the problem is for them, all the other media companies are jealous of the power they have and want a slice of it. Now they have found a weakness they are pulling them apart. Im not hearing anything about Syria today on the news, just about murdoch and some old horse who got trapped in some mud on the coast of Australia (maybe a metaphore for murdoch).
In 6 months he'll be back in charge and the ****ing idiots that make up the UK population will not give a ****, in fact they'll probably get record readership like they did when the reprinted the News of the world...... sorry, I mean the Sunday Sun. Murdoch is the Goebbels of the West.
I'm a massive fan of James. From where I'm sat, anyone capable of bringing down one of Rupert Murdoch's crowning glories is to be applauded. To do it and retain influence in some of his other crowning glories is nothing short of genius.
Not as good news as you may think. James Murdoch is the person who made Sky TV the dominant power it is, his father is the mastermind behind the news paper business, James never wanted to be a part of the news paper part of their empire and doesn't see a future for it. Now he's moving away from it he will most likely end up back at the TV side of things and focus his energies on expanding that part of their empire which is their major earner.
Yes Bob. James is the one to 'watch' rather than read. On the other hand, I found this statement of his father's quite amusing - and yes, this one should be read (between the lines perhaps) rather than watched: "We are all grateful for James' leadership at News International and across Europe and Asia, where he has made lasting contributions to the group's strategy in paid digital content and its efforts to improve and enhance governance programs." ("governance"? shouldn't that be government?)
I agree with Bob. Pervasively, I think this is good news. James will concentrate on making Sky even better. With the internet, tablets etc Newspapaers surely are on the way down. Their circulations shrink year by year. James will do an amazing job for Sky TV.
I don't think it means a thing. He is heir to the whole empire, so stepping down for a little while is like a child being told to wait until christmas, you know he'll get his goodies (Sky in this case). He's a smart man, there is an ulterior motive at stake here.
Probably true, but I do detect the authorities or at least some of them distancing themselves from the Dirty Digger, last night's news showed Sir Paul Condon and others openly critical of whats been going on and last week we had a senior woman police chief wading in and looking like she meant business, so maybe we could see the Murdoch empire brought to justice.
I think this is one area in which we'll see the gaping gulf between justice and the law. Questions are being raised now about whether Sue Akers has prejudiced any future trial by honouring her commitment to keep the Leveson inquiry updated.
I don't quite see what the Leveson enquiry will ultimately achieve, if the evidence given at the enquiry is in the public domain, would any possible future judicial prosecution be compromised. However, surely there is clearly a case for prosecution of both those who gave and those who recieved payment's, after all, all evidence in a court of law is given under oath, so its a yes or no answer and if you lie then it's perjury and look what happens if if you go down that road, eh Mr Archer. DAC Sue Akers in my view will persue the prosecution of those involved and she must be aware and taken into account the implication's of her current position regarding any effect on future trials. Bergy, as for Cameron and his horse riding mate, I don't think either of them are implicated in any wrong doing yet and the font of all knowledge, none less than Jeremy Clarkson, publicly stated on the Chris Evans radio programme the other morning, that Cameron never rode 'that' horse.
