"News of The World" Shut Down & Rupert Murdoch's Print Empire in Freefall

[c.t.ner]

I haven't seen anyone start a thread on this, so please delete if it's already been brought up. But Rupert Murdoch's print and media empire in England is in a massive tailspin since last Thursday.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe...rticle2092007/

The gist of the story is that late last week the Guardian revealed that The News of The World, England's most read daily 'tabloid' newspaper, was caught hacking into the phone messages of a dead girl's family. They deleted phone messages from the police to give hope to the family and also to steal information for their headlines. They've also been accused of hacking into the phones and emails of the families of dead soldiers, paying off members of the London metropolitan police and the security team that follows the Monarchy and Prime Minister.

The speed of the fallout has been incredible. Including shutting down the News of The World on Sunday (after a 128 year run or something like that). Murdoch's bid to purchase a major share in BSKYB, a large satellite company in England, is all but squashed and it looks like there is going to be a massive fallout for the new Tory coalition government.

Here are some articles:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14119225

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2093936/

While the fallout has just begun on Murdoch's empire in Britain, the allegations could have legal ramifications in the US.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...rticle2093895/

Anyways, it is fascinating stuff.

I doubt it will make major waves over in North America, but it would be interesting if it affected the Fox News here in the US. I doubt it will, but you never know.

Wondering what others think will happen.

[FlamesAddiction]

I would have loved to get a mint copy of the last edition.

This story makes you wonder if the same thing could be happening elsewhere or if it is an isolated thing. The print media has to be getting a little desperate these days, especially the gossip rags which pretty much just do what the internet does now.

[HotHotHeat]

This story is all over anything not owned by News Corp. State side. It's always amusing watching news organizations try to take each other down. In this case, the claims are disgusting. Murdoch is the closest thing reality has to Dr. Evil.

[Thor]

The idea of so few hands controlling so much media worldwide is a horrible idea, anything to lessen this I'm all for.

[longsuffering]

I'm thinking that the 'rot' starts at the top for News Corp.

I absolutely think it will affect Fox News in N America. They have precious little credibility as a news organization. Losing even a bit more can't be good.

The shareholders will be the ones who bring Murdoch down. He's under growing criticism for running his (Public) companies as though they were privately held business.

It wouldn't shock me if eventually we discovered the old man (Murdoch) personally approved the phone hacking.

Murdoch's fall will make Conrad Black's fall from grace pale in comparison.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Thor

The idea of so few hands controlling so much media worldwide is a horrible idea, anything to lessen this I'm all for.

In terms of newspapers, the News of the World only publishes on Sundays, and Murdoch's other paper (The Sun) will probably start publishing similar content on Sundays very soon.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

In terms of newspapers, the News of the World only publishes on Sundays, and Murdoch's other paper (The Sun) will probably start publishing similar content on Sundays very soon.

Ture, but it'll be interesting to see what the fallout does to his other British paper properties.

The Sun
News of the World (closed after a scandal on July 10th 2011)
The Times
Sunday Times

(BTW, his list of properties under the News Corp umbrella is massive and or frightening, depending on your view)

[Shades]

Originally Posted by c.t.ner

(BTW, his list of properties under the News Corp umbrella is massive and or frightening, depending on your view)

[Sr. Mints]

Originally Posted by c.t.ner

(BTW, his list of properties under the News Corp umbrella is massive and or frightening, depending on your view)

I didn't know they owned Hulu; I'm surprised, actually.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by c.t.ner

Ture, but it'll be interesting to see what the fallout does to his other British paper properties.

The Sun
News of the World (closed after a scandal on July 10th 2011)
The Times
Sunday Times

(BTW, his list of properties under the News Corp umbrella is massive and or frightening, depending on your view)

There is definitely a concentration of information in his hands. Shutting down what was basically the Sunday version of the Sun, to be replaced by the "Sunday Sun" doesn't seem like a big change to me, more of a damage control move. Still too bad for the ~200 people out of work. Doubt this will affect the Times properties much, they're a pretty different market segment, and have managed to stay above the fray.

The big news is if it screws up the BskyB aquisition. That's been one of his main cash engines, and he needs to own 100% to have access to the cash in the parent company as newspaper profits begin to decline.

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by bizaro86

There is definitely a concentration of information in his hands. Shutting down what was basically the Sunday version of the Sun, to be replaced by the "Sunday Sun" doesn't seem like a big change to me, more of a damage control move. Still too bad for the ~200 people out of work. Doubt this will affect the Times properties much, they're a pretty different market segment, and have managed to stay above the fray.

The big news is if it screws up the BskyB aquisition. That's been one of his main cash engines, and he needs to own 100% to have access to the cash in the parent company as newspaper profits begin to decline.

This is a fast moving story. The Sunday Times and The S*n have been accused of illegally accessing medical records of ex PM Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. It is also alleged that The Sunday Times gained access to his bank account and legal files and private investigators working for the paper hired criminals to work on stories about him.

[c.t.ner]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

This is a fast moving story. The Sunday Times and The S*n have been accused of illegally accessing medical records of ex PM Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. It is also alleged that The Sunday Times gained access to his bank account and legal files and private investigators working for the paper hired criminals to work on stories about him.

This is an incredibly fast moving story and one that is going to have lasting ramifications.

On the one side there is of course the public outrage to these deplorable actions. And that on it's own would give the story a lot of legs and cause a massive headache for the Murdoch's entities in Britain and anyone publicly tied to either organization.

