Murdoch cleared to buy BSkyB...

Murdoch cleared to buy BSkyB...

Author
Discussion

MadMullah

Original Poster:

5,265 posts

193 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
"The British government has approved a controversial bid by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation to buy the 61% stake in BSkyB that it does not already own.

The green light follows News Corp's offer to spin-off Sky News as an independent company."

So does that mean murdoch will still have sky news too but ran seperately?

ralphrj

3,523 posts

191 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
Murdoch (or rather News Corp) currently own 39% of BSkyB including Sky News.

After the takeover News Corp will own:

1. 100% of BSkyB excluding Sky News, and,
2. 39% of Sky News (i.e. the same as he does now).

Victor McDade

4,395 posts

182 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
Not sure why this was 'controversial' in the first place. Maybe I'm being naive but does this decision really have an impact on our lives? There are lots of news sources to choose from these days - Murdoch does not have a monopoly.

wolves_wanderer

12,373 posts

237 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
Victor McDade said:
Not sure why this was 'controversial' in the first place. Maybe I'm being naive but does this decision really have an impact on our lives? There are lots of news sources to choose from these days - Murdoch does not have a monopoly.
Ironically the BBC seem to be the most upset about a new broadcasting "monopoly".

Pupp

12,217 posts

272 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
wolves_wanderer said:
Victor McDade said:
Not sure why this was 'controversial' in the first place. Maybe I'm being naive but does this decision really have an impact on our lives? There are lots of news sources to choose from these days - Murdoch does not have a monopoly.
Ironically the BBC seem to be the most upset about a new broadcasting "monopoly".
Seem to remember Vince Cable was fairly upset about the prospect but amazing how quickly policies can change...

hyperblue

2,800 posts

180 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
I'm trying to work out why the BBC wants us to be outraged by this, anyone care to shed some light?

Parrot of Doom

23,075 posts

234 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
The problem is that News Corp owns a few newspapers. Newspapers can editorialise to their heart's content, push any agenda they wish, etc - the BBC is much more constricted in that regard.

The fear is that a wholly-owned BSB would become Murdoch's mouthpiece. Sky do pretty much all the news on commercial radio stations as well.

Anyway, BSB shareholders might tell Murdoch to ps off. Who knows.

baz1985

3,598 posts

245 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
If only BSkyB was led by an Uncle Silvio type character.

DWP

1,232 posts

215 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
hyperblue said:
I'm trying to work out why the BBC wants us to be outraged by this, anyone care to shed some light?
It's not really the BBC alone, ITN are spitting blood behind closed doors and the quote below shows a fairly broad spectrum who are less than delighted.


The announcement was condemned as a “whitewash” by the alliance of media groups opposing the deal, which includes BT, Guardian Media Group, Associated Newspapers, Trinity Mirror, Northcliffe Media and Telegraph Media Group.




Halb

53,012 posts

183 months

Thursday 3rd March 2011
quotequote all
MadMullah said:
"The British government has approved a controversial bid by Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation to buy the 61% stake in BSkyB that it does not already own.

The green light follows News Corp's offer to spin-off Sky News as an independent company."

So does that mean murdoch will still have sky news too but ran seperately?
Now witness this fully armed and operational news corporation.


BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Friday 9th December 2016
quotequote all
So Murdoch will get his hands on Sky after all.

"British broadcaster Sky has agreed an £18bn takeover by Rupert Murdoch’s US media group 21st Century Fox five years after a takeover was abandoned at the height of the phone-hacking scandal."

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/dec/09/r...

Halb

53,012 posts

183 months

Friday 9th December 2016
quotequote all
It will be a day long remembered, it has seen the end of independence, it shall soon see the end of ethics.

r11co

6,244 posts

230 months

Friday 9th December 2016
quotequote all
Am I the only one who thinks that Murdoch has gone in the wrong direction here. Broadcast media is so 20th Century and rapidly losing traction as the way to influence minds.

About the only thing broadcast TV has any USP for these days is live sports events, and ever-faster broadband is even making that obsolete.

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Friday 24th November 2017
quotequote all
Ken Clarke was recently giving evidence to the Competition and Markets Authority and said some interesting things.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a1...

Ken Clarke said:
Quite how David Cameron got The Sun out of the hands of Gordon Brown I shall never know. Rupert would never let Tony (Blair) down because Tony had backed the Iraq war.

Maybe it was some sort of a deal. David would not tell me what it was. Suddenly we got the Murdoch empire on our side.

Within a week or two we had got Andy Coulson on board - I think he was Murdoch's man, that was part of the deal I assume - as the press officer. I am not being totally indiscreet. Nobody seemed bothered by it very much.

Within a few weeks of taking over, my Prime Minister arranged a meeting with Rebekah Brooks. Rebekah Brooks described herself as running the government - now in partnership with David Cameron.

