Eff all socialists. Stick it to 'em, Murdoch.
I’d like to see his wife pull some kung-fu on them.
Uhhhh...not to be insolent or anything, Commodore, but who decides whether or not MPs are fit to exercise stewardship of their subjects' lives?
The Commons culture, media and sport select committee also concludedWell excuuuuse me, 'select committee'. And conclude 'this' too, ya asshats.
If this wasn't so fricken bizzare it would be funny. They come down on Murdoch like a ton of bricks but this same Culture committee hasn't said diddle about all the Muslim Enclaves that exist in London and are DESTROYING all things 'British' about the "culture" of the UK.
Like where was this so-called 'Culture Committee' when all those 'muslim yutes' were rioting and burning buildings a couple years ago?? And since Sports is part of their purview, where are they when all the Soccer Thugs -- or whatever they're called -- go bonkers and start brawls and riots??
This nonsense is example #654,329 why the American Revolution was necessary mandatory. And why 'I ain't' exactly a fan of all things British like fawning over 'The Royals'. That is, except for Nigel Farage, the last sane politician in Europe. (I have him on my Google News Alerts)
Nigel Farage: Euro Break-Up Just a Question of How, European Parliament, Strasbourg, April 18, 2012.
First, this happened because of a British tradition of government regulation not only of the broadcast spectrum (which is probably unavoidable) but also of the press. As others have pointed out, we declared independence from Britain for a reason. If government has the right to control media to make sure only "fit persons" are in charge, it can do abusive things like this.
Second, I don't know anyone who disputes that Murdoch's employees committed crimes, least of all Murdoch, who fired some of his closest senior associates and shut down the entire newspaper. Hacking into people's emails and cell phones is illegal — and should be. However, once we grant the principle that government has the right to regulate media, do we want to let the head of a company which has a history of serious criminal activity being allowed to participate in a regulated media business? I do not see a way to avoid the logical conclusion unless Murdoch can prove that he really did have no idea what was going on in his own company and wasn't being willfully and deliberately ignorant.
The solution to illegal hacking and wiretapping is to prosecute the criminals. The solution to irresponsible media is to stop buying the newspaper or turn the channel on the TV. Those are two very different solutions for two very different problems, and applying the wrong solution leads to cures that are much worse than the disease.
As conservatives, we're used to complaining about media, often with good reason. But let's not forget that once government gets its camel-head in the tent, all sorts of bad things happen as a result.
This has direct relevance to Free Republic and other internet media sites like this. Give the government the ability to regulate things that should be left to the free market, and we give government the right to abuse.
Well, at least, we’ll get fair coverage and analysis from the “Guardian”!!
Do people think CEO’s personally run every single business hands on?
Next time a BBC scandal erupts will these MP’s resign because they are unfit??
Unless they hold shares in his companies, their opinion means jack squat.
I’d suggest that GB’s gov’t, en banc, are unfit to run their own country.