Tory Jeremy Hunt now in charge of ruling on the News Corp bid, BSKYB deal in the bag for Murdoch now then?
It is. Even on Hunt's own website, he is very complementarity of BSkyB and Murdoch. And with the Telegraph not releasing the snippet of what Cable said about his thoughts on Murdoch will leave the newspaper being asked very difficult questions, considering that they are a competitor to The Times, one of Murdoch's papers and were part of the group of companies alongside BT, Guardian Media Group and others who wanted the deal blocked. Tonight's events will have made Murdoch's critics case weakened significantly and if it wasn't for Hunt's position, it will be very difficult for Murdoch's takeover to be blocked. Ironically, Murdoch's critics may have gifted him the star prize of full ownership of BSkyB.
Tragic news for competition, the BBC (makes me wonder why Robert Peston released the recording and broke the story?), free-to-air broadcasting and news impartiality.
Tragic news for competition, the BBC (makes me wonder why Robert Peston released the recording and broke the story?), free-to-air broadcasting and news impartiality.
because it is the BBC doing what it does best, reporting the news even if that news is damaging to the BBC. Impartiality at it best
because it is the BBC doing what it does best, reporting the news even if that news is damaging to the BBC. Impartiality at it best
Agreed.
It would be interesting to know the rationale that Robert Peston had going through his head when he had the scoop and he ultimately reported it for the BBC, with the potential that the scoop he will claim could well damage the BBC should Murdoch gain full control of BSkyB and with Murdoch's publicised dislike of the BBC and his wish to curb the organisation for his own vested interest.
Tory Jeremy Hunt now in charge of ruling on the News Corp bid, BSKYB deal in the bag for Murdoch now then?
...and all digital media issues will now be dealt with exclusively by the Culture Ministry (which is all staffed by Tories) and not jointly with the Department for Business. That means that new decisions in this area will be pro-business and pro-Sky and the public and viewers' interest will now be forgotten.
The Telegraph, BBC and Robert Peston may be preening themselves over this story but they've ensured that the Sky buyout will now proceed smoothly and their Sky/News International media opponent will then be much stronger - a huge, and rather stupid, own goal.
...and all digital media issues will now be dealt with exclusively by the Culture Ministry (which is all staffed by Tories) and not jointly with the Department for Business. That means that new decisions in this area will be pro-business and pro-Sky and the public and viewers' interest will now be forgotten.
The Telegraph, BBC and Robert Peston may be preening themselves over this story but they've ensured that the Sky buyout will now proceed smoothly and their Sky/News International media opponent will then be much stronger - a huge, and rather stupid, own goal.
Don't shoot the messenger, Vince Cable is the one to blame.
...and all digital media issues will now be dealt with exclusively by the Culture Ministry (which is all staffed by Tories) and not jointly with the Department for Business. That means that new decisions in this area will be pro-business and pro-Sky and the public and viewers' interest will now be forgotten.
The Telegraph, BBC and Robert Peston may be preening themselves over this story but they've ensured that the Sky buyout will now proceed smoothly and their Sky/News International media opponent will then be much stronger - a huge, and rather stupid, own goal.
Peston was chosing his words very carefully this afternoon - I think there is more to come about the Telegraph and BSkyB - I don't think the tale is told (yet!)
...and all digital media issues will now be dealt with exclusively by the Culture Ministry (which is all staffed by Tories) and not jointly with the Department for Business. That means that new decisions in this area will be pro-business and pro-Sky and the public and viewers' interest will now be forgotten.
The Telegraph, BBC and Robert Peston may be preening themselves over this story but they've ensured that the Sky buyout will now proceed smoothly and their Sky/News International media opponent will then be much stronger - a huge, and rather stupid, own goal.
Do you seriously think that the leaker would not have taken the story to another media organisation if the BBC didn't report it? Peston was just lucky he got first dibs.
Way to go Telegraph.You sign a letter with other media organisations asking for the Murdoch takeover to be blocked and then you go and undermine and remove the one person in the current government who was likely to make that decision.
Peston was chosing his words very carefully this afternoon - I think there is more to come about the Telegraph and BSkyB - I don't think the tale is told (yet!)
The Lib-Dem whips will be working overtime tonight trying to find out if any other of their MPs has been indiscreet in their surgery with two "constituents"
No, the real ones to blame are those two bitchy Telegraph slappers who recorded a confidential conversation without consent.
They, along with the BBC and Robert Peston, have scored a massive own goal as illustrated by the following appropriate article comment below:
Your anger is understandable, but I dont suppose they needed rubber hoses to get Cable to speak. He sounded very willing.
What is really behind this is a lack of experience in government. It was all very well in opposition to open up to anyone who would listen, but a government MP should know better.
