not even low cunning.

Sure, Murdoch has too much power. But who gave it to him? Who let him acquire such a ridiculously high percentage of the media market? Who allowed the BBC to do the same?

The politicos want you to choose sides, so that they can make a stage exit.

The rot probably goes deep and wide and encompasses decades of collusion between politicos, mandarins and corporate interests.

The politicos are the only ones who have the power to curtail the power of mandarins and corporations - and themselves. But they don't want that particular spotlight on themselves.

We need to hold their feet to the fire - without mercy - until we have a just system.

G. Tingey said...

Murdoch independant?
What are you smoking or drinking or snorting?

Murdoch is an extremely unpleasant right-winger of the nasty, bullying uber-corporate type.
He should be declared Persona non grata here, immediately.

You wil note that I don't disagree with your estimation of Broon.

Why (oh why?) this anti-BBC bias still eludes me, or is that because I don't watch ANY tv (I don't have one...)

Elby the Beserk said...

A "free" press brings its Murdochs with it. A regulated press brings tyranny. Easy choice.

Elby the Beserk said...

Tingey, natch, is unable to think this through. At least he is thick

outsider said...

The reason why politicians suck up to (and also hate) Rupert Murdoch is not because he owns a big share of the UK press but because his papers are not tied to one party. There is no point in Labour (or for that matter Conervatives) sucking up to the Telegraph or the Mail or Conservatives trying to win over the Mirror or Guardian. By contrast, the Sun, The Times and The Sunday Times can be won round. Occasionally, they even back different parties at General Elections. This gives their editors greater influence. At the Sun, Mr Murdoch dictates the choice so he can exercise power. He is not particularly right-wing, as Mr Tingey claims: if he were he would not have endorsed Labour in successive General Elections. If more newspapers were non-aligned, democracy would be more open and no one proprietor would be so powerful. That is not Mr Murdoch's fault.

Anonymous said...

Whatever the flaws of Murdoch and I ain't perfect either - he is still the lone, in fact the only representative of a free-ish press baron.
The take over should have been allowed - a rival to the beeb would have been interesting 'news'.

The left's attempts to sabotage Murdoch is the subtext here and it was always the big story, forget the rest of it - this is about power and who wields it - a battle between; on the one hand the left and the propagandizing media whores [Guardian/beeb] who are in bed with the Westminster political claque and what is left of a free press - ie - Murdoch.
Like him or loathe him, he represents the remaining bastion of a free press in the UK.

Anonymous said...

On the one hand one is a ruthless, ambitious businessman.....the other a failed politician mired in mendacity.....

but who to choose to side with....


jaded said...

Murdoch knows where the bodies are buried.Watching his revenge should be amusing.....

Michael said...

I watched, incredulous, as Hunt's political adviser was forced to fall on his spoon whilst Hunt told The House that his below-stairs employee had conducted negotiations with NewsCorp that Hunt was oblivious of.

Oh really?

A government minister who knows nothing of what his staff are up to, day in and day out?

Incompetence or lies? Do they seriously think that we are that stupid or is it overweening arrogance? Sod the plebs, they'll swallow whatever succulent lamb we feed them.

Let's hope that Murdoch sets the record straight.

G. Tingey said...

Oh dear.

Elby - I DO know what is going on ...
Ever seen "Citzen Kane"?


Anonymous said...

I know feck all about football and never watch it - which qualifies me by G Tingeys standards to make heartfelt comments ("why oh why")about what people who do watch think about it. I'll own up, we've crossed swords on this before, and I do wish he'd shut up on things he knows nothing about because as he says "I don't watch ANY TV"