And not to diminish the outrage of the citizens, but the bigger underlying story will be how the politicians in Britain (and to an extent the US) distance themselves from Murdoch and his empire. There are a few articles that note to win an election in Britain, you pretty much had to play Murdoch's cards just right. It was a necessary evil for the past few decades. Blair, Brown and Cameron have all had relationships with Murdoch. Because of his power, I don't think there is a single politician in England that hasn't been linked to private meetings with Murdoch or members of his affiliates.

But this scandal is going to make even being remotely associated with Murdoch's empire akin to a political kiss of death in the eyes of the public. Because of this, I really doubt Cameron (or the coalition) will allow Murdoch's bid to own BSkyB to go through.

[Barnet Flame]

Well the bid has been referred to the Competition Commission to look at plurality issues. This is a delaying tactic by Jeremy Hunt who is the Minister responsible for providing regulatory approval of the takeover.

I'm guessing Hunt is hoping for one of two things:

For the decision to take so long (39 weeks max) that the issue dies down and people lose interest, so he can wave it through, which was his original intention until last week.

There is an Ofcom (Office of Communications) review into whether or not News International is a 'fit and proper' owner of a broadcaster. The public view is that NI is not. This could take some time for a decision to be made - but if they decide NI is not fit and proper, then that would scupper the bid.

But the ramifications for NI could go much further because if NI are not fit and proper, they may have to sell off their existing holding. If this happens, it will be an unmitigated disaster for Murdoch because BskyB is incredibly profitable with no prospect of a serious competitor as entry into the market is impossible. I was going to say practically impossible, but the level of investment required and the domestic dominance of BSB is so total, it is impossible.

The stakes, political and ecomomic could barely be higher.

[bizaro86]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

This is a fast moving story. The Sunday Times and The S*n have been accused of illegally accessing medical records of ex PM Gordon Brown's son who has cystic fibrosis. It is also alleged that The Sunday Times gained access to his bank account and legal files and private investigators working for the paper hired criminals to work on stories about him.

Hadn't heard the part about the Sunday Times being involved. That makes it seem more like a corporate wide thing vs a few rogue staff at a trashy tabloid.

[c.t.ner]

Well it looks like the British Parliament is going to make a request for Murdoch to remove his bid to own BSKYB.

http://www.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/europe/07/12/uk.phone.hacking.scandal/index.html?hpt=hp_c1

Meanwhile, a Downing Street source told CNN the British coalition government will vote in favor of a parliamentary motion by the Labour opposition calling on News Corp. to withdraw its bid for satellite broadcaster BSkyB.


Whittingdale predicted any vote would be lopsided, if not unanimous, against the elder Murdoch. "I would have thought that, if Parliament sends a signal as strong as is likely, he would be very foolish to ignore it."

[Azure]

Well, anyone that hacks private information to obtain a news story ought to crash and burn.

And, any CEO, owner or executive of any kind that knows about it, and doesn't turn the guy over to the wolves ought to crash and burn too.

So regardless of political leanings or how massively Murdoch is involved in the media, which I don't like either.....the fact that one of his papers pulled crap like they do reflects pretty seriously on what kind of person he runs, and how legitimate his news companies actually are.

[HOZ]

Related. NY Times article on Murdoch

In Defense of Murdoch

British Sky Broadcasting is emphatically not Fox. It’s a varied channel with some serious news shows. Overall, the British media scene without Murdoch would be pretty impoverished. His breaking of the unions at Wapping in 1986 was decisive for the vitality of newspapering. He took The Times tabloid when everyone said he was crazy. He was right. He loves a scoop, loves a scrap, and both the Wall Street Journal and The Times show serious journalists can thrive under him.
But Murdoch’s in trouble now. An important deal for all of British Sky Broadcasting hangs on his being able to convince British authorities News Corp management is in fact reputable. He’ll probably have to sacrifice Brooks for that. Politicians who fawned now fulminate. Prime Minister David Cameron is embarrassed. Both Murdoch and his savvy son James Murdoch (of more centrist views than his father) are scrambling.
I’d bet on them to prevail. When I asked Murdoch the secret of TV, he told me “Bury your mistakes.” The guy’s a force of nature and his restless innovations have, on balance and with caveats, been good for the media and a more open world.

[Barnet Flame]

That NYT article does not take into account the fact that British Broadcasting Laws prevent Sky News from reporting in the same way as Fox News. The regulatory environment prevents broadcasting news programmes being unduly biased and there is a requirement to give equal exposure when providing opinion.

There is no such environment in the self regulating print media, and this is where we see how Murdoch rolls in the UK. UK print media is a joke in the tabloid sector, but in this respect a great deal of responsibility lies with the consumer, because they buy this crap.

[icarus]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

That NYT article does not take into account the fact that British Broadcasting Laws prevent Sky News from reporting in the same way as Fox News. The regulatory environment prevents broadcasting news programmes being unduly biased and there is a requirement to give equal exposure when providing opinion.

NI originally intended to get around this to the facilitate the acquisition of BSkyB by essentially hiving off Sky News from the mothership. But in an effort to speed things along they have taken that proposal off the table in order to force it to the competition committee which would speed up the process. What a risky gambit though: hiving off Sky News was the biggest concession made by NI but by taking back that concession just to try to speed things up just removes the last shred of goodwill they had going for them.

All UK parties are now showing rare unity to finally free themselves of their oppressive overlord a la the Arab spring.

EDIT: ...and now NI has given up its bid for BSkyB. Amazing.

[HOZ]

Well it is over Murdoch group pulls out of buying BSkyB

The media group feels the situation has become "too politicised" for it to continue with its takeover offer, a senior source told Kleinman.
A statement confirming the news read: "News Corporation announces that it no longer intends to make an offer for the entire issued and to be issued share capital of British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC ("BSkyB") not already owned by it."
News Corp has a 39% stake in BSkyB and had been trying to buy the remaining shares.