Porn King or Media Mogul? I would choose Murdoch everytime

The Times under Richard Desmond?




Is Rupert Mudoch evil? Does he have an empire which truly shapes British politics?

Rewind a month or so and politicians where falling over themselves to meet Rupert Murdoch, now it seems they are falling over themselves to do quite the opposite, condemn Murdoch and his “evil corporation which has spread it's tentacles throughout British politics”.

I guess in modern day Britiain, as a career politician, it would be most unwise to go against the grain on this one. Public opinion is so repulsed by the hacking of a dead school girl’s phone that any positive analysis of News Corp is tossed aside as hogwash and the voice of special interest. Yet the angry mob baying for blood is as fickle as the news of the world journalist. (Indeed mob comes from ‘mobus’ in Latin meaning ‘fickle crowd’, seems etymology may be worth studying. Thank you Bill Bryson).

So here I want to stand back from the noise and ask two important questions: 1.What would be the fate of The Times had Murdoch not purchased the paper and who would buy it now?  2. Is breaking the law an inherent part of investigative journalism or something only Murdoch papers do?

1. Murdoch’s news corporation loses $50 million a year in order to prop up The Times newspaper. The mogul has such an interest in newspapers that investors talk of a “Murdoch discount” on the share price eluding to the fact that the mogul refuses to divest The Times despite it losing millions yearly. How many other individuals can claim such a passion for newspapers? One might assert that another individual would have saved the paper. When Murdoch purchased The Times the two other potential buyers were the Daily Mail – Yes that fine periodical sensationalising everything remotely related to Muslims – Had the Daily Mail succeeded they would have certainly shut The Times down in an attempt to expand their own market share. (Closing down a company which loses $50 million a year is fair enough I guess). The other bidder was Robert Maxwell and one can only imagine how that would have turned out…

But enough of the past, what about the current situation ? Maybe the Murdochs will decide enough is enough and leave this island all together who will step in to purchase The Times? Apparently Richard Desmond is interested, the Daily star and television X CEO. I wonder how many people would cheer that.

2. Don’t act Holier than thou. That’s exactly what comes to mind when reports from other papers  proclaim that News Corp publications are guilty of hacking and other shady techniques in efforts to acquire information. The line goes; ‘News Corp papers break the law in the pursuit of stories’ Lets consider for a moment some decent stories which were acquired in not necessarily legitimate or legal manners: The Telegraph – MPs expenses scandal. Thanks to some excellent investigative journalism and the stealing of a disc with MPs’ information on it, The Telegraph broke a great story. The infamous Watergate scandal in America was only brought to light after all manners of illegal work  was undertaken by the Washington post. I could go on.

If investigative journalism sometimes leads to rule breaking then so be it. The sleaze which comes in the red tops is a necessary evil to allow the serious papers to hold our politicians to account. In a representative democracy, where we vote once in five years, it is the press which holds politicians to account and influences public opinion. Would Richard Desmond, owner of Television X and the Daily Star, hold up the standards of journalism to the same level?