Skip to main content

Poor Rupe!

It may too early to call the outcome of the British election [next Thursday] and the Sun King, Rupert Murdoch, may still see the Conservatives, who he backs, back into power, but this piece "Murdoch's election blues" from Business Spectator shows the way the man "behaves".

"If you thought Gordon Brown was having a bad election, spare some sympathy for Rupert Murdoch. After, you know, practically winning the election for John Major and the Conservatives back in 1992, and then giving Labour and Blair a massive leg-up in 1997, he's having a dog of a 2010 in terms of the wielding of political influence.

It seems Rupert was convinced by son James, who was convinced by former Sun editor and Murdoch clan confidant Rebekah Brooks (nee Wade), that his UK newspapers should support David Cameron, Britain's Conservative party candidate for prime minister.

"This took some doing," says Murdoch biographer Michael Wolff on Newser, "because Murdoch had become a good friend and pretty loyal supporter of Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

But since the The Sun came out for the Tories the party has seen its poll rating drop from 41 per cent to 33 per cent, prompting the Financial Times to begin charting Cameron’s downward movement under the inevitable headline “It’s The Sun Wot Lost it”.

And when Lib-Dem candidate Nick Clegg emerged as the underdog alternative to Labour last week, the Murdoch papers embarked upon what Wolff described as "a full-scale attack on Clegg with hardly any pretence other than to help Cameron".

And then, last week, The Independent ran a front page with the headline “Rupert Murdoch will not decide the outcome of the election. You will.”

Such effrontery triggered what Wolff has described as "a coming-apart-at-the-seams scenario", in which Wade/Brooks and James Murdoch "stormed over to The Independent, breached its security systems, barged into the offices of the (paper's) editor-in-chief and top executive, Simon Kelner, and commenced, in Brit-speak, a giant row."

Their goal, says Wolff, was to put forward "that newspaper publishers don’t slag off other newspaper publishers in polite Britain," least of all the Murdochs. But they then went and undermined their argument, adds Wolff in a later Newser post, by "threatening to investigate Evgeny Lebedev, the son of The Independent’s new owner, Russian businessman, Alexander Lebedev (also the owner of the Evening Standard)."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...