Murdoch - unfit to have any role in the UK media

We need a fox news in this country - only having left leaning news outlets isn't healthy.

Imagine this forum with only Stockhausen and no Dolph? ;)
 
scorza said:
I find these responses a bit obnoxious tbh now. Stockhausen makes his posts in his own unique style which you might not agree with, but there's always a debate-worthy issue at heart.
Click to expand...

But unfortunately his 'own style' buries the issue in a load of lies, spin, hyperbole, abuse of people and just a smidge of apparent insanity.

Given that this has been pointed out several times, and he doesn't change, one can only assume that he's either incapable of a rational, well reasoned post, or willfully refusing to do it.
 
MrMoonX said:
ahhh the sun read by the majority of morons of this country, its no wonder the great british public are so stupid when they get their news from trash like the sun!
Click to expand...

Most of the "great british public" don't, while it certainly has the highest readership figures it certainly doesn't come near to a majority of the UK. Let's not forget the Star and Mirror have their impact too. (The Socialist Worker gets an honourable mention but frankly has a readership too low to count).
 
You can "Lol stockhausen" all you like, but his point is legitimate imo when it comes to Rupert MurDICK.

The media is too powerful a device to leave to the masses, and too much money is made from the working man and transferred to various power brokers [in various places/industries] for it to be "free" to tell the [unbiased] truth of things.....thats why the Internet exists and is such a threat to established media.

Back to MurDICK though, the truth of this man will only be revealed in retrospect I think, when it is too late to do anything about it.

OT: And mark my words, the Internet is the next big target by just about all world governments. It is already slightly compromised as seen by recent political events around the world, as we can't have those pesky civilians saying what they think now can we? Just wait for the disguised bills that will be passed into law for one reason, only for it to invoke censorship of some sort. Wikileaks has been a major fright for the West, while the Internet as entity has been a fright to the majority of the [governments in the] developing world.
 
Last edited:
Dolph said:
But unfortunately his 'own style' buries the issue in a load of lies, spin, hyperbole, abuse of people and just a smidge of apparent insanity.

Given that this has been pointed out several times, and he doesn't change, one can only assume that he's either incapable of a rational, well reasoned post, or willfully refusing to do it.
Click to expand...

Come on, we all spin to further our own arguments and forum image, who isn't a little bit insane? AIUI personal abuse is against the rules on these forums so if he breaks that rule I assume the mods take action accordingly. Personally I would deem responses like "lolstockhausen" as abusive.
 
Random Guy said:
You can "Lol stockhausen" all you like, but his point is legitimate imo when it comes to Rupert MurDICK.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately any point he may have is lost in his Daily Mail like distortion of the facts. Much like any point you were trying to make in the above post failed because of the oh so hilarious changing of Murdoch's surname. :D
 
Telescopi said:
We need a fox news in this country - only having left leaning news outlets isn't healthy.

Imagine this forum with only Stockhausen and no Dolph? ;)
Click to expand...

Sky News offers a right wing view as does Th Sun, The Times, The Daily Mail, The Telegraph. When it comes to news outlets offering viewpoints from both sides of the divide we're pretty good.

However, of those names Murdoch already owns The Sun and The Times as well a stake in Sky News. One many having a large control over news media, including the most circulated paper in the country isn't great. Also if Sky News became like Fox News, it'd become a ridiculous farce of a news channel instead of giving a semi decent output for news.
 
scorza said:
Come on, we all spin to further our own arguments and forum image, who isn't a little bit insane? AIUI personal abuse is against the rules on these forums so if he breaks that rule I assume the mods take action accordingly. Personally I would deem responses like "lolstockhausen" as abusive.
Click to expand...

I was talking about his personal abuse of the figures in the news, rather than other posters.

The reason the lolstockhausen response has become common is because trying to engage in a debate, or sit and point out the myriad of flaws, contradictions and hypocrisy in his average post only for him to completely ignore it has got rather old now...
 
OriginalJonty said:
Sky News offers a right wing view as does Th Sun, The Times, The Daily Mail, The Telegraph. When it comes to news outlets offering viewpoints from both sides of the divide we're pretty good.

However, of those names Murdoch already owns The Sun and The Times as well a stake in Sky News. One many having a large control over news media, including the most circulated paper in the country isn't great. Also if Sky News became like Fox News, it'd become a ridiculous farce of a news channel instead of giving a semi decent output for news.
Click to expand...

We can have a discussion on media plurality when the BBC stops being state funded via a taxation approach irrespective of desire to watch.

Until then, complaining about Murdoch's ability to make popular products is just hypocritical.
 
I take it that either
  • none of you Fox Fanboyz have ever been subject to a diet of Fox Lies
-or-
  • you actually agree with its style and extreme right-wing bias
As to UK opposition to Murdoch and his plans for domination of the media, I don't think that you will find that it is unique to the Marxist strongholds of the BBC and the Grauniad; I suspect that the right-wing Torygraph and Daily Wail oppose it as well :p


ps
Telescopi said:
... Imagine this forum with only Stockhausen and no Dolph? ;)
Click to expand...
Thank you ;)
 
stockhausen said:
I take it that either
  • none of you Fox Fanboyz have ever been subject to a diet of Fox Lies
-or-
  • you actually agree with its style and extreme right-wing bias
As to UK opposition to Murdoch and his plans for domination of the media, I don't think that you will find that it is unique to the Marxist strongholds of the BBC and the Grauniad; I suspect that the right-wing Torygraph and Daily Wail oppose it as well :p


ps
Thank you ;)
Click to expand...

You're begging the question now.

I've seen fox news, I am not a fan in the slightest. It's dumbed down biased rubbish.

That doesn't mean I oppose the merger though. In order for that to happen, I'd have to both have more meaningful evidence that Murdoch having more involvement (remember he is already the biggest shareholder) would actually occur, that he would drive Sky News towards populist right wing drivel and the other issue of media anti-competitiveness (the BBC) would have to be addressed as well.

You appear to be unwilling or unable to be rational about this issue, you aren't looking at what is actually happening, or what has happened in the past, just ranting about Murdoch and presenting an entire argument that seems to consist of 'Murdoch is evil, hence...'

Ironically, the Telegraph did far more damage to the anti-murdoch campaign by stinging Vince Cable (who probably would have ignored the lack of legal grounds for banning the buyout and tried to do it anyway) than Murdoch could ever do.
 
stockhausen said:
I take it that either
  • none of you Fox Fanboyz have ever been subject to a diet of Fox Lies
-or-
  • you actually agree with its style and extreme right-wing bias
Click to expand...

No, I just exercise free will and not watch or read any of News International's news.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom