The audaciousness of The Sun printing a front page apology today - not from itself to the people of the UK and beyond, no, the fact that the Guardian was slipped dodgy info, they took the bait, and were then forced to refute dodgy info by Murdochs legal attack dogs. Classic ambush, but for the Scum to champion an apology now, not theirs, that as some sort of desperate righteous claw reaching from the cesspool of evil they might attain victim status???
Similarly, I was well fucking irritated listening to Harriet Harman castigating the tories for getting right in there with Murdoch for their own ends....and then suggesting that NL just did much the same because they were
scared...AWWWWWWWWWW!
Anyway....I keep meaning to ask about Newscorp's hold in the US but I'm not sure it's appropriate on this thread
I know ymu mentioned that US journailsts are expressly forbidden from accepting hospitality - and also that the press is generally just much better regulated over there.
Well I didn't know that until just recently and I only know (from this thread) that Murdoch owns the Wall Street Journal (I think?) but presume he owns others too (and I know there's Fox, obv, and that this news has now started trickling through even there).
I'm not sure what I'm asking really
simple stuff, tbf
- is their press effectively regulated already, so just not open to this shite?
So there most likely just wouldn't be anything similar coming from
US based Newscorp operations?
So any bother there would almost certainly come from the UK press hacking (for eg) 9/11 victims/families - and the other stuff about journalists not being allowed to bribe international officials (which is big enough on it's own, I know!)......but also how much *influence* Murdoch would be likely to have had, politically, by way of his grip on the media there (which is rather more minimal - again because of set legal limitations)?
Soz for the waffle (am shit at formulating questions) but *out of interest* sort of thing...