The Sun on Sunday is coming soon
Discussion
Haggleburyfinius said:
Perhaps, but we have to pick our battles more carefully as there are much greater crimes/inequalities of power/corruption going on under our noses!
I get what you're saying, but some folk could pick this battle and others, another. 'We' need to cover all areas; I think this is quite possible if everyone increases their involvement in one way or another.Heh at Pistonheaders on this thread.
All he is doing is getting off his arse and starting a business - something that is usually celebrated on here.
Some of you are calling for a 'free and open press' - what is more free and open than a bloke opening a newspaper? You have all had months to fill the void in the Sunday tabloid market and chosen not to.
All he is doing is getting off his arse and starting a business - something that is usually celebrated on here.
Some of you are calling for a 'free and open press' - what is more free and open than a bloke opening a newspaper? You have all had months to fill the void in the Sunday tabloid market and chosen not to.
Haggleburyfinius said:
I will be amazed if it is anything other than a roaring success.
True, but you would have hoped he might have let all the investigations various actually run their course/s. Once the all clear had been given he could then announce the all-new Sun on Sunday, without any dark clouds surrounding it, but this would mean he has an iota of decency, which he probably hasn't.
SilverLinings said:
...what is more free and open than a bloke opening a newspaper? You have all had months to fill the void in the Sunday tabloid market and chosen not to.
This isn't a 'bloke'. This is Murdoch. Fatuous comments about 'starting your own newspaper' are clouding the issue.Haggleburyfinius said:
Johnnytheboy said:
The BBC were getting in a lather about this yesterday.
Ultimately, if no one advertises in it and no one buys it, it will fail.
I wil be amazed if it is anything other than a roaring success. Ultimately, if no one advertises in it and no one buys it, it will fail.
"But we've been telling all you plebs about all the bad stuff the Murdochs have been up to. Why won't you listen to us?"
Tonsko said:
SilverLinings said:
...what is more free and open than a bloke opening a newspaper? You have all had months to fill the void in the Sunday tabloid market and chosen not to.
This isn't a 'bloke'. This is Murdoch. Fatuous comments about 'starting your own newspaper' are clouding the issue.He is just a bloke, with a lot of money and infrastructure to buy or create newspapers.
There has been a gaping void and nobody has stepped up to fill it.
He just runs a newspaper and media empire - get over it.
johnfm said:
Nope.
He is just a bloke, with a lot of money and infrastructure to buy or create newspapers.
There has been a gaping void and nobody has stepped up to fill it.
He just runs a newspaper and media empire - get over it.
That's one of those phrases like "I dropped the atomic bomb and it went off"He is just a bloke, with a lot of money and infrastructure to buy or create newspapers.
There has been a gaping void and nobody has stepped up to fill it.
He just runs a newspaper and media empire - get over it.
Only if you think one man who owns a few newspapers and tv stations really :
a) makes that much difference and;
b) the difference he makes is negative.
Frankly, there are much bigger things to be concerned about than newspaper and media owners...
..unless you are a signed up member of the tin foil hat club.
a) makes that much difference and;
b) the difference he makes is negative.
Frankly, there are much bigger things to be concerned about than newspaper and media owners...
..unless you are a signed up member of the tin foil hat club.
I think that when former Prime Ministers reveal that they were briefed not to p
s off Murdoch, then you have to start to question who the people who really wield power are in the world. And in that respect I don't believe that he is just "some bloke" of little consequence.
But I'm happy for you to have your opinion and for me to have mine.
s off Murdoch, then you have to start to question who the people who really wield power are in the world. And in that respect I don't believe that he is just "some bloke" of little consequence. But I'm happy for you to have your opinion and for me to have mine.
You're blind if you think he didn't have a lot of say in gov't and the policies. C.f. When he bought the Times, Thatcher was persuaded by Murdoch's man not to refer to Monopolies Commision. He has weilded a lot of power in our country for many years. Well documented, not 'tin foil hat'.
It annoys me that 1 man's commercial interests affected how an entire country lived certain aspects of their lives.
It annoys me that 1 man's commercial interests affected how an entire country lived certain aspects of their lives.
JonRB said:
I think that when former Prime Ministers reveal that they were briefed not to ps off Murdoch, then you have to start to question who the people who really wield power are in the world. And in that respect I don't believe that he is just "some bloke" of little consequence.
But I'm happy for you to have your opinion and for me to have mine.
I remember watching an interview with Blair where he stated that by the end of his term in office, he had realised that Murdoch's power had long been overstated. s off Murdoch, then you have to start to question who the people who really wield power are in the world. And in that respect I don't believe that he is just "some bloke" of little consequence. But I'm happy for you to have your opinion and for me to have mine.
The claim is made that he owns a third of the media - he might in terms of newspapers, but in terms of content actually consumed this number is much smaller nowadays. Most reading my generation does is online in the form of blogs, forums and comments made on articles.
The days of "the Sun what won it" are long over if they ever existed in the first place.
Indeed I'd make the argument that Murdoch has actually been good for media plurality. Without NI and the Sun, The Times would not exist. Had the print unions not been taken on, who knows whether we would have a newspaper industry that looks anything like what we have today.
Unlike the BBC, you are not forced to consume Murdoch's products. The BBC tax and the organisation's influence concerns me far more than Murdoch.
We’re all entitled to our own point of view though, mine is that Murdoch’s influence is overstated and in decline. It is worrying that our public officials seem open to bribes, however - I watch to see if we see a whole series of dawn raids on police officers.
Surprised to see OA pretty much in a minority of one here.
Is hacking voicemails illegal? If so then prosecute, if not, not. If it should be then make a new law.
As for bribery, it's at least as much the fault of those accepting the bribes, so where's the witch hunt for them?
I've no love for Murdoch or his (overstated) empire, but there's definite elements of a witch hunt here.
Is hacking voicemails illegal? If so then prosecute, if not, not. If it should be then make a new law.
As for bribery, it's at least as much the fault of those accepting the bribes, so where's the witch hunt for them?
I've no love for Murdoch or his (overstated) empire, but there's definite elements of a witch hunt here.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff