quote:

So what?

Do you read his papers?

I don't.

And even if I did....what the fuck do I care?

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
Murdoch's papers have generally looked after right wing interests. Without the steady stream of propaganda pumped by The Sun, in particular, for so many years, we may not have had a Tory government since Thatcher's day. Nor would we have had a Labour government that shifted so far to the right in order to keep Murdoch, in the main amongst media moguls, happy.

The Tories just know which side their bread's buttered, that's all.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
So what?

Do you read his papers?

I don't.

And even if I did....what the fuck do I care?

I actually read (other....lots of) news....so his don't/doesn't objectify me...nor do they (or any other news source) turn my head.

Why do you give a shit?

Why don't you read enough to discern?

(The facts).

quote:

The problem for Tweak is that they only have Sky, The Times, The Sun and ex-News of the World down in Oz! That, and just maybe she loathes their brand of centre/right politics

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

The problem for Tweak is that they only have Sky, The Times, The Sun and ex-News of the World down in Oz! That, and just maybe she loathes their brand of centre/right politics

Somethings never change. Like, for instance, Anax's (lack of) familiarity with relevant facts when it to political or international affairs. Not a single one of the media outlets Anax mentions is available here in Australia (except online). Pure fantasy.

Though please don't despair Anax, there may be a future for you in News Corp. It looks like there will be some vacancies there shortly, and an ability to get facts comprehensively wrong consistently is highly regarded there. Best you brush up your CV. I'll be happy to provide a reference attesting to your singular talents in this area

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
Somethings never change. Like, for instance, Anax's (lack of) familiarity with relevant facts when it to political or international affairs. Not a single one of the media outlets Anax mentions is available here in Australia (except online). Pure fantasy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

The problem for Tweak is that they only have Sky, The Times, The Sun and ex-News of the World down in Oz!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
Maybe if you are being facetious about what papers are in Oz, you should use an emoticon as we only have your words, not your intention. It read like an assertion of fact.
Nice attempt at backpedalling tho

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
nothing obvious about it, considering your penchant for misinformation.
I didnt backpedal as I didnt assert anything, YOU DID

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer
Murdoch's papers have generally looked after right wing interests. Without the steady stream of propaganda pumped by The Sun, in particular, for so many years, we may not have had a Tory government since Thatcher's day. Nor would we have had a Labour government that shifted so far to the right in order to keep Murdoch, in the main amongst media moguls, happy.

The Tories just know which side their bread's buttered, that's all.

quote:

So you blame Murdoch for most of the shift to the right?

quote:

Britain has its fair share of left wing papers and broadcasters too you know! One being that massive entity the BBC, where Peter Sissons said it was unfashionable to read anything to the right of the Indie and the Guardian. I think there has to be a reason why Murdoch's papers were so successful in the first instance. Maybe Britain has more of a culturally ingrained conservatism than a lot of other countries (e.g. France) that tend to swing somewhat more to the left.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

So you blame Murdoch for most of the shift to the right?

No, what I think is that without the steady stream of propaganda pumped by The Sun, in particular, for so many years, we may not have had a Tory government since Thatcher's day. Nor would we have had a Labour government that shifted so far to the right in order to keep Murdoch, in the main amongst media moguls, happy.

You and your strawman arguments, Anax, you crafty old sausage, you! It would, of course, be ludicrous to blame Murdoch's media for an entire shift to the right not least because it's largely an imponderable. We've little idea what the political culture would have been like had had the Murdoch machine's (undeniably massive) influence not been present for the last few decades.

quote:

But, yes, I do think you'd be daft to argue that his media has had little effect on the political culture. Quite apart from the evidence now coming out from the Leveson enquiry about just how much party leaders have chummied up with him over the years, there's the propaganda effect of his newspapers.

quote:


That aside, yes, of course the UK's political culture has a strong and solid conservative vein running through it, just as it has its liberal media. But, firstly, that conservative vein isn't as strong as many might think, going from electoral support for right wing political parties alone. We know that our electoral system skews these results. Most people don't vote for right wing parties. And the Conservatives - the main right wing party - hasn't won an election outright since John Major was Prime Minister. Secondly, the liberal/left media isn't aimed so exclusively at the working class (the biggest class, natch), nor - in the case of the BBC - is it so overtly propagandist. It can't be, for obvious reasons. At the same time, there are only a few national newspapers that are vaguely left or liberal left: of these, the Guardian's content is resolutely middlebrow and barely read by working class people. The Mirror is the Sun's closest competitor, but even the circulation of that teeters around half that of the Sun.

Nup. We could be in for some very interesting times were Murdoch's influence to wane here.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

quote:

So what?

Do you read his papers?

I don't.

And even if I did....what the fuck do I care?

