My Thread about News Corp: The Potential Fallout

[whitehall]

What makes you think they won't?

If I'm gonna destroy an individual, I like to consider the blowback. We're in a recession. Newspapers are particularly vulnerable. Other media companies are struggling. Fox is not just Fox News. You bring down Fox News... fine.... what about the rest of the Fox Network? What about the potential losses there? I like rational thought over hysterical ranting.

You took the time to document all Murdoch's holdings. Why not document the convoluted privacy laws in the UK. What are the charges against Murdoch? Are they more serious than illegally hacking Speaker Gingrich's cell phone conversation and turning it over to the NY Times? What about the violations of Sarah Palin's right to privacy? There was little or no outrage on the left when her e-mail account was hacked or when an angry creepy stalker rented a house next door so he could spy on her and her family and write it up for the leftie media.

If you want them documented, feel free. I'm not you 'go to gal'.

The investigation is still in it's very early stages... no one knows what charges, if any, will be laid and against whom. Nine NotW journalists have been arrested. That is the only hard fact.

People also need to bear in mind that Murdoch (and his son) are both American citizens, they are beyond the reach of the UK legal system.

The email hacks of Palin are subject to US law. The NotW are subject to UK law. Why the fuck are you asking me about that? I haven't mentioned Palin's emails.

Do you own fucking work.

Do you lefties even know how to argue about an issue? You are so full of yourselves and full of hatred that you assume all sorts of things. You brought it up girlie. What charges does Murdoch face that would cause him "to lose his companies".

 

[Trajan]

So, everyone seems very enthusiastic (and with good reason) to see Murdoch and his empire destroyed.

I wondered what exactly the impact of destroying that empire would be. Firstly, we need to know what exactly this 'News Corp' is... what does it own, and where does it own it. So, here:



Ok. So that's quite a substantial company. From there, what else would we need to consider:

How many people would lose their jobs if News Corp was destoyed?
How many supply chain jobs would be lost?
How much revenue would be lost?
How much tax money would be lost? (Bear in mind that each of their employees pays tax somewhere)
How many countries would that affect?

There are a few more questions, but I'm kind of hoping that people will think logically before running off at the mouth about destroying this 'evil' corporation. Think. Preferably critically, instead of partisanly.

here are some snips from a wjs article, I am not familiar with slander libel and accetpted news methodology over there, you appear to be(?)...what do you think of Jenkins supposition altogether?

* JULY 13, 2011

Law & Order, Fleet Street
The crime spree could have been stopped in 1999.

To wit, for approximately 10 years it was deemed fine and dandy that private gumshoes bribed police officers, stole voicemails, and broke into the bank records of celebrities, royals, government leaders and notorious convicts in order to create fodder for tabloid journalism. The violent reaction that finally engulfed one of the papers, the News of the World (owned by the parent of The Wall Street Journal), last week came only because of one additional revelation: An ordinary citizen had been victimized by phone hacking, namely Milly Dowler, a schoolgirl who went missing early in 2002 and six months later was found to have been murdered.

This story turns out to have an extraordinarily long backstory, which throws a light (for a naive American, anyway) on the gigantic furor erupting across the Atlantic. As far back as 2002, the Guardian newspaper detailed the reliance of three British tabloids—the News of the World, the Daily Mirror, and the Sunday Mirror—on private investigators to bring them stories based on bribes handed out to policemen and purloined electronic records.

The Guardian report itself was based on leaked details of a secret 1999 police investigation into corrupt cops, reporters and private eyes. Even this statement does not do justice to the ancient provenance of the scandal. A central target of that investigation was private eye Jonathan Rees, Scotland Yard's recurrent suspect in the 1987 axe murder of his partner, Daniel Morgan, who was killed possibly because he was about to give evidence of police corruption.

snip-
Phew. If the 1999 investigation did not lead to the prosecution of any journalists, it was apparently only because the police were obliged to call off the probe early. Their surveillance bug had caught wind of a felony being hatched. The cops intervened to stop Rees and a corrupt police officer from planting cocaine on a woman involved in a child-custody case. Rees went to jail for several years. Amazingly, on emergence in 2005, he returned to the payroll of Fleet Street.

Here it seems appropriate to interject another seemingly unrelated fact. In 2002, the British government considered making it illegal for news organizations to offer tell-all financial deals to jurors in ongoing criminal trials—and to dangle a larger payment if the verdict were to be guilty.

In the end, it was decided to rely on press self-regulation, but—forgive a late hit here—wasn't the overarching message that all of Britain was in connivance with the boundary-stretching of its tabloid press?

After the Guardian revelations, that print media only became more full of stories produced by illegal methods. Prince William in 2005 was reported to have visited a doctor after a soccer injury, information the prince and his handlers concluded could only have come from a hacked voicemail—as evidently it did. Ditto stories about everything from Bank of England Chief Eddie George's mortgage to the personal lives of rock stars and pro athletes.

and more at-
Jenkins: Law & Order, Fleet Street - WSJ.com

While I am not a journalist, I am a writer and I do publish in major newspapers and magazines in the UK. Therefore, yea, I am painfully well aware of the laws governing the media.

We should bear in mind, this is an ongoing investigation - a journalist and a private investigator went to prison some years ago about this. Other than these two convictions, 9 journalists have been arrested and are currently on bail while investigations continue. There is a Parliamentary Select Committee investigating the mess, and there will shortly be a judicial review to determine a set of facts - those facts are yet to be confirmed.

It is, therefore, speculation and not hard facts at the moment. We really need to wait to find out the facts before we decide who to hang.

do you think he has a poi nt that this has been going for well, quite a while and now that a "civilian' was in the cross hairs its gone viral? That it appears they have gone long with a wink and a nod in the past, so this should not be the HUGE big deal it is minus the BIG name

 

[Synthaholic]

So, everyone seems very enthusiastic (and with good reason) to see Murdoch and his empire destroyed.

I wondered what exactly the impact of destroying that empire would be. Firstly, we need to know what exactly this 'News Corp' is... what does it own, and where does it own it. So, here:



Ok. So that's quite a substantial company. From there, what else would we need to consider:

How many people would lose their jobs if News Corp was destoyed?
How many supply chain jobs would be lost?
How much revenue would be lost?
How much tax money would be lost? (Bear in mind that each of their employees pays tax somewhere)
How many countries would that affect?

There are a few more questions, but I'm kind of hoping that people will think logically before running off at the mouth about destroying this 'evil' corporation. Think. Preferably critically, instead of partisanly.

here are some snips from a wjs article, I am not familiar with slander libel and accetpted news methodology over there, you appear to be(?)...what do you think of Jenkins supposition altogether?

* JULY 13, 2011

Law & Order, Fleet Street
The crime spree could have been stopped in 1999.

To wit, for approximately 10 years it was deemed fine and dandy that private gumshoes bribed police officers, stole voicemails, and broke into the bank records of celebrities, royals, government leaders and notorious convicts in order to create fodder for tabloid journalism. The violent reaction that finally engulfed one of the papers, the News of the World (owned by the parent of The Wall Street Journal), last week came only because of one additional revelation: An ordinary citizen had been victimized by phone hacking, namely Milly Dowler, a schoolgirl who went missing early in 2002 and six months later was found to have been murdered.

This story turns out to have an extraordinarily long backstory, which throws a light (for a naive American, anyway) on the gigantic furor erupting across the Atlantic. As far back as 2002, the Guardian newspaper detailed the reliance of three British tabloids—the News of the World, the Daily Mirror, and the Sunday Mirror—on private investigators to bring them stories based on bribes handed out to policemen and purloined electronic records.

The Guardian report itself was based on leaked details of a secret 1999 police investigation into corrupt cops, reporters and private eyes. Even this statement does not do justice to the ancient provenance of the scandal. A central target of that investigation was private eye Jonathan Rees, Scotland Yard's recurrent suspect in the 1987 axe murder of his partner, Daniel Morgan, who was killed possibly because he was about to give evidence of police corruption.

snip-
Phew. If the 1999 investigation did not lead to the prosecution of any journalists, it was apparently only because the police were obliged to call off the probe early. Their surveillance bug had caught wind of a felony being hatched. The cops intervened to stop Rees and a corrupt police officer from planting cocaine on a woman involved in a child-custody case. Rees went to jail for several years. Amazingly, on emergence in 2005, he returned to the payroll of Fleet Street.

Here it seems appropriate to interject another seemingly unrelated fact. In 2002, the British government considered making it illegal for news organizations to offer tell-all financial deals to jurors in ongoing criminal trials—and to dangle a larger payment if the verdict were to be guilty.

In the end, it was decided to rely on press self-regulation, but—forgive a late hit here—wasn't the overarching message that all of Britain was in connivance with the boundary-stretching of its tabloid press?

After the Guardian revelations, that print media only became more full of stories produced by illegal methods. Prince William in 2005 was reported to have visited a doctor after a soccer injury, information the prince and his handlers concluded could only have come from a hacked voicemail—as evidently it did. Ditto stories about everything from Bank of England Chief Eddie George's mortgage to the personal lives of rock stars and pro athletes.

and more at-
Jenkins: Law & Order, Fleet Street - WSJ.com

While I am not a journalist, I am a writer and I do publish in major newspapers and magazines in the UK. Therefore, yea, I am painfully well aware of the laws governing the media.

We should bear in mind, this is an ongoing investigation - a journalist and a private investigator went to prison some years ago about this. Other than these two convictions, 9 journalists have been arrested and are currently on bail while investigations continue. There is a Parliamentary Select Committee investigating the mess, and there will shortly be a judicial review to determine a set of facts - those facts are yet to be confirmed.

It is, therefore, speculation and not hard facts at the moment. We really need to wait to find out the facts before we decide who to hang.

Link to one of your articles.

 

[whitehall]

Let's lay our cards on the table lefties. We all know it ain't about hacking the phones of dead people in the UK. Y'all think you have a shot at shutting down opposition speech in the US. That's what it's all about. In the real world when something happens in a gigantic media corporation somebody gets fired and that's the end of it. That's the way it happened in CBS when they tried to influence a presidential election with forged documents. Dan Rather and producer Mary Mapes were sent packing. We don't even know the name of the CEO of CBS. What CBS tried to pull borders on treason and that's far more serious than privacy concerns in the UK. The left won't let go of Murdoch because they see it as their chance to stop alternate sources of information. You are wasting your time but it's fun to watch the convoluted attempts.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

So, everyone seems very enthusiastic (and with good reason) to see Murdoch and his empire destroyed.

I wondered what exactly the impact of destroying that empire would be. Firstly, we need to know what exactly this 'News Corp' is... what does it own, and where does it own it. So, here:

Television:

Networks: Fox, MyNetworkTV. In the United States, News Corp. owns 27 television stations.

Cable: Fox Business Channel, Fox Movie Channel, Fox News Channel, Fox College Sports, Fox Regional Sports Networks (16 owned and operated), Fox Sports En Espanol, Fox Sports Net, Fox Soccer Channel, Fox Reality, Premier Media Group (Australia 50%), Premium Movie Partnership (Australia 20%), Cine Canal (Latin America 23%), Telecine (Latin America 13%), FUEL TV, FX, FX HD, National Geographic Channel (US 67% and Worldwide 52%), National Geographic Channel HD, SPEED Channel, SPEED HD, Big Ten Network & Big Ten Network HD (49%), Premier Media Group (Australia 50%).

Production and Distribution Companies: Fox Television Studios, Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Television, 20th Television, Regency Television (50%).

Satellite Television: Fox International owns 120 channels around the world.

Europe: SKY Italia includes Sky Sport, Sky Calcio, Sky Cinema, Sky TG 24, Premiere AG (25%). British Sky Broadcasting (39%) includes Sky News, Sky Sports, Sky Travel, Sky One, Sky Movies, Artsworld. News Corp. also owns Balkan News Corporation.

Latin America:LAPTV (33%), Telecine (13%).

Asia: STAR Channels, Space TV (India DBS 20%), Phoenix Satellite Television (18%), Hathway Cable and Datacom (22%), China Network Systems (17 affiliated cable systems), Vijay, Xing Kong Channel , ESPN Star Sports (50%), ANTV (20%), TATA Sky (20%).

Australia & New Zealand: Sky Network Television Limited (44%), FOXTEL (25%).

Programming: Fox Sports, Special Report with Brit Hume, Fox Report with Shepard Smith, On the Record With Greta Van Susteren, Fox News Sunday, The O’Reilly Factor, Fox Pan American Sports (38%).

Publishing:

Magazines: Barron’s, SmartMoney (50%), Big League, InsideOut, donna hay, News America Marketing (In-Store, FSI (SmartSource), SmartSource iGroup, News Marketing Canada), Alpha, The Weekly Standard, The Weekend Australian Magazine, sundaymagazine, body + soul, STM (WA), home, TVGuide, News Magazine (Australia).