No, the real ones to blame are those two bitchy Telegraph slappers who recorded a confidential conversation without consent.
They, along with the BBC and Robert Peston, have scored a massive own goal as illustrated by the following appropriate article comment below:
So you're saying that the BBC should censor the news when it feels it is in its own vested interest? That would makes them no different than Rupert Murdoch's news organisations like Fox News.
The Telegraph went on a fishing trip and they landed a whopper with that idiot Cable trying to impress them with his own importance.
If Cable kept his mouth shut there would be no story. Put the blame where it deserves to go.
I just want to know why the Telegraph only printed half the story and actually hid the juicy part.
We don't know whether the Telegraph was going to bury this part of the story or whether they would have released it bit by bit like they did with MPs' expenses story in order to string out the interest and headlines. l guess we'll never know the answer to that now.
I just want to know why the Telegraph only printed half the story and actually hid the juicy part.
I suspect it is because they are part of a group of companies who have submitted their objections against Murdoch's takeover of BSkyB, alongside other companies such as BT, Guardian Media Group, Daily Mail, the Daily Mirror and others. They probably knew that Cable opposed the takeover so for their own vested interest, they probably held off publishing Cable's views of Murdoch would have landed him in the trouble he is in now, likely bring in Hunt to oversee the decision to allow the takeover or not, and Hunt is likely to agree to allow Murdoch to have full ownership of BSkyB.
The Telegraph have a reason for opposing Murdoch's takeover of BSkyB, the Telegraph is in direct competition with Murdoch's Times newspaper and if the deal goes ahead, Murdoch could tie in the Times with BSkyB's subscription model to take readers away from the Telegraph, alongside other competition issues. Ironically, the Telegraph may have contributed to helping Murdoch get his way and allow the takeover. I am sure there will be some soul-searching tonight at the Telegraph and I would not be suprised if heads rolled over this.
We'll find out in the next few days what the actual reasons why, I heard tonight on the news on BBC Radio 4 that the Telegraph face difficult questions regarding their reason(s) for not publishing Cable's views on Murdoch.
I suspect it is because they are part of a group of companies who have submitted their objections against Murdoch's takeover of BSkyB, alongside other companies such as BT, Guardian Media Group, Daily Mail, the Daily Mirror and others. They probably knew that Cable opposed the takeover so for their own vested interest, they probably held off publishing Cable's views of Murdoch would have landed him in the trouble he is in now, likely bring in Hunt to oversee the decision to allow the takeover or not, and Hunt is likely to agree to allow Murdoch to have full ownership of BSkyB.
The Telegraph have a reason for opposing Murdoch's takeover of BSkyB, the Telegraph is in direct competition with Murdoch's Times newspaper and if the deal goes ahead, Murdoch could tie in the Times with BSkyB's subscription model to take readers away from the Telegraph, alongside other competition issues. Ironically, the Telegraph may have contributed to helping Murdoch get his way and allow the takeover. I am sure there will be some soul-searching tonight at the Telegraph and I would not be suprised if heads rolled over this.
We'll find out in the next few days what the actual reasons why, I heard tonight on the news on BBC Radio 4 that the Telegraph face difficult questions regarding their reason(s) for not publishing Cable's views on Murdoch.
Yup - and I bet there are loads of lawyers watching very closely at everything being said on all sides
So you're saying that the BBC should censor the news when it feels it is in its own vested interest? That would makes them no different than Rupert Murdoch's news organisations like Fox News.
The Telegraph went on a fishing trip and they landed a whopper with that idiot Cable trying to impress them with his own importance.
If Cable kept his mouth shut there would be no story. Put the blame where it deserves to go.
just like theSky people who recorded GB's comment about the biggoted cow.
Ah well, the sponsorship of the Tory party in all his press outlets gets paid back
You're missing the fundamental point here. It's well out of order for anyone to go into a formal MP's private surgery under completely false pretences and then record a private conversation without consent with the full intention of making that conversation public.
That is both unprecedented and unethical. There are many tens of thousands of desperate people who go to their MP as the last resort of help. MPs, quite understandably, will now be more reluctant to trust and take their constituents at face value which could result in a poorer servce for needy constituents. That's what brasses me off about those so-called "reporters". They were behaving completely irresponsibly.
I'd like to say more about those two but it involves short and bad words in English so instead l'll say De er drittsekker!!
You're missing the fundamental point here. It's well out of order for anyone to go into a formal MP's private surgery under completely false pretences and then record a private conversation without consent with the full intention of making that conversation public.
That is both unprecedented and unethical. There are many tens of thousands of desperate people who go to their MP as the last resort of help. MPs, quite understandably, will now be more reluctant to trust and take their constituents at face value which could result in a poorer servce for needy constituents. That's what brasses me off about those so-called "reporters". They were behaving completely irresponsibly.
