dieseltaylor Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 I am kind of curious that apparently News International in the UK is ridden with an urge to get stories by any means but not so the US arm. Seems wierd. But credit where credit is due - corrupting the police , employing the police who investigated the original crimes, and general all round nastiness we appear to be leading the world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted July 11, 2011 Share Posted July 11, 2011 Remember it also takes the people on the other side of hte transaction to agree to perform the actions, accept the money, etc. I don't douobt similar things are happening elsewhere in the world - they just haven't been discovered or made public yet! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 I had not realised before that Murdoch controls a religious publishing house who do the likes of Desmond Tutu. BTW is this a good program? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_Watch_%28TV_program%29 problem a question for Affy 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I've seen the aussie one athough I didn't initially know what they are talking about or hte people involved, etc. The NZ version of media watch is radio only, and well worth a listen. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Media Watch has been an Australian icon for years and has claimed some pretty big scalps. But IMHO it has got a bit lost in recent years, often devoting large chunks of time to castigating some stupid local paper over some stuff up....the sort of publishing house that has one or two recent journalism graduates trying to churn out 4 papers for different neighbourhoods every week. Who cares? It's often preaching to the choir a bit too. The people who watch Media Watch aren't usually watching the sort of crappy journalism that it exposes and vice versa. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 It was never quite the same after Stuart Littlemore left. Like Aff says it had it's devout followers but was never a really serious "Media Watchdog" I'm sure there are similar goings on in the press all over the world but no press seems to be quite as Machiavellian as the UK press, not sure why. The Economist puts it down to the super competitiveness of the UK media but surly there is more to it than that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Too bad he was allowed to ruin MySpace. What a tool. I think the reason why this voicemail hacking wasn't attempted in the US is that in the US you are much more likely to end up in jail, at least in some states. The UK's legal system seems to be very forgiving when it comes to crimes that don't involve physical violence and there is one system for the whole country. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 Apparently, News International, as a company incorporated in the US is subject to some rather strict US laws on the bribery and corruption of foreign officials. I'm told that such laws draw no distinction as to whether the management of the company were aware of the malfeasance, and swingeing penalties can be imposed. So hopefully, if any NI employees are convicted of bribing Met police officers, NI could be hit with massive fines in America... Don't know how true this is, but it would be sweet if it were fact... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce90 Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 I have come to the conclusion particularly since the bank bailouts that British politicians of any party are a gutless bunch. The ordinary working man in the UK is shafted on a regular basis by anyone and everyone, bankers,oil companies,utility companies and huge supermarket chains to name but a few. Then of course government itself with taxes on taxes like VAT on petrol already made expensive by tax. Now we learn that any political party that wants to get itself elected has to pay homage to an octagenarian Australian and his media organisation or run the risk of his newspapers like the late but not lamented News of the World and its daily sister the Scum,sorry Sun, dishing the dirt on them whether its true or not. Did anyone notice that when teachers, civil servants etc went on strike the other week, the Sun made sure to include a virtually page size photo of the Eighties miners stike leader, Arthur Scargill in their coverage. Lets hope the hacking details uncovered so far are just the tip of the iceberg. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 Womble - that is really good news - oh that would be soo sweet. It is a shame we do not have a serious programme on TV regarding corruption and lies in governemnt both local and natiional. Anyone who reads Private Eye knows there is a lot going unpunished/under-reported. Media should also be covered in the same way. Bruce 90 - you have got that right but the real damage was done before the bailout by the Government allowing the property market to become corrupted. Blair has a huge amount to answer for. Booming economy and feel good factor great for his re-election and his image but based on a property market binge aided and abetted by estate agents, builders, building societies and the media. ANd the public fell for it as there was no countervailing arguments offered. I hope I never paid Murdoch anything in the last two decades. And he lost 0.5B$ on Myface .Yeah! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 12, 2011 Author Share Posted July 12, 2011 http://www.propublica.org/article/how-murdoch-reporters-bribes-to-british-cops-violate-us-law 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I'm sure there are similar goings on in the press all over the world but no press seems to be quite as Machiavellian as the UK press, not sure why. The Economist puts it down to the super competitiveness of the UK media but surly there is more to it than that? There is greater competition and a much richer advertising market. But It's not just a case of more newspapers, it's a case of more market crossover between segments. In Australia most of the big cities have one broadsheet and one tabloid and people read one or the other. Not so in the UK where the newpapers are national and they're often competing for slices of the same demographic. Plus I really do think that the Brits are totally nuts for celebrities. Much more so than here. TV and pop celebs seem to be much more devoured by so many segments of the UK population. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 There is greater competition and a much richer advertising market. But It's not just a case of more newspapers, it's a case of more market crossover between segments. In Australia most of the big cities have one broadsheet and one tabloid and people read one or the other. Not so in the UK where the newpapers are national and they're often competing for slices of the same demographic. Yes, we tend to have an evening newspaper, locally produced, but owned by a larger national group, which leads with local news. Generally, they're so parochial as to be meaningless. Good for classifieds and local "what's on" info. Mostly the journalism is execrable, and the influence such organs of the press wield is, I believe, negligible. Plus I really do think that the Brits are totally nuts for celebrities. Much more so than here. TV and pop celebs seem to be much more devoured by so many segments of the UK population. Unfortunately true, that. Bread and circuses for the subjects of a senescent empire. I wonder sometimes if it's because everything is so safe (if you're not damaged in some way, it's hard to starve) that the populace must vicariously acquire their tribulations so they feel alive. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 And, as predicted ......the news wires this morning are covered with reports of an FBI investigation into Murdoch's troops hacking phones in the USA 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted July 14, 2011 Share Posted July 14, 2011 Yes, we tend to have an evening newspaper, locally produced, but owned by a larger national group, which leads with local news. Generally, they're so parochial as to be meaningless. Good for classifieds and local "what's on" info. Mostly the journalism is execrable, and the influence such organs of the press wield is, I believe, negligible. I was meaning more that you have a market where you have things like the Daily Express competing head to head with the Daily Mail for pretty much the same market nationally. That doesn't happen in Australia. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I was meaning more that you have a market where you have things like the Daily Express competing head to head with the Daily Mail for pretty much the same market nationally. That doesn't happen in Australia. Sorry, I wasn't disagreeing with you More expanding on the weakness of local press in the face of the dominance of the nationals in the UK. It strikes me that large countries like the US and Aus had the time to develop powerful geographic newspaper territories, in the days before the telegraph/telephone, whereas the UK's regional 'broadsheets' got smacked about by the advent of the steam train (which made it possible to get London newspapers to Manchester in a useful timescale), a bit earlier in their development. I wonder whether the regional divisions of the great continents' newspapers will survive this Internet age where delivery of paper product is going to become more and more marginalised... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magpie_Oz Posted July 15, 2011 Share Posted July 15, 2011 I wonder whether the regional divisions of the great continents' newspapers will survive this Internet age where delivery of paper product is going to become more and more marginalised... Maybe demographics will be more important to circulation than geographics? I'm thinking that newspapers will continue as a source of news but just in a different, electronic, form. Where they need to sell themselves is on the basis of reliability and truth which is a hard thing to find on the 'net. Can't imagine this latest stoush is going to help all that. Having said that, perhaps all these "revelations" are a simple way for Murdoch to be able to destroy the printed newspaper industry and consolidate his hold on and increase the desirability of his Internet news sources? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 It strikes me that large countries like the US and Aus had the time to develop powerful geographic newspaper territories, in the days before the telegraph/telephone, whereas the UK's regional 'broadsheets' got smacked about by the advent of the steam train (which made it possible to get London newspapers to Manchester in a useful timescale), a bit earlier in their development. Well you also need to factor in that the population of Manchester alone was greater than most Australian states in their entirety during the period you refer to. So that's a much greater incentive to jump into the fray. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 16, 2011 Author Share Posted July 16, 2011 The Uk market does have powerful regional bias with the Scottish and Irish papers and even regional ones with some clout. Perhaps the most famous being the Guardian - it was the Manchester Guardian : ) It had the same editor for 57 years which for a national newspaper must be a record. This seems an appropriate comment on newspapers (15) The New Statesman (January, 1932) Every newspaper lives by appealing to a particular public. It can only go ahead of its times if it carries its public with it. Success in journalism depends on understanding the public. But success is of two kinds. Northcliffe had a genius for understanding his public and he used it for making money, not for winning permanent influence. He became a millionaire because he was his own most appreciative reader; he instinctively appealed in the most profitable way to the millions of men and women whose tastes and prejudices were the same as his own. He lived by flattering. He did not educate or change his public in any essential; he merely induced it to buy newspapers. C. P. Scott succeeded in a different way. He had just as much flair, just as acute an understanding of his public as Northcliffe. But his relationship to it was a professional, not a commercial relation. He taught his public to trust his integrity, to rely on the facts he told them, to respect his judgment, and to listen to his criticism. He offered his undivided services. I remember his saying that there was a definite moment in his life, the equivalent of a religious conversion, when he dedicated his life wholly to his paper and the causes it served. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/PRguardian.htm However overall the future looks bleak for newspapers and in particular for the ability for the media to be manipulated even more aggressively. Just looking at Fox makes one shudder. Arguably no worse than a tabloid it is much more pervasive being on all the time and the opportunity to "re-read" does not exist. I think the only hope is that Governments institute bodies that fine news media heavily for publishing lies and misleading statistics. For instance percentages should never be quoted without the underlying figures beside them. If figures are referenced the source and link must be displayed. Etc etc, Incidentally this should also apply to any figures quoted by adverts and puffs. I am told Facebook has increased its hit rate by the over 50's by 84% iin May 2011 which is a pile of **** figure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 16, 2011 Author Share Posted July 16, 2011 MediaMatters analyzes coverage of the scandal by three major networks, and finds that CNN is doing the most thorough job, airing 108 segments since July 4 compared to MSNBC's 71 and Fox's paltry 30. No comment? : ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vanir Ausf B Posted July 16, 2011 Share Posted July 16, 2011 They are measuring the quantity of coverage, not the quality, so it's of little interest. FOX obviously has reasons to downplay the issue, just as it's rivals CNN and MSNBC have a motivation to play it up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 According to Fox, NOTW are the victims. http://www.boingboing.net/2011/07/17/fox-friends-lash-out.html But you're right, it's just about the quantity, not the quality. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 17, 2011 Author Share Posted July 17, 2011 That is going to play so well in the UK. Poor old NoW victims of hacking. That Bob guy is he representative of the smart people Fox trots out for its audience? How are the Aussie media treating it? Britain attacks favourite ex-son unfairly : ) No Aussies have more sense. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stalins Organ Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 Apart from the major news stories (arrests, resignations) here in NZ we're getting quite a lot of "just how did Murdoch get to be so powerful anyway?" pieces purporting to analyse to structure & ownership of media worldwide, along with the relationship betwen the media & politicians & others in positions of power. It's quite interesting.....given that 75% of out dailies are owned by Fairfax..... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted July 17, 2011 Share Posted July 17, 2011 Poor old NoW victims of hacking. Yeah, nice spin isn't it? As one of the commentors notes, that's like speeder claiming to be just like the *victim* of a drunk driver - because both involve cars >_< :mad: Lest we forget, Fox were responsible for clarifying that the media can legally lie when presenting 'news' storys. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.