Newspapers:
Australia/Asia: More than 150 titles including: The Wall Street Journal Asia, the Fiji Times, Daily Telegraph, Nai Lalakai, Shanti Dut, Gold Coast Bulletin, Herald Sun, Newsphotos, Newspix, Newstext, NT News, Papua New Guinea Post-Courier (63%), Sunday Herald Sun, Sunday Mail, Sunday Tasmanian, Sunday Times, Sunday Territorian, The Advertiser, The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Mercury, News Limited, The Sunday Mail, The Sunday Telegraph, Weekly Times, The Weekend Australian, MX, Brisbane News, Northern Territory News, Cumberland (NSW), Leader (VIC), Quest (QLD), Messenger (SA), Community (WA), Darwin Sun/Palmerson Sun (NT).

United Kingdom: Now defunct News of the World, The Sun, The Sunday Times, The Times, News International.

United States: Newspaper holdings include the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, MarketWatch and Dow Jones Newswire; News Corp. also acquired the Ottoway group of community newspapers through its takeover of Dow Jones in 2007.

Books: HarperCollins Publishers.

Film:

Production and Distribution: Fox Film Entertainment: 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, Fox 2000 Pictures, 20th Century Fox Espanol, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Licensing and Merchandising, 20th Century Fox International, Fox Atomic, Blue Sky Studios, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Fox Music, Fox Studios Australia, Fox Studios Baja (Latin America), Canal Fox (Latin America), Balaji Telefilms (26%, Asia), 20th Century Fox Animation.

Online:

Fox Interactive Media manages Fox’s online holdings, which include MySpace.com, Scout.com (a college sports site), ign.com (Internet gaming), Simply Hired (an online job search site), FoxSports.com, Fox News.com, Fox.com, Intermix, IGN.com, IGN.com.au, NYPost.com, MSN.Foxsports.com, WeeklyStandard.com, Broadsystem.com, NewsOptimus.co.uk, NewsOutdoor.com, RottenTomatoes, Fox.com, AmericanIdol.com, MarketWatch.com, Photobucket.com, Hulu.com (45%), jamster.com (51%), askmen.com, whatifsports.com, ksolo.com, springwidgets.com, flecktor.com milkround.com, nds.com, newsoutdoor.com, wsj.com, dowjones.com, barrons.com.

News Corp. also owns News Digital Media (a group of Australian Web sites). Mobile Web sites include Fox Business and Fox News. Fox is also now offering a mobile entertainment package called Mobizzo on Cingular and T-Mobile phones.

Other:

Outdoor advertising: News Outdoor.

Sports: National Rugby League.

Europe: NDS (72%), News Outdoor Group.

Misc.: Fox Sports Enterprises, National Advertising Partners, Media Support Services Limited (Russia), STATS LLC (50%).

Source: Ownership Chart: The Big Six | Free Press


Ok. So that's quite a substantial company. From there, what else would we need to consider:

How many people would lose their jobs if News Corp was destoyed?
How many supply chain jobs would be lost?
How much revenue would be lost?
How much tax money would be lost? (Bear in mind that each of their employees pays tax somewhere)
How many countries would that affect?

There are a few more questions, but I'm kind of hoping that people will think logically before running off at the mouth about destroying this 'evil' corporation. Think. Preferably critically, instead of partisanly.

If "News Corp" goes under, all of those companies (at least the profitable ones) will be sold to other corporations. No one (or very few) will lose their jobs - aside from the people scapegoated for this scandal - and for the most part, everything will continue as normal.

 

[Synthaholic]

What makes you think they won't?

If I'm gonna destroy an individual, I like to consider the blowback. We're in a recession. Newspapers are particularly vulnerable. Other media companies are struggling. Fox is not just Fox News. You bring down Fox News... fine.... what about the rest of the Fox Network? What about the potential losses there? I like rational thought over hysterical ranting.

Because Murdoch isn't an idiot, like you seem to think! He will sell whatever he has - not let it collapse and go away.

You don't think there are companies who would LOVE to buy all of those holdings???

He hasn't been charged, tried or convicted of anything. Is that the America that we are now? That we think we can decide who gets to keep their companies?

I've stated - more than once on this board - that I have absolutely no respect for Murdoch - I'm just slightly less inclined towards hysterical bullshit. I prefer to wait for facts.... I'm not afraid of the truth... unlike some.

What the fuck are you talking about? If his empire starts to sink, he will sell off his companies to whoever wants to buy them. That's capitalism.

 

[Synthaholic]

other companies will come in and replace or these companies will be sold either way no net loss to the economy infact the increased compition will be good for the economy, did you not notice the size oif that list does it not concern you?

If it was George Soros, she would be concerned!

When did I give you authority to speak for me, Synthia? Kindly refrain from announce what I would be concerned about. I am concerned about what is happening within the UK media - and I suspect, and so do the UK media, that this behavior is not confined to Murdoch's stable.

And... for the record.... if it was Soros.... I would be saying the same thing. He has not even been questioned, certainly not charged and definitely not convicted of anything. I require evidence and facts - not media stories and speculations but actual facts on which to make decisions.

Uh huh. Unless it's Obama - then you can claim he's a Marxist, Socialist, Communist without any facts you claim to cherish.

 

[Synthaholic]

What makes you believe that these companies would disappear?

What makes you think they won't?

If I'm gonna destroy an individual, I like to consider the blowback. We're in a recession. Newspapers are particularly vulnerable. Other media companies are struggling. Fox is not just Fox News. You bring down Fox News... fine.... what about the rest of the Fox Network? What about the potential losses there? I like rational thought over hysterical ranting.

You took the time to document all Murdoch's holdings. Why not document the convoluted privacy laws in the UK. What are the charges against Murdoch? Are they more serious than illegally hacking Speaker Gingrich's cell phone conversation and turning it over to the NY Times? What about the violations of Sarah Palin's right to privacy? There was little or no outrage on the left when her e-mail account was hacked or when an angry creepy stalker rented a house next door so he could spy on her and her family and write it up for the leftie media.

Where's your link, boy?

 

[Synthaholic]

You took the time to document all Murdoch's holdings. Why not document the convoluted privacy laws in the UK. What are the charges against Murdoch? Are they more serious than illegally hacking Speaker Gingrich's cell phone conversation and turning it over to the NY Times? What about the violations of Sarah Palin's right to privacy? There was little or no outrage on the left when her e-mail account was hacked or when an angry creepy stalker rented a house next door so he could spy on her and her family and write it up for the leftie media.

If you want them documented, feel free. I'm not you 'go to gal'.

The investigation is still in it's very early stages... no one knows what charges, if any, will be laid and against whom. Nine NotW journalists have been arrested. That is the only hard fact.

People also need to bear in mind that Murdoch (and his son) are both American citizens, they are beyond the reach of the UK legal system.

The email hacks of Palin are subject to US law. The NotW are subject to UK law. Why the fuck are you asking me about that? I haven't mentioned Palin's emails.

Do you own fucking work.

Do you lefties even know how to argue about an issue? You are so full of yourselves and full of hatred that you assume all sorts of things. You brought it up girlie. What charges does Murdoch face that would cause him "to lose his companies".

Yeah, CaliforniaGirl - you Lefty!!!!

 

[MarcATL]

So, everyone seems very enthusiastic (and with good reason) to see Murdoch and his empire destroyed.

I wondered what exactly the impact of destroying that empire would be. Firstly, we need to know what exactly this 'News Corp' is... what does it own, and where does it own it. So, here:

Television:

Networks: Fox, MyNetworkTV. In the United States, News Corp. owns 27 television stations.

Cable: Fox Business Channel, Fox Movie Channel, Fox News Channel, Fox College Sports, Fox Regional Sports Networks (16 owned and operated), Fox Sports En Espanol, Fox Sports Net, Fox Soccer Channel, Fox Reality, Premier Media Group (Australia 50%), Premium Movie Partnership (Australia 20%), Cine Canal (Latin America 23%), Telecine (Latin America 13%), FUEL TV, FX, FX HD, National Geographic Channel (US 67% and Worldwide 52%), National Geographic Channel HD, SPEED Channel, SPEED HD, Big Ten Network & Big Ten Network HD (49%), Premier Media Group (Australia 50%).

Production and Distribution Companies: Fox Television Studios, Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Television, 20th Television, Regency Television (50%).

Satellite Television: Fox International owns 120 channels around the world.

Europe: SKY Italia includes Sky Sport, Sky Calcio, Sky Cinema, Sky TG 24, Premiere AG (25%). British Sky Broadcasting (39%) includes Sky News, Sky Sports, Sky Travel, Sky One, Sky Movies, Artsworld. News Corp. also owns Balkan News Corporation.

Latin America:LAPTV (33%), Telecine (13%).

Asia: STAR Channels, Space TV (India DBS 20%), Phoenix Satellite Television (18%), Hathway Cable and Datacom (22%), China Network Systems (17 affiliated cable systems), Vijay, Xing Kong Channel , ESPN Star Sports (50%), ANTV (20%), TATA Sky (20%).

Australia & New Zealand: Sky Network Television Limited (44%), FOXTEL (25%).

Programming: Fox Sports, Special Report with Brit Hume, Fox Report with Shepard Smith, On the Record With Greta Van Susteren, Fox News Sunday, The O’Reilly Factor, Fox Pan American Sports (38%).

Publishing:

Magazines: Barron’s, SmartMoney (50%), Big League, InsideOut, donna hay, News America Marketing (In-Store, FSI (SmartSource), SmartSource iGroup, News Marketing Canada), Alpha, The Weekly Standard, The Weekend Australian Magazine, sundaymagazine, body + soul, STM (WA), home, TVGuide, News Magazine (Australia).

Newspapers:
Australia/Asia: More than 150 titles including: The Wall Street Journal Asia, the Fiji Times, Daily Telegraph, Nai Lalakai, Shanti Dut, Gold Coast Bulletin, Herald Sun, Newsphotos, Newspix, Newstext, NT News, Papua New Guinea Post-Courier (63%), Sunday Herald Sun, Sunday Mail, Sunday Tasmanian, Sunday Times, Sunday Territorian, The Advertiser, The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Mercury, News Limited, The Sunday Mail, The Sunday Telegraph, Weekly Times, The Weekend Australian, MX, Brisbane News, Northern Territory News, Cumberland (NSW), Leader (VIC), Quest (QLD), Messenger (SA), Community (WA), Darwin Sun/Palmerson Sun (NT).

United Kingdom: Now defunct News of the World, The Sun, The Sunday Times, The Times, News International.

United States: Newspaper holdings include the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, MarketWatch and Dow Jones Newswire; News Corp. also acquired the Ottoway group of community newspapers through its takeover of Dow Jones in 2007.

Books: HarperCollins Publishers.

Film:

Production and Distribution: Fox Film Entertainment: 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, Fox 2000 Pictures, 20th Century Fox Espanol, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Licensing and Merchandising, 20th Century Fox International, Fox Atomic, Blue Sky Studios, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Fox Music, Fox Studios Australia, Fox Studios Baja (Latin America), Canal Fox (Latin America), Balaji Telefilms (26%, Asia), 20th Century Fox Animation.

Online:

Fox Interactive Media manages Fox’s online holdings, which include MySpace.com, Scout.com (a college sports site), ign.com (Internet gaming), Simply Hired (an online job search site), FoxSports.com, Fox News.com, Fox.com, Intermix, IGN.com, IGN.com.au, NYPost.com, MSN.Foxsports.com, WeeklyStandard.com, Broadsystem.com, NewsOptimus.co.uk, NewsOutdoor.com, RottenTomatoes, Fox.com, AmericanIdol.com, MarketWatch.com, Photobucket.com, Hulu.com (45%), jamster.com (51%), askmen.com, whatifsports.com, ksolo.com, springwidgets.com, flecktor.com milkround.com, nds.com, newsoutdoor.com, wsj.com, dowjones.com, barrons.com.

News Corp. also owns News Digital Media (a group of Australian Web sites). Mobile Web sites include Fox Business and Fox News. Fox is also now offering a mobile entertainment package called Mobizzo on Cingular and T-Mobile phones.

Other:

Outdoor advertising: News Outdoor.

Sports: National Rugby League.

Europe: NDS (72%), News Outdoor Group.

Misc.: Fox Sports Enterprises, National Advertising Partners, Media Support Services Limited (Russia), STATS LLC (50%).

Source: Ownership Chart: The Big Six | Free Press


Ok. So that's quite a substantial company. From there, what else would we need to consider:

How many people would lose their jobs if News Corp was destoyed?
How many supply chain jobs would be lost?
How much revenue would be lost?
How much tax money would be lost? (Bear in mind that each of their employees pays tax somewhere)
How many countries would that affect?

There are a few more questions, but I'm kind of hoping that people will think logically before running off at the mouth about destroying this 'evil' corporation. Think. Preferably critically, instead of partisanly.

Thanks for this thread showing the far reaching and POWERFUL influence that Herr Murdoch has.

Now, can any of you RW nutjobs produce anything even REMOTELY similar to this influence and reach from George Soros? ANYTHING?

Murdoch's reach and influence is dangerous, especially since he's using it for his own nefarious agenda. He's not responsible...he's agenda-driven.

 

[Ravi]

Yes, we should look the other way to save FX!!!

Look the other way from what exactly? Have Fox News been charged with any criminal behavior? No. Is there even any evidence to suggest that they are guilty of some actual wrong doing (and by actual wrong doing, I do not mean saying things that you disagree with).

Exactly what is it that Fox News have done that is not legal?

No idea.

Does FOX pay you to shill?

 

[MarcATL]

If you want them documented, feel free. I'm not you 'go to gal'.

The investigation is still in it's very early stages... no one knows what charges, if any, will be laid and against whom. Nine NotW journalists have been arrested. That is the only hard fact.

People also need to bear in mind that Murdoch (and his son) are both American citizens, they are beyond the reach of the UK legal system.

The email hacks of Palin are subject to US law. The NotW are subject to UK law. Why the fuck are you asking me about that? I haven't mentioned Palin's emails.

Do you own fucking work.

Do you lefties even know how to argue about an issue? You are so full of yourselves and full of hatred that you assume all sorts of things. You brought it up girlie. What charges does Murdoch face that would cause him "to lose his companies".

Yeah, CaliforniaGirl - you Lefty!!!!

They are eating their own.

lol!!

 

[Trajan]

here are some snips from a wjs article, I am not familiar with slander libel and accetpted news methodology over there, you appear to be(?)...what do you think of Jenkins supposition altogether?

* JULY 13, 2011

Law & Order, Fleet Street
The crime spree could have been stopped in 1999.

To wit, for approximately 10 years it was deemed fine and dandy that private gumshoes bribed police officers, stole voicemails, and broke into the bank records of celebrities, royals, government leaders and notorious convicts in order to create fodder for tabloid journalism. The violent reaction that finally engulfed one of the papers, the News of the World (owned by the parent of The Wall Street Journal), last week came only because of one additional revelation: An ordinary citizen had been victimized by phone hacking, namely Milly Dowler, a schoolgirl who went missing early in 2002 and six months later was found to have been murdered.

This story turns out to have an extraordinarily long backstory, which throws a light (for a naive American, anyway) on the gigantic furor erupting across the Atlantic. As far back as 2002, the Guardian newspaper detailed the reliance of three British tabloids—the News of the World, the Daily Mirror, and the Sunday Mirror—on private investigators to bring them stories based on bribes handed out to policemen and purloined electronic records.

The Guardian report itself was based on leaked details of a secret 1999 police investigation into corrupt cops, reporters and private eyes. Even this statement does not do justice to the ancient provenance of the scandal. A central target of that investigation was private eye Jonathan Rees, Scotland Yard's recurrent suspect in the 1987 axe murder of his partner, Daniel Morgan, who was killed possibly because he was about to give evidence of police corruption.

snip-
Phew. If the 1999 investigation did not lead to the prosecution of any journalists, it was apparently only because the police were obliged to call off the probe early. Their surveillance bug had caught wind of a felony being hatched. The cops intervened to stop Rees and a corrupt police officer from planting cocaine on a woman involved in a child-custody case. Rees went to jail for several years. Amazingly, on emergence in 2005, he returned to the payroll of Fleet Street.

Here it seems appropriate to interject another seemingly unrelated fact. In 2002, the British government considered making it illegal for news organizations to offer tell-all financial deals to jurors in ongoing criminal trials—and to dangle a larger payment if the verdict were to be guilty.

In the end, it was decided to rely on press self-regulation, but—forgive a late hit here—wasn't the overarching message that all of Britain was in connivance with the boundary-stretching of its tabloid press?

After the Guardian revelations, that print media only became more full of stories produced by illegal methods. Prince William in 2005 was reported to have visited a doctor after a soccer injury, information the prince and his handlers concluded could only have come from a hacked voicemail—as evidently it did. Ditto stories about everything from Bank of England Chief Eddie George's mortgage to the personal lives of rock stars and pro athletes.

and more at-
Jenkins: Law & Order, Fleet Street - WSJ.com

While I am not a journalist, I am a writer and I do publish in major newspapers and magazines in the UK. Therefore, yea, I am painfully well aware of the laws governing the media.

We should bear in mind, this is an ongoing investigation - a journalist and a private investigator went to prison some years ago about this. Other than these two convictions, 9 journalists have been arrested and are currently on bail while investigations continue. There is a Parliamentary Select Committee investigating the mess, and there will shortly be a judicial review to determine a set of facts - those facts are yet to be confirmed.

It is, therefore, speculation and not hard facts at the moment. We really need to wait to find out the facts before we decide who to hang.

Link to one of your articles.

oh yeah I can see her doing that..first thing for a whack job like you....

 

[Father Time]

So, everyone seems very enthusiastic (and with good reason) to see Murdoch and his empire destroyed.

I wondered what exactly the impact of destroying that empire would be. Firstly, we need to know what exactly this 'News Corp' is... what does it own, and where does it own it. So, here:

Television:

Networks: Fox, MyNetworkTV. In the United States, News Corp. owns 27 television stations.

Cable: Fox Business Channel, Fox Movie Channel, Fox News Channel, Fox College Sports, Fox Regional Sports Networks (16 owned and operated), Fox Sports En Espanol, Fox Sports Net, Fox Soccer Channel, Fox Reality, Premier Media Group (Australia 50%), Premium Movie Partnership (Australia 20%), Cine Canal (Latin America 23%), Telecine (Latin America 13%), FUEL TV, FX, FX HD, National Geographic Channel (US 67% and Worldwide 52%), National Geographic Channel HD, SPEED Channel, SPEED HD, Big Ten Network & Big Ten Network HD (49%), Premier Media Group (Australia 50%).

Production and Distribution Companies: Fox Television Studios, Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Television, 20th Television, Regency Television (50%).

Satellite Television: Fox International owns 120 channels around the world.

Europe: SKY Italia includes Sky Sport, Sky Calcio, Sky Cinema, Sky TG 24, Premiere AG (25%). British Sky Broadcasting (39%) includes Sky News, Sky Sports, Sky Travel, Sky One, Sky Movies, Artsworld. News Corp. also owns Balkan News Corporation.

Latin America:LAPTV (33%), Telecine (13%).

Asia: STAR Channels, Space TV (India DBS 20%), Phoenix Satellite Television (18%), Hathway Cable and Datacom (22%), China Network Systems (17 affiliated cable systems), Vijay, Xing Kong Channel , ESPN Star Sports (50%), ANTV (20%), TATA Sky (20%).

Australia & New Zealand: Sky Network Television Limited (44%), FOXTEL (25%).

Programming: Fox Sports, Special Report with Brit Hume, Fox Report with Shepard Smith, On the Record With Greta Van Susteren, Fox News Sunday, The O’Reilly Factor, Fox Pan American Sports (38%).

Publishing:

Magazines: Barron’s, SmartMoney (50%), Big League, InsideOut, donna hay, News America Marketing (In-Store, FSI (SmartSource), SmartSource iGroup, News Marketing Canada), Alpha, The Weekly Standard, The Weekend Australian Magazine, sundaymagazine, body + soul, STM (WA), home, TVGuide, News Magazine (Australia).

Newspapers:
Australia/Asia: More than 150 titles including: The Wall Street Journal Asia, the Fiji Times, Daily Telegraph, Nai Lalakai, Shanti Dut, Gold Coast Bulletin, Herald Sun, Newsphotos, Newspix, Newstext, NT News, Papua New Guinea Post-Courier (63%), Sunday Herald Sun, Sunday Mail, Sunday Tasmanian, Sunday Times, Sunday Territorian, The Advertiser, The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Mercury, News Limited, The Sunday Mail, The Sunday Telegraph, Weekly Times, The Weekend Australian, MX, Brisbane News, Northern Territory News, Cumberland (NSW), Leader (VIC), Quest (QLD), Messenger (SA), Community (WA), Darwin Sun/Palmerson Sun (NT).

United Kingdom: Now defunct News of the World, The Sun, The Sunday Times, The Times, News International.

United States: Newspaper holdings include the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, MarketWatch and Dow Jones Newswire; News Corp. also acquired the Ottoway group of community newspapers through its takeover of Dow Jones in 2007.

Books: HarperCollins Publishers.

Film:

Production and Distribution: Fox Film Entertainment: 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, Fox 2000 Pictures, 20th Century Fox Espanol, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Licensing and Merchandising, 20th Century Fox International, Fox Atomic, Blue Sky Studios, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Fox Music, Fox Studios Australia, Fox Studios Baja (Latin America), Canal Fox (Latin America), Balaji Telefilms (26%, Asia), 20th Century Fox Animation.

Online:

Fox Interactive Media manages Fox’s online holdings, which include MySpace.com, Scout.com (a college sports site), ign.com (Internet gaming), Simply Hired (an online job search site), FoxSports.com, Fox News.com, Fox.com, Intermix, IGN.com, IGN.com.au, NYPost.com, MSN.Foxsports.com, WeeklyStandard.com, Broadsystem.com, NewsOptimus.co.uk, NewsOutdoor.com, RottenTomatoes, Fox.com, AmericanIdol.com, MarketWatch.com, Photobucket.com, Hulu.com (45%), jamster.com (51%), askmen.com, whatifsports.com, ksolo.com, springwidgets.com, flecktor.com milkround.com, nds.com, newsoutdoor.com, wsj.com, dowjones.com, barrons.com.

News Corp. also owns News Digital Media (a group of Australian Web sites). Mobile Web sites include Fox Business and Fox News. Fox is also now offering a mobile entertainment package called Mobizzo on Cingular and T-Mobile phones.

Other:

Outdoor advertising: News Outdoor.

Sports: National Rugby League.

Europe: NDS (72%), News Outdoor Group.

Misc.: Fox Sports Enterprises, National Advertising Partners, Media Support Services Limited (Russia), STATS LLC (50%).

Source: Ownership Chart: The Big Six | Free Press


Ok. So that's quite a substantial company. From there, what else would we need to consider:

How many people would lose their jobs if News Corp was destoyed?
How many supply chain jobs would be lost?
How much revenue would be lost?
How much tax money would be lost? (Bear in mind that each of their employees pays tax somewhere)
How many countries would that affect?

There are a few more questions, but I'm kind of hoping that people will think logically before running off at the mouth about destroying this 'evil' corporation. Think. Preferably critically, instead of partisanly.

If Newscorp goes under that doesn't mean all these guys go under too.

Other companies can buy them or maybe they can just be independent.

 

[Annie]

What makes you think they won't?

If I'm gonna destroy an individual, I like to consider the blowback. We're in a recession. Newspapers are particularly vulnerable. Other media companies are struggling. Fox is not just Fox News. You bring down Fox News... fine.... what about the rest of the Fox Network? What about the potential losses there? I like rational thought over hysterical ranting.

Because Murdoch isn't an idiot, like you seem to think! He will sell whatever he has - not let it collapse and go away.

You don't think there are companies who would LOVE to buy all of those holdings???

He hasn't been charged, tried or convicted of anything. Is that the America that we are now? That we think we can decide who gets to keep their companies?

I've stated - more than once on this board - that I have absolutely no respect for Murdoch - I'm just slightly less inclined towards hysterical bullshit. I prefer to wait for facts.... I'm not afraid of the truth... unlike some.

Fine with that then, but seems the story of his taxes and such were less than true:

Rupert Murdoch

Reuters Withdraws Story on News Corp.'s Tax Profits
News agency says that the claim that the Murdoch-owned company made money on income taxes "is wrong."
By Josh Voorhees | Posted Wednesday, Jul. 13, 2011, at 2:17 PM EDT

UPDATE: Looks like Reuters columnist David Cay Johnston got it wrong on Tuesday when he reported that Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. managed to turn a profit on income taxes over the past four years.

Reuters issued an advisory Wednesday afternoon stating that the column had been withdrawn and the claim that News Corp. made money on income taxes "is wrong."

A new column explaining the error is said to be on the way. We'll update when it's live, but in the meantime here's the full statement:

Please be advised that the David Cay Johnston column published on Tuesday stating that Rupert Murdoch’s U.S.-based News Corp made money on income taxes is wrong and has been withdrawn. News Corp’s filings show the company changed reporting conventions in its 2007 annual report when it reversed the way it showed positive and negative numbers. A new column correcting and explaining the error in more detail will be issued shortly.

...

 

[California Girl]

Do you lefties even know how to argue about an issue? You are so full of yourselves and full of hatred that you assume all sorts of things. You brought it up girlie. What charges does Murdoch face that would cause him "to lose his companies".

Yeah, CaliforniaGirl - you Lefty!!!!

They are eating their own.

lol!!

That's because I have the ability to remove my personal political leanings from a subject. That is a good think. It demonstrates critical thinking. It is a pity that so many of you - left and right - cannot do likewise. If you could, you would be far more rational and intelligent. However, we each march to our own drum and you are entitled to remain an uninformed asshole.

 

[California Girl]

here are some snips from a wjs article, I am not familiar with slander libel and accetpted news methodology over there, you appear to be(?)...what do you think of Jenkins supposition altogether?

* JULY 13, 2011

Law & Order, Fleet Street
The crime spree could have been stopped in 1999.

To wit, for approximately 10 years it was deemed fine and dandy that private gumshoes bribed police officers, stole voicemails, and broke into the bank records of celebrities, royals, government leaders and notorious convicts in order to create fodder for tabloid journalism. The violent reaction that finally engulfed one of the papers, the News of the World (owned by the parent of The Wall Street Journal), last week came only because of one additional revelation: An ordinary citizen had been victimized by phone hacking, namely Milly Dowler, a schoolgirl who went missing early in 2002 and six months later was found to have been murdered.

This story turns out to have an extraordinarily long backstory, which throws a light (for a naive American, anyway) on the gigantic furor erupting across the Atlantic. As far back as 2002, the Guardian newspaper detailed the reliance of three British tabloids—the News of the World, the Daily Mirror, and the Sunday Mirror—on private investigators to bring them stories based on bribes handed out to policemen and purloined electronic records.

The Guardian report itself was based on leaked details of a secret 1999 police investigation into corrupt cops, reporters and private eyes. Even this statement does not do justice to the ancient provenance of the scandal. A central target of that investigation was private eye Jonathan Rees, Scotland Yard's recurrent suspect in the 1987 axe murder of his partner, Daniel Morgan, who was killed possibly because he was about to give evidence of police corruption.

snip-
Phew. If the 1999 investigation did not lead to the prosecution of any journalists, it was apparently only because the police were obliged to call off the probe early. Their surveillance bug had caught wind of a felony being hatched. The cops intervened to stop Rees and a corrupt police officer from planting cocaine on a woman involved in a child-custody case. Rees went to jail for several years. Amazingly, on emergence in 2005, he returned to the payroll of Fleet Street.

Here it seems appropriate to interject another seemingly unrelated fact. In 2002, the British government considered making it illegal for news organizations to offer tell-all financial deals to jurors in ongoing criminal trials—and to dangle a larger payment if the verdict were to be guilty.

In the end, it was decided to rely on press self-regulation, but—forgive a late hit here—wasn't the overarching message that all of Britain was in connivance with the boundary-stretching of its tabloid press?

After the Guardian revelations, that print media only became more full of stories produced by illegal methods. Prince William in 2005 was reported to have visited a doctor after a soccer injury, information the prince and his handlers concluded could only have come from a hacked voicemail—as evidently it did. Ditto stories about everything from Bank of England Chief Eddie George's mortgage to the personal lives of rock stars and pro athletes.

and more at-
Jenkins: Law & Order, Fleet Street - WSJ.com

While I am not a journalist, I am a writer and I do publish in major newspapers and magazines in the UK. Therefore, yea, I am painfully well aware of the laws governing the media.

We should bear in mind, this is an ongoing investigation - a journalist and a private investigator went to prison some years ago about this. Other than these two convictions, 9 journalists have been arrested and are currently on bail while investigations continue. There is a Parliamentary Select Committee investigating the mess, and there will shortly be a judicial review to determine a set of facts - those facts are yet to be confirmed.

It is, therefore, speculation and not hard facts at the moment. We really need to wait to find out the facts before we decide who to hang.

Link to one of your articles.

Idiot.

 

[California Girl]

So, everyone seems very enthusiastic (and with good reason) to see Murdoch and his empire destroyed.

I wondered what exactly the impact of destroying that empire would be. Firstly, we need to know what exactly this 'News Corp' is... what does it own, and where does it own it. So, here:

Television:

Networks: Fox, MyNetworkTV. In the United States, News Corp. owns 27 television stations.

Cable: Fox Business Channel, Fox Movie Channel, Fox News Channel, Fox College Sports, Fox Regional Sports Networks (16 owned and operated), Fox Sports En Espanol, Fox Sports Net, Fox Soccer Channel, Fox Reality, Premier Media Group (Australia 50%), Premium Movie Partnership (Australia 20%), Cine Canal (Latin America 23%), Telecine (Latin America 13%), FUEL TV, FX, FX HD, National Geographic Channel (US 67% and Worldwide 52%), National Geographic Channel HD, SPEED Channel, SPEED HD, Big Ten Network & Big Ten Network HD (49%), Premier Media Group (Australia 50%).

Production and Distribution Companies: Fox Television Studios, Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Television, 20th Television, Regency Television (50%).

Satellite Television: Fox International owns 120 channels around the world.

Europe: SKY Italia includes Sky Sport, Sky Calcio, Sky Cinema, Sky TG 24, Premiere AG (25%). British Sky Broadcasting (39%) includes Sky News, Sky Sports, Sky Travel, Sky One, Sky Movies, Artsworld. News Corp. also owns Balkan News Corporation.

Latin America:LAPTV (33%), Telecine (13%).

Asia: STAR Channels, Space TV (India DBS 20%), Phoenix Satellite Television (18%), Hathway Cable and Datacom (22%), China Network Systems (17 affiliated cable systems), Vijay, Xing Kong Channel , ESPN Star Sports (50%), ANTV (20%), TATA Sky (20%).

Australia & New Zealand: Sky Network Television Limited (44%), FOXTEL (25%).

Programming: Fox Sports, Special Report with Brit Hume, Fox Report with Shepard Smith, On the Record With Greta Van Susteren, Fox News Sunday, The O’Reilly Factor, Fox Pan American Sports (38%).

Publishing:

Magazines: Barron’s, SmartMoney (50%), Big League, InsideOut, donna hay, News America Marketing (In-Store, FSI (SmartSource), SmartSource iGroup, News Marketing Canada), Alpha, The Weekly Standard, The Weekend Australian Magazine, sundaymagazine, body + soul, STM (WA), home, TVGuide, News Magazine (Australia).