I'd like to say more about those two but it involves short and bad words in English so instead l'll say De er drittsekker!!
As you say, most constituents want to discuss things like planning problems and perhaps problems with a retailer, not the MPs views on a specific take over. This alone should have set alarm bells ringing in Cables head, after all he is the business secretary
Comments
of course, also expect BBC Worldwide to be thrown in to say sorry
Tragic news for competition, the BBC (makes me wonder why Robert Peston released the recording and broke the story?), free-to-air broadcasting and news impartiality.
Not to mention who dare sattack Murdoch and not expect to get destroyed by newscorp.
because it is the BBC doing what it does best, reporting the news even if that news is damaging to the BBC. Impartiality at it best
It would be interesting to know the rationale that Robert Peston had going through his head when he had the scoop and he ultimately reported it for the BBC, with the potential that the scoop he will claim could well damage the BBC should Murdoch gain full control of BSkyB and with Murdoch's publicised dislike of the BBC and his wish to curb the organisation for his own vested interest.
...and all digital media issues will now be dealt with exclusively by the Culture Ministry (which is all staffed by Tories) and not jointly with the Department for Business. That means that new decisions in this area will be pro-business and pro-Sky and the public and viewers' interest will now be forgotten.
The Telegraph, BBC and Robert Peston may be preening themselves over this story but they've ensured that the Sky buyout will now proceed smoothly and their Sky/News International media opponent will then be much stronger - a huge, and rather stupid, own goal.
Don't shoot the messenger, Vince Cable is the one to blame.
Peston was chosing his words very carefully this afternoon - I think there is more to come about the Telegraph and BSkyB - I don't think the tale is told (yet!)
Do you seriously think that the leaker would not have taken the story to another media organisation if the BBC didn't report it? Peston was just lucky he got first dibs.
No, the real ones to blame are those two silly Telegraph slappers who recorded a confidential conversation without consent.
They, along with the BBC and Robert Peston, have scored a massive own goal as illustrated by the following appropriate article comment below:
Almost certainly, and a large brown bag full of money for David Cameron.
The Lib-Dem whips will be working overtime tonight trying to find out if any other of their MPs has been indiscreet in their surgery with two "constituents"
Your anger is understandable, but I dont suppose they needed rubber hoses to get Cable to speak. He sounded very willing.
What is really behind this is a lack of experience in government. It was all very well in opposition to open up to anyone who would listen, but a government MP should know better.
So you're saying that the BBC should censor the news when it feels it is in its own vested interest? That would makes them no different than Rupert Murdoch's news organisations like Fox News.
The Telegraph went on a fishing trip and they landed a whopper with that idiot Cable trying to impress them with his own importance.
If Cable kept his mouth shut there would be no story. Put the blame where it deserves to go.
just like theSky people who recorded GB's comment about the biggoted cow.
Ah well, the sponsorship of the Tory party in all his press outlets gets paid back
I would not be surprised if some Tory grey suits were not behind this to get Cable out of the way for their mates at News Corp
We don't know whether the Telegraph was going to bury this part of the story or whether they would have released it bit by bit like they did with MPs' expenses story in order to string out the interest and headlines. l guess we'll never know the answer to that now.
The Telegraph have a reason for opposing Murdoch's takeover of BSkyB, the Telegraph is in direct competition with Murdoch's Times newspaper and if the deal goes ahead, Murdoch could tie in the Times with BSkyB's subscription model to take readers away from the Telegraph, alongside other competition issues. Ironically, the Telegraph may have contributed to helping Murdoch get his way and allow the takeover. I am sure there will be some soul-searching tonight at the Telegraph and I would not be suprised if heads rolled over this.
We'll find out in the next few days what the actual reasons why, I heard tonight on the news on BBC Radio 4 that the Telegraph face difficult questions regarding their reason(s) for not publishing Cable's views on Murdoch.
Yup - and I bet there are loads of lawyers watching very closely at everything being said on all sides
You're missing the fundamental point here. It's well out of order for anyone to go into a formal MP's private surgery under completely false pretences and then record a private conversation without consent with the full intention of making that conversation public.
That is both unprecedented and unethical. There are many tens of thousands of desperate people who go to their MP as the last resort of help. MPs, quite understandably, will now be more reluctant to trust and take their constituents at face value which could result in a poorer servce for needy constituents. That's what brasses me off about those so-called "reporters". They were behaving completely irresponsibly.
I'd like to say more about those two but it involves short and bad words in English so instead l'll say De er drittsekker!!
As you say, most constituents want to discuss things like planning problems and perhaps problems with a retailer, not the MPs views on a specific take over. This alone should have set alarm bells ringing in Cables head, after all he is the business secretary