I found myself having an extraordinary meeting with Rebekah who was instructing me on criminal justice policy from now on, as I think she had instructed my predecessor, so far as I could see, judging from the numbers of people we had in prison and the growth of rather exotic sentences.

She wanted me to buy prison ships because she did accept that the capacity of the prisons was getting rather strained... She really was solemnly telling me that we had got to have prison ships because she had got some more campaigns coming, which is one of her specialities.

I regarded this as a very amusing conversation and took not the slightest notice. As long as I was Justice Secretary we would not have any of this. I do not think my successor (Chris Grayling) needed any promoting from Rebekah so it all went back to the norm.

wc98

10,366 posts

140 months

Friday 24th November 2017
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
Ken Clarke was recently giving evidence to the Competition and Markets Authority and said some interesting things.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a1...

Ken Clarke said:
Quite how David Cameron got The Sun out of the hands of Gordon Brown I shall never know. Rupert would never let Tony (Blair) down because Tony had backed the Iraq war.

Maybe it was some sort of a deal. David would not tell me what it was. Suddenly we got the Murdoch empire on our side.

Within a week or two we had got Andy Coulson on board - I think he was Murdoch's man, that was part of the deal I assume - as the press officer. I am not being totally indiscreet. Nobody seemed bothered by it very much.

Within a few weeks of taking over, my Prime Minister arranged a meeting with Rebekah Brooks. Rebekah Brooks described herself as running the government - now in partnership with David Cameron.

I found myself having an extraordinary meeting with Rebekah who was instructing me on criminal justice policy from now on, as I think she had instructed my predecessor, so far as I could see, judging from the numbers of people we had in prison and the growth of rather exotic sentences.

She wanted me to buy prison ships because she did accept that the capacity of the prisons was getting rather strained... She really was solemnly telling me that we had got to have prison ships because she had got some more campaigns coming, which is one of her specialities.

I regarded this as a very amusing conversation and took not the slightest notice. As long as I was Justice Secretary we would not have any of this. I do not think my successor (Chris Grayling) needed any promoting from Rebekah so it all went back to the norm.
oh well, at least we know the suspicions many of us had were true after all .

Halb

53,012 posts

183 months

Friday 24th November 2017
quotequote all
BlackLabel said:
Ken Clarke was recently giving evidence to the Competition and Markets Authority and said some interesting things.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/5a1...

Ken Clarke said:
Quite how David Cameron got The Sun out of the hands of Gordon Brown I shall never know. Rupert would never let Tony (Blair) down because Tony had backed the Iraq war.

Maybe it was some sort of a deal. David would not tell me what it was. Suddenly we got the Murdoch empire on our side.

Within a week or two we had got Andy Coulson on board - I think he was Murdoch's man, that was part of the deal I assume - as the press officer. I am not being totally indiscreet. Nobody seemed bothered by it very much.

Within a few weeks of taking over, my Prime Minister arranged a meeting with Rebekah Brooks. Rebekah Brooks described herself as running the government - now in partnership with David Cameron.

I found myself having an extraordinary meeting with Rebekah who was instructing me on criminal justice policy from now on, as I think she had instructed my predecessor, so far as I could see, judging from the numbers of people we had in prison and the growth of rather exotic sentences.

She wanted me to buy prison ships because she did accept that the capacity of the prisons was getting rather strained... She really was solemnly telling me that we had got to have prison ships because she had got some more campaigns coming, which is one of her specialities.

I regarded this as a very amusing conversation and took not the slightest notice. As long as I was Justice Secretary we would not have any of this. I do not think my successor (Chris Grayling) needed any promoting from Rebekah so it all went back to the norm.
All rather insidious, a grim lil window into so called journalists and their agendas. I recall have a chat with Tam Dayall about the Iraq war and what was going on. One of the few politicians I had respect for.

Derek Smith

45,609 posts

248 months

Friday 24th November 2017
quotequote all
I thought the reason Murdoch jumped ship was well known and little to do with concessions. Many suggest Blair was being a bit too friendly with the Murdochs.

Interesting with regards to Brookes. There were rumours at the time of her sticking her nose in various places. This would appear to be confirmation.




BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Friday 24th November 2017
quotequote all
I imagine one of the main reasons Murdoch jumped ship is because no one wants to be seen backing a loser. Cameron should have just called his bluff. Would a Murdoch backed Gordon Brown really have won the 2010 election?

BlackLabel

13,251 posts

123 months

Thursday 14th December 2017
quotequote all
It appears Murdoch is giving up on his ambition to own all of Sky.



"Rupert Murdoch has agreed to sell $66bn (£49bn) worth of 21st Century Fox’s assets, including a Hollywood film studio and 39% stake in Sky, in a deal that transforms his media empire.

The takeover involves the 86-year-old tycoon and his family taking a 4.25% stake in Disney, gaining control of assets including Avatar, X-Men, The Simpsons and Modern Family as well as the FX and National Geographic businesses."

https://www.theguardian.com/media/2017/dec/14/rupe...