The sale of the Daily Telegraph, Sunday Telegraph and the Spectator

[cupid_stunt]

Lloyds bank took control of the titles in the summer, because the Barclay brothers failed to come up with an acceptable plan to clear over £1bn in unpaid debt, the Barclay brothers have been trying to stop the businesses being auctioned off, most recently offering £1bn to re-take control, but strangely Lloyds declined that and have officially launched the auction, despite estimates it is likely to 'only' fetch between £500-£700m that way.

Still a silly amount of money for a business that only reported £39m in profits in their last set of accounts, but then it's more about buying influence.

So far potentially in the running are:

Lord Rothermere's Daily Mail group, which already handles the print advertising for the Telegraph, but could face competition issues, as they also publish the Metro and 'i'.

David Montgomery's National World group, publisher of over 100 regional daily and local weekly newspapers, including The Scotsman and Yorkshire Post.

Axel Springer, a German media company.

Sir William Lewis, a former News UK and Telegraph executive.

Sir Paul Marshall, a minority shareholder in GB News.

Murdoch’s News UK is considered only a potential bidder for the Spectator, for some reason, probably potential competition issues, because of being owners of Times newspapers. .

Sale of Telegraph newspapers and Spectator kicks off

Last-ditch attempt by Barclay family to shut down auction with blockbuster £1bn offer thwarted

www.theguardian.com

 

[stavros]

They sound like a lovely bunch, to follow in the footsteps of Conrad Black and the Barclays.

Harmsworth (let's call him by his real name) and Murdoch are surely non-starters, due to the plurality issue. The former has the Mail titles, the i and the Metro, and the latter the Times and the Sun. You can't own three national dailies.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Harmsworth (let's call him by his real name) and Murdoch are surely non-starters, due to the plurality issue. The former has the Mail titles, the i and the Metro, and the latter the Times and the Sun. You can't own three national dailies.

Hang on, you list the Mail group as also publishing the Metro and the 'i', then you say, you can't own three national dailies.

And, what about Reach plc that publishes the Mirror, Express, and Star?

 

[stavros]

Hang on, you list the Mail group as also publishing the Metro and the 'i', then you say, you can't own three national dailies.

And, what about Reach plc that publishes the Mirror, Express, and Star?

My point about three dailies related to Murdoch, with the Times, the Sun and the Telegraph.

I agree that Reach has too many publications. You could also argue that they present a wider political viewpoint than the three above (Mirror = Labour, Express = Tories, Star = Lettuce), and that they're not, as far as I know, controlled by one person.

 

[Bingoman]

My point about three dailies related to Murdoch, with the Times, the Sun and the Telegraph.

I agree that Reach has too many publications. You could also argue that they present a wider political viewpoint than the three above (Mirror = Labour, Express = Tories, Star = Lettuce), and that they're not, as far as I know, controlled by one person.

Murdoch doesn't own the Telegraph

 

[quiet guy]

Lloyds bank took control of the titles in the summer, because the Barclay brothers failed to come up with an acceptable plan to clear over £1bn in unpaid debt, the Barclay brothers have been trying to stop the businesses being auctioned off, most recently offering £1bn to re-take control, but strangely Lloyds declined that and have officially launched the auction, despite estimates it is likely to 'only' fetch between £500-£700m that way.

Still a silly amount of money for a business that only reported £39m in profits in their last set of accounts, but then it's more about buying influence.

So far potentially in the running are:

Lord Rothermere's Daily Mail group, which already handles the print advertising for the Telegraph, but could face competition issues, as they also publish the Metro and 'i'.

David Montgomery's National World group, publisher of over 100 regional daily and local weekly newspapers, including The Scotsman and Yorkshire Post.

Axel Springer, a German media company.

Sir William Lewis, a former News UK and Telegraph executive.

Sir Paul Marshall, a minority shareholder in GB News.

Murdoch’s News UK is considered only a potential bidder for the Spectator, for some reason, probably potential competition issues, because of being owners of Times newspapers. .

Sale of Telegraph newspapers and Spectator kicks off

Last-ditch attempt by Barclay family to shut down auction with blockbuster £1bn offer thwarted

www.theguardian.com

There is only one Barclay as one of the twins, David, died in 2021.

 

[stavros]

Murdoch doesn't own the Telegraph

He doesn't, but as the OP says he's in the running to buy it.

 

[cupid_stunt]

He doesn't, but as the OP says he's in the running to buy it.

Nope.

Murdoch’s News UK is considered only a potential bidder for the Spectator, for some reason, probably potential competition issues, because of being owners of Times newspapers. .

 

[Sasaferrato]

Can someone explain to me why it would be a bad thing for a newspaper with a circulation of circa 200k and a paywalled website to be sold to Saudi Arabia?

I give the circulation figure as 'circa' as it withdrew from the ratings agency in 2019.

Estimate here: National daily newspaper circulation UK by publisher 2023 | Statista.

Secondary question is I suppose, is anyone's vote influenced by a newspaper?

 

[Idris2002]

Well you see Sas, Johnny Arab is a fine fellow, so long as he remains in his proper place.

As for whether votes are made by fish wrappers, well they may be an industry in decline but they're still part of a media apparatus that spreads bollocks throughout the land, with obvious results.

 

[marty21]

Isn't part of the same deal that includes The Spectator ? A deal with would also include their website, youtube channel, twitter feed etc - actual paper sales have been on the decline for years.

 

[trabuquera]

^ Its circulation is small but its influence (particularly on right wingers of the Tory party) is considerable.
The Telegraph is one of the few broadsheets still to employ some of its own staff on reporting from abroad. (Some of those in the past just wrote a load of nonsense, like <ahem> Boris Johnson from the Brussels bureau - but very few media operations even send reporters outside the UK these days, never mind keep them there.)

Also: the possible buyers are a consortium led by investors from the UAE - not Saudi.

 

[Sasaferrato]

^ Its circulation is small but its influence (particularly on right wingers of the Tory party) is considerable.
The Telegraph is one of the few broadsheets still to employ some of its own staff on reporting from abroad. (Some of those in the past just wrote a load of nonsense, like <ahem> Boris Johnson from the Brussels bureau - but very few media operations even send reporters outside the UK these days, never mind keep them there.)

Also: the possible buyers are a consortium led by investors from the UAE - not Saudi.

Yes, UAE not Saudi.

It may influence Conservative right wingers, but is not read by the mass market. It's actual influence will be quite small.

The Guardian has even fewer sales, but with an open website will be more influential.

Not that either of them would influence my vote.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Whether they influence anyone's vote is a bit besides the point IMO. It's not all that important. The role of the national papers is more in agenda and sense setting I think. The current role of the Telegraph in particular is in pushing far-right/conspiracy adjacent nonsense into the mainstream and using its history and status to support that in a way more modern media outlets can't do.

 

[Santino]

Imagine the spittle-flecked rage we would get if it was sold to a trade union.

 

[NoXion]

Oh goody, the medieval-minded slaver shitheads are trying to launder their filthy rep again, through buying up even more stuff with their blood money. I'm sure that group of aristo scumbags have nothing but the best of intentions.

If they didn't think they could get some kind of influence or advantage, then they wouldn't be buying it. What the world really needs is for them to fuck off and die.

 

[T & P]

Given how rabidly pro-Zionism the Telegraph has traditionally been throughout the last few decades, its sale to an Arab outlet and (presumably) subsequent change in editorial policy regarding the ME conflict would likely make a good percentage of its ageing readership have a coronary when reading the paper over their breakfast cereal.

So all fine with me

 

[editor]

*merged threads

 

[kabbes]

Secondary question is I suppose, is anyone's vote influenced by a newspaper?

Bernard Cohen, in 1963, noted that the press “may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about. The world will look different to different people depending on the map that is drawn for them by writers, editors, and publishers of the paper they read.”

Agenda-setting theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[cupid_stunt]

Can someone explain to me why it would be a bad thing for a newspaper with a circulation of circa 200k and a paywalled website to be sold to Saudi Arabia?

T
heir website is the 10th largest UK news site, visited by almost 14 million visits a month, so reasonably important.

Leading news websites UK by monthly visits 2023 | Statista

In December 2023, the BBC had a total of 37.9 million monthly visits in the United Kingdom, according to the results of data designed to be nationally representative taken from 10 thousand people across 25 thousand devices measuring website and app usage.

www.statista.com

 

[skyscraper101]

It's a good website tbf. It's just shame about the owners.

 

[cupid_stunt]

And, for those not aware, the paywall comes crumbling down if you install the 'Bypass Paywalls' extension.

 

[Sasaferrato]

And, for those not aware, the paywall comes crumbling down if you install the 'Bypass Paywalls' extension.

Tell me more.

 

[Sasaferrato]

*merged threads

Sorry.

 

[cupid_stunt]

Tell me more.

'Bypass Paywalls' extension

Works for most UK sites, but not The Times, in that case you need to copy over the URL to - https://archive.ph/ - and that'll blow-up their paywall.

 

[Sasaferrato]

Oh goody, the medieval-minded slaver shitheads are trying to launder their filthy rep again, through buying up even more stuff with their blood money. I'm sure that group of aristo scumbags have nothing but the best of intentions.

If they didn't think they could get some kind of influence or advantage, then they wouldn't be buying it. What the world really needs is for them to fuck off and die.

This is what puzzles. Over a billion quid to buy 'influence'?

I read the physical Telegraph for over thirty years, then a change of editor and the disappearance of things I liked put me off it. I wrote to them telling them why I was binning it after three decades, and got a phone call with an offer of money off coupons from the then editor Tony Gallagher.

They never influenced my vote, I've been solidly Labour for a long time.

 

[two sheds]

I wrote to them telling them why I was binning it after three decades, and got a phone call with an offer of money off coupons from the then editor Tony Gallagher.

green ink & capitals I hope

 

[kabbes]

They never influenced my vote, I've been solidly Labour for a long time.

Bernard Cohen, in 1963, noted that the press “may not be successful much of the time in telling people what to think, but it is stunningly successful in telling its readers what to think about. The world will look different to different people depending on the map that is drawn for them by writers, editors, and publishers of the paper they read.”

Agenda-setting theory - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Of course they are influencing your vote. Not by telling you what who vote for, but by normalising the range of what the debate is allowed to be about in the first place.

 

[Humberto]

Would it be strange if King Charles basically owned a major British newspaper?

 

[Sasaferrato]

Of course they are influencing your vote. Not by telling you what who vote for, but by normalising the range of what the debate is allowed to be about in the first place.

No. They are not. My vote is cast in favour of who can beat the SNP, which in this constituency is Labour.