THE SHARKS ARE CIRCLING THE Murdoch empire after the hacking scandal has now gone beyond the private lives of celebrities, and touched the lives of ordinary people. Perhaps the most outrageous example (of several) was the News of the Worlds (NoW) attempt at hacking into the voicemail of the schoolgirl Milly Dowler, who was murdered on her way home from school in 2002.
While the scandal remained a celebrity trend, the public cared little for the ethics of tabloid journalism. Indeed, judging by the red tops circulation figures, the public enjoyed whatever type or size of fish was trawled up and cared little for whatever method was deployed, be it rod, net or hand grenade, in catching it. All that was required was that something worth reading about and talking about was caught.
Then the NoW could afford to be indifferent to the complaints of politicians, the chattering classes, or News International’s old nemesis, the BBC.
Having overstepped a mark that the public and common morality deemed unacceptable, Murdoch now finds himself with a real crises on his hands. It seems he, or his son, should have been paying more attention to what was going on in London, and especially the performance of his NoW editor Rebekah Brooks, who we are told is/was a particular favourite of his.
Ms Brooks should be sacked (as she refuses to fall on the sword), as well as a great deal of contrition should be offered up by News International, if the NoW wishes to keep its readers and advertisers. There is now talk of the great man himself meeting his company’s victims in person. What he will say matters little as far as the enemies of his empire are concerned. For it is those rather than the victims of this sorry business who will be out to destroy as much of Rupert Murdoch, and of what he represents; which will have very little to do with the NoW’s disgraceful behaviour.
RUPERT MURDOCH IS THE GREAT SATAN as far as liberal Britain is concerned. Ever since the Grunwick dispute (1976-1977) when Murdoch defeated radical trade unionism and revolutionised the printing industry, the trade unions have waited, more in hope than expectation, for Murdoch’s comeuppance .
Of course, it is not only the trade unions that are now waiting with baited breath, hoping to witness the great man’s downfall. For his political enemies in Britain far exceed the minnows of the trade union movement. First of all, his rivals, who for sound competitive reasons, would like to see his empire lose a few of its colonies: but their opposition is quite natural and would no doubt be expected.
There are other enemies however, who despise News International and its creator for reasons other than to do with the thrust and parry of competition. One such enemy does not need to worry itself with competition, and is wholly opposed on ideological grounds to Murdoch’s empire.
The BBC survives comfortably on over £3 billion annually from the taxpayer. To this institution, the vagaries of the market place are a foreign field of which little is known or experienced. Ratings at the BBC are a matter of choice rather than necessity. This Leviathan of cultural subsidy stands contrary to the ebb and flow of the market place. Despite its claims to being unbiased and neutral; it is Ideologically liberal. It hates the Murdoch empire for being Right-wing, and, like the rest of News International’s enemies, will do its bit to keep the Aussie in the headlines.
Next we have the politicians, who have been given their chance to debate the latest scandal by John Bercow, the Speaker of the House, whose wife is an outspoken (on twitter) Labour supporter. Mr Speaker was a controversial choice for this most important of all parliamentary positions. The Speaker’s job requires neutrality and fairness in his or her dealings with the floor of the house. But both Conservative, as well as the Liberal Democrat back benchers have been restless to say the least regarding Speaker Bercow and his orchestration of the chamber. Especially after his intervention against David Cameron at Prime Minister’s Question Time, when the prime minister was half way through a reply to Ed Milliband when he was unceremoniously cut off by Speaker Bercow.
Perhaps, just perhaps, Speaker Bercow allowed this debate in the full knowledge that the government’s culture secretary was about to allow News International’s bid for the control of B Sky B to go ahead, and that such an announcement would prove perilous at this time to the Coalition. It seems that Speaker Bercow’s wife is pulling his strings and this only adds to the unfortunate diminishing of the office of Speaker of the House.
But overall, the politicians will use today’s debate to take revenge upon the newspaper media generally for subjecting them to so much scrutiny during the parliamentary inquiry into MP’s expenses.
BRAND GUARDINISTA is another enemy of Murdoch. But, although small in numbers, the Guardianistas encapsulates more than the Guardian newspaper from which their name was derived. Your average Guardianista works in the public sector as part of academia, the civil service or the BBC; plus numerous quangos with a cultural brief. What is important, is not their numbers, but their stature and influence within society. For the liberal agenda is their agenda; the very agenda that now oversees every aspect of our modern culture; from politics and the law, to the media.
Brand Guardianista are relishing News International’s present predicament. Tonight London’s liberal elite will no doubt be sharing a bottle or two of Sainsbury’s Chilean Merlot £3.99 (times are hard), and recalling the night in 1997 when Michael Portillo was driven from office at the 1997 General Election; and making comparisons with Rupert’s current predicament.
SO WHAT THIS TELLS US is that, for liberal Britain, the outrageous behaviour of the NoW, is just a means to an end – the end of Rupert Murdoch. This is how many on the liberal-left regard this whole episode. It has been manner from heaven; and, whatever the means by which Rupert is brought to his knees, it matters little too liberal and Left-wing principles.
The NoW’s disgraceful intrusions into the lives of its victims and their families by journalists can only be summed up by the genuine disgust of the ordinary citizen - many of whom buy the NoW and may no longer chose to do so.
I cannot believe that an entrepreneur with Rupert Murdoch’s savvy could allow this outlandish and cruel adventure to proceed. Admittedly, Rupert had given his son James control over his paper media; and while these disreputable means of procuring information was confined to celebrities, I can understand why his son refused to take action. But when the dubious ethics employed upon celebrities were transferred to ordinary people; such ethics were no longer in doubt, and action should have been taken against any journalist that sough the procurement of such information from such people. Which leaves us with the NoWs editor, Rebekah Brooks, who denies any knowledge of the events under investigation – she must be, as a first step, removed from her position in News International
RUPERT MURDOCH is not liked in Britain by the liberal elite who govern us and claim hegemony over our whole culture. He has annoyed them on numerous occasions and they are now in the hunt for their long pent-up vengeance.
Murdoch represents the best in capitalist behaviour. He, for instance, brought modern technology and modern practices of employment to the newspaper printing industry. He buried Fleet Street as the source of bad practice in the industry, while advances in technology provided him with the battering ram to complete the modernisation of the printing industry as well as its working practices.
He has never been forgiven for his foresight by the Left. He, like many before him, helped bring modernisation and efficiency to an industry that had suffered in the past from feeble, frail and weak management of the type that had almost brought this country to its knees during the 1970s.
Murdoch exemplifies the attitude of the pioneers of the Industrial Revolution that set this country briefly on the road to greatness from the 18th century onwards.
When he challenged the restrictive practices of the print unions during the 1970s, he foresaw the future, while the unions that sought to hold on to the past; and sadly this will always remain the case as far as the unions are concerned, for as long their memberships remain apathetic about who leads them.
WHAT THE NEWS CORPORATION DID by seemingly allowing the NoW to spy upon a young murder victim, goes beyond any moral compass, and the newspaper should be made to pay the price for its cruel activities.
But let us remember this. If the technology was there to be used by the NoW, then the question should be asked about the other tabloid’s access to the same technology. Were those journalists belonging to the other tabloids of a superior moral compass than those of the NoW; or should their own activities be brought under the public microscope.
It is my view that British journalism has always had its, what was once called ‘yellow press’, and its behaviour was then no less reprehensible than that of the NoW today.
It is technology rather than human nature that has heralded this current crisis. Human nature will always act without ethics given sufficient pressure and reward; and will use any innovative technology to help procure whatever ambition the individual seeks to acquire.
Those tabloids who today have sought refuge on a higher moral plane than the NoW, by adding their disgust at the NoW’s behaviour, are hypocrites. The only reason they are not being looked into at the moment, is because they are not owned by Rupert Murdoch – for it is the man rather than the ball that is being played at the moment, and I hope Milly Dowler’s family, as well as all the other ordinary victims, will take cognisance of this.
No comments:
Post a Comment