Newspapers:
Australia/Asia: More than 150 titles including: The Wall Street Journal Asia, the Fiji Times, Daily Telegraph, Nai Lalakai, Shanti Dut, Gold Coast Bulletin, Herald Sun, Newsphotos, Newspix, Newstext, NT News, Papua New Guinea Post-Courier (63%), Sunday Herald Sun, Sunday Mail, Sunday Tasmanian, Sunday Times, Sunday Territorian, The Advertiser, The Australian, The Courier-Mail, The Mercury, News Limited, The Sunday Mail, The Sunday Telegraph, Weekly Times, The Weekend Australian, MX, Brisbane News, Northern Territory News, Cumberland (NSW), Leader (VIC), Quest (QLD), Messenger (SA), Community (WA), Darwin Sun/Palmerson Sun (NT).

United Kingdom: Now defunct News of the World, The Sun, The Sunday Times, The Times, News International.

United States: Newspaper holdings include the Wall Street Journal, the New York Post, MarketWatch and Dow Jones Newswire; News Corp. also acquired the Ottoway group of community newspapers through its takeover of Dow Jones in 2007.

Books: HarperCollins Publishers.

Film:

Production and Distribution: Fox Film Entertainment: 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, Fox 2000 Pictures, 20th Century Fox Espanol, 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment, 20th Century Fox Licensing and Merchandising, 20th Century Fox International, Fox Atomic, Blue Sky Studios, Fox Searchlight Pictures, Fox Music, Fox Studios Australia, Fox Studios Baja (Latin America), Canal Fox (Latin America), Balaji Telefilms (26%, Asia), 20th Century Fox Animation.

Online:

Fox Interactive Media manages Fox’s online holdings, which include MySpace.com, Scout.com (a college sports site), ign.com (Internet gaming), Simply Hired (an online job search site), FoxSports.com, Fox News.com, Fox.com, Intermix, IGN.com, IGN.com.au, NYPost.com, MSN.Foxsports.com, WeeklyStandard.com, Broadsystem.com, NewsOptimus.co.uk, NewsOutdoor.com, RottenTomatoes, Fox.com, AmericanIdol.com, MarketWatch.com, Photobucket.com, Hulu.com (45%), jamster.com (51%), askmen.com, whatifsports.com, ksolo.com, springwidgets.com, flecktor.com milkround.com, nds.com, newsoutdoor.com, wsj.com, dowjones.com, barrons.com.

News Corp. also owns News Digital Media (a group of Australian Web sites). Mobile Web sites include Fox Business and Fox News. Fox is also now offering a mobile entertainment package called Mobizzo on Cingular and T-Mobile phones.

Other:

Outdoor advertising: News Outdoor.

Sports: National Rugby League.

Europe: NDS (72%), News Outdoor Group.

Misc.: Fox Sports Enterprises, National Advertising Partners, Media Support Services Limited (Russia), STATS LLC (50%).

Source: Ownership Chart: The Big Six | Free Press


Ok. So that's quite a substantial company. From there, what else would we need to consider:

How many people would lose their jobs if News Corp was destoyed?
How many supply chain jobs would be lost?
How much revenue would be lost?
How much tax money would be lost? (Bear in mind that each of their employees pays tax somewhere)
How many countries would that affect?

There are a few more questions, but I'm kind of hoping that people will think logically before running off at the mouth about destroying this 'evil' corporation. Think. Preferably critically, instead of partisanly.

If Newscorp goes under that doesn't mean all these guys go under too.

Other companies can buy them or maybe they can just be independent.

I didn't say they couldn't. But certainly not all would be. If it was that easy to sell, say, a newspaper, I think Murdoch probably would have sold the NotW, instead he shut it down. And that was one of Britain's more successful papers.

 

[manifold]

You see folks, rightwingtwats only support the free market when it's convenient.

 

[theliq]

You just don't learn,Yes folks I'm the person who the mouth is referring to and as an Australian we know Murdoch well,and its enough to know that this is his way of doing things.........she/he/it throws in the words HATE(very American)DEMONISE(ditto the worlds greatest exponents) but its all rubbish.

Murdoch has been caught out and is now paying the price.....yep its the old story"We're in recession" so that makes it alright,No it doesn't, NOT in any way.........Grow a backbone Tanderson and GET UP,STAND UP,STAND UP FOR WHAT's RIGHT......I'm theliq and say it how it is,its called being an AUSTRALIAN,and very proud of the fact.

So Tanderson.....don't talk in half truths...name me....THELIQ.....we have nothing to hide,but remember you will need a thick skin in the end of all this abuse which you have initiated.

What makes you believe that these companies would disappear?

What makes you think they won't?

If I'm gonna destroy an individual, I like to consider the blowback. We're in a recession. Newspapers are particularly vulnerable. Other media companies are struggling. Fox is not just Fox News. You bring down Fox News... fine.... what about the rest of the Fox Network? What about the potential losses there? I like rational thought over hysterical ranting.

Great thread!

Good points.

It all goes to what's failed in the past.

When the yacht industry was demonized by the politicians, a lot of non-yacht owners were out of work. A lot of industries took a hit.

When "big oil" is demonized, a lot of oil rigs stopped producing, and floating rigs floated off to other countries that had far fewer environmental rules. And, what we see are thousands of Americans out of work, gas prices spiking, and our importation of foreign oil from countries that hate us going up instead of down.

Now it's the "corporate jet set" that's being demonized. There are many more thousand jobs at stake, along with an industry that's already being fought by our own government for wanting to be productive in a state where the dependable left-wing workers aren't predominant.

In another forum, a rabidly anti-Murdoch poster was stating as if a fact that Murdoch pretty much orchestrated all the illegalities and immoral acts attributed, (if you go by evidence rendered,) to reporters who work for a company Murdoch oversees. Then, when the English paper, News of the World folded, he was ranting about how horrible Murdoch is for the loss of those newspaper jobs!

It's pretty hard to debate with such people who can't take a moment to try to see whether personal opinion and hate have clouded their judgment. The poster is still on a bender over Murdoch, and has just joined, here. He hides behind the fact that he's supposedly in Australia, so that gives him a special interest and insight into Murdoch.

I'm still going to wait for a jury to decide things, rather than depending on the people who shout the loudest, or shut out the truth.

Thanks for making a couple more people think about the consequences to a mad mob mentality.

T.