"..... what the fuck do I care?"
Indeedies. What the fuck do you care? Obviously you care enough to fire off this bad tempered piece of snark as a response to my original post. In whatever frame of mind you were in when you put your post together. So it appears that you care a lot more than you are letting on ........

What does it matter that the top executives of News Corp, and its owner Rupert Murdoch have had such damning findings made against them? That they are exposed as scoundrels, liars, conniving conmen who hold Parliament and democracy in "contempt"? It mightn't be an issue for you personally, or so you would have us believe. But for most people, the media is the source of the information on which they form their opinions and views on matters of public interest.

In a democracy this is a vital role - keeping the citizens informed and the Govt under review. While you can pretend to be blasé that this role has been usurped by a bunch of crooks, I and many many others are not. A free media is critical to the functioning of democracy. Citizens need to be able to trust the media to tell the truth and to report the news fairly and objectively.

Many of us have zero confidence in the ability of a bunch of cheap crooks to perform this vital function. Neither should you if you have any sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

You can keep pretending that the influence and role of the media is strictly limited to individual choice for as long as you like. We both know that it doesn't fly as a serious argument. Look, for instance, at Watergate, where the media initiated and developed a story that brought down a President.

I know it must hurt those on your side of the political divide to have one your luminaries, a powerful media baron responsible for the trashy Fox TV, publicly shamed and humiliated. I doubt that you enjoy the fact that the shenanigans at News Corp and Murdoch's antics validate much of the criticism leftists have made of News Corp and Murdoch over the years.

But pretending that these developments are of no consequence is just silly, a childish form of denial. Even as you try to deny the above, your choice to continue posting on this issue belies your argument that it's all a matter of personal choice or taste. If personal choice or taste is all that is at stake here, why are you so concerned to influence others through your posts?

Mass media (that's M-A-S-S, not individual media) play a critical role in democracies. The quality of their work, the integrity of the media personnel, their success or failure in the functions they perform for society are all important issues and valid issues for citizens to take more than a passing interest in. It is reasonable to expect to find truth and integrity in the media and its content. The absence of integrity, as is so clearly demonstrated in the case of Murdoch and News Corp is a major cause for legitimate concern.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
Ya know what?

You're right...it does matter, but only to those who can't think for themselves. Unfortunately (once again correct), there's more than a few of those.

You write well....the truth is however, your ability to think isn't that of the masses....ergo, your comments are more than correct...it does matter.

However...it shouldn't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PeonForHer

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie
Ya know what?

You're right...it does matter, but only to those who can't think for themselves. Unfortunately (once again correct), there's more than a few of those.

You write well....the truth is however, your ability to think isn't that of the masses....ergo, your comments are more than correct...it does matter.

However...it shouldn't.

That goes to one of - perhaps the biggest - downside to democracy. A huge swathe of stupid people get to vote.

In a major sense, it really is accurate to say that, in democracies, the stupid and unthinking get to control the lives of the intelligent and thoughtful.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

quote:

ORIGINAL: tweakabelle

You can keep pretending that the influence and role of the media is strictly limited to individual choice for as long as you like. We both know that it doesn't fly as a serious argument. Look, for instance, at Watergate, where the media initiated and developed a story that brought down a President.

I know it must hurt those on your side of the political divide to have one your luminaries, a powerful media baron responsible for the trashy Fox TV, publicly shamed and humiliated. I doubt that you enjoy the fact that the shenanigans at News Corp and Murdoch's antics validate much of the criticism leftists have made of News Corp and Murdoch over the years.

But pretending that these developments are of no consequence is just silly, a childish form of denial. Even as you try to deny the above, your choice to continue posting on this issue belies your argument that it's all a matter of personal choice or taste. If personal choice or taste is all that is at stake here, why are you so concerned to influence others through your posts?

Mass media (that's M-A-S-S, not individual media) play a critical role in democracies. The quality of their work, the integrity of the media personnel, their success or failure in the functions they perform for society are all important issues and valid issues for citizens to take more than a passing interest in. It is reasonable to expect to find truth and integrity in the media and its content. The absence of integrity, as is so clearly demonstrated in the case of Murdoch and News Corp is a major cause for legitimate concern.

Ya know what?

You're right...it does matter, but only to those who can't think for themselves. Unfortunately (once again correct), there's more than a few of those.

You write well....the truth is however, your ability to think isn't that of the masses....ergo, your comments are more than correct...it does matter.

However...it shouldn't.

quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

Ya know what?

You're right...it does matter, but only to those who can't think for themselves. Unfortunately (once again correct), there's more than a few of those.

You write well....the truth is however, your ability to think isn't that of the masses....ergo, your comments are more than correct...it does matter.

However...it shouldn't.