
But seriously - this one is worth a look. Rupert Murdoch is looking to up his stake in BSkyB to 100%, which will effectively turn it into a Fox News-esque mouthpiece for him and all his little wizards. This petition is to Vince Cable, and asks him for a full and fair investigation into the purchase rather than letting it go through on the nod, as it were.
Worth the 30 seconds of your life it will take to fill in, IMHO.
Kitten-ball says to sign it, anyhow.

( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 9:59, Reply)

There are laws in place to ensure SKY news has to, at least pretend, retain an impartiality.
As for Murdoch increasing his stake, he's the person who took HUGE finiancial risks to get the whole off the ground in the first place.
he's the one who invested massively in sports and movie rights, when everyone else was saying pay-tv would never work.
Why shouldn't he be able to reap the financial rewards of his huge financial investment.
Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of ANY corporate monolith. But i get the impression that some (Murdoch, Gates) get a rougher than others (Jobs, Schmidt)...
Blimey, that was a long one
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:08, Reply)

is monopolies.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:24, Reply)

Jobs has monopolised the MP3 market just as much as Gates has monopolised the OS and software market.
Murdoch doesn't have any monopolies.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 11:01, Reply)

What's more worrying about Sky news is that it's of such thunderously low quality.
Sky claims to have been breaking the news for 20 years. It doesn't realise how true that claim is.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:28, Reply)

then it's based on taste, rather than any sound legal reason to stop it happening.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:57, Reply)

I couldn't care less if it was a 100% Murdochian outlet - As it stands, virtually nobody watches it, BBC News 24 has cornered the market, and if it WAS to become a Faux News-esque mouthpiece - I believe they'd sink even further.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:18, Reply)

BBC News 24 is arm chewingly bad in many ways. The presenters can't seem to get anything insightful from any 'real people' they talk to (for example eyewitnesses) and the professional commentators get free reign with their agendas most of the time.
I get the impression some of their presenters live in a dormitory outback of the studio and never leave the building.
I'm not saying Sky is the shining beacon of news coverage but given the choice I'll always rather watch Sky. In practice I flip around to balance the news anyway.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:25, Reply)

I get Sky "news" inflicted on me via the TVs at the gym. It's wrenchingly bad - unless you're interested in the news alerts about a footballer or TV talent-show poppet doing something trivial.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:31, Reply)

But the presenters on the BBC really make me despair. It's like a badly cooked English Breakfast, the BBC have better ingredients but they cook them really badly.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:40, Reply)

which offers roughly 5% news and 95% 'celebs' whoring their wares with meaningless vox-pops on frankly pointless subjects. This morning they had some real filler material as their 'reporter' went to some dodgy estate and asked the general public if they would support the Germans in the World Cup. Fascinating stuff.
I find the only 'news' worth watching anymore is Newsnight. I long for the day when the UK gets its own Daily Show.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:38, Reply)

I don't even include that as BBC News output. It's just a properly made programme that has news as it's topic.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:42, Reply)

...and it could open the door to biased news.
"If thousands of us e-mail Vince Cable, we can persuade him to make the right decision and oppose Murdoch’s master plan."
So basically you they want to do what they accuse Murdoch of doing, only they don't have their own media outlets so they will use social media outlets instead.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:20, Reply)

that using a social media campaign to encourage a democratically elected representative to use the tools of process available to