Monday, July 25, 2011
Clear rules needed on media ownership
There are some who interpreted my question yesterday as to whether Rupert Murdoch and his company are fit and proper people to own any media in this country as a call for censorship. Nothing could be further from the truth.
My point was that in the current 24/7 news cycle those who own and control the media have great power and need to exercise that responsibly. They should not be allowed to misuse that power by seeking to subvert democratically elected politicians, bribe policemen and break laws with impunity as has happened. There needs to be a standard that all media should meet but that should not prevent genuine investigative journalism or even popularist muck-raking provided that sources are legitimate.
Making threats to bring down elected politicians so as to further economic interests if, indeed that happened, in my view does not meet that fit and proper test. In other contexts it would be called blackmail, so why should it be any different for multi-millionaire media moguls?
Vince Cable in today's Financial Times appears to agree. He says that companies that own UK newspapers should not be allowed to take control of broadcasters without thorough investigation.
On the BBC’s Andrew Marr show, Mr Cable said: “We have learned from the past that having media moguls dominating the British media is deeply unhelpful, not simply in terms of plurality but because of the wider impact on the political world.”
He said he would not pre-empt the inquiry by Lord Justice Leveson into phone hacking and the behaviour and influence of the press.
But Mr Cable added: “What I want to see is a very clear set of unambiguous rules ... about market shares – that we don’t have dominant players and a presumption against cross-ownership between press and television.”
He was more circumspect on the way that News International sought to influence the decision on their bid for BSkyB though:
Asked about his own involvement in the BSkyB bid and reports that staff from News International, the News Corp company that controls its UK papers, had tried to bully his Liberal Democrat party over the bid, Mr Cable added: “Well, there was heavy lobbying but it was perfectly legal.”
Setting the boundary as to what is and what is not legal must be one of the outcomes of this whole process.
My point was that in the current 24/7 news cycle those who own and control the media have great power and need to exercise that responsibly. They should not be allowed to misuse that power by seeking to subvert democratically elected politicians, bribe policemen and break laws with impunity as has happened. There needs to be a standard that all media should meet but that should not prevent genuine investigative journalism or even popularist muck-raking provided that sources are legitimate.
Making threats to bring down elected politicians so as to further economic interests if, indeed that happened, in my view does not meet that fit and proper test. In other contexts it would be called blackmail, so why should it be any different for multi-millionaire media moguls?
Vince Cable in today's Financial Times appears to agree. He says that companies that own UK newspapers should not be allowed to take control of broadcasters without thorough investigation.
On the BBC’s Andrew Marr show, Mr Cable said: “We have learned from the past that having media moguls dominating the British media is deeply unhelpful, not simply in terms of plurality but because of the wider impact on the political world.”
He said he would not pre-empt the inquiry by Lord Justice Leveson into phone hacking and the behaviour and influence of the press.
But Mr Cable added: “What I want to see is a very clear set of unambiguous rules ... about market shares – that we don’t have dominant players and a presumption against cross-ownership between press and television.”
He was more circumspect on the way that News International sought to influence the decision on their bid for BSkyB though:
Asked about his own involvement in the BSkyB bid and reports that staff from News International, the News Corp company that controls its UK papers, had tried to bully his Liberal Democrat party over the bid, Mr Cable added: “Well, there was heavy lobbying but it was perfectly legal.”
Setting the boundary as to what is and what is not legal must be one of the outcomes of this whole process.
Comments:
<< Home
'On the BBC’s Andrew Marr show, Mr Cable said: “We have learned from the past that having media moguls dominating the British media is deeply unhelpful, not simply in terms of plurality but because of the wider impact on the political world.” '
Actually, one can say exactly the same thing with respect to the BBC news service. Only when I left the UK did I notice the huge bias in the way the BBC covers (and sometimes does not) news stories. I remember reading AP raw news and then the BBC's slant on the same.
The BBC's news service needs to be cut down and Marr is hardly someone with 100% credibility - didn't he apply for a "super injunction" to squash a news story that concerned him? What a hypocrite. cw
Actually, one can say exactly the same thing with respect to the BBC news service. Only when I left the UK did I notice the huge bias in the way the BBC covers (and sometimes does not) news stories. I remember reading AP raw news and then the BBC's slant on the same.
The BBC's news service needs to be cut down and Marr is hardly someone with 100% credibility - didn't he apply for a "super injunction" to squash a news story that concerned him? What a hypocrite. cw
# posted by 
: 7:46 PM
: 7:46 PM
"But Mr Cable added: “What I want to see is a very clear set of unambiguous rules ... about market shares – that we don’t have dominant players and a presumption against cross-ownership between press and television.”
Didn't Business secretary Mr. Vince Cable just call a group of elected politicians in the House of Representatives a bunch of 'rightwing nutters'?
I've chatted about this with some of my American colleagues who were curious about why a senior member of the UK government would say such a thing about the US legislature.
They r a bit puzzled!
Post a Comment
Didn't Business secretary Mr. Vince Cable just call a group of elected politicians in the House of Representatives a bunch of 'rightwing nutters'?
I've chatted about this with some of my American colleagues who were curious about why a senior member of the UK government would say such a thing about the US legislature.
They r a bit puzzled!
# posted by : 7:35 PM
: 7:35 PM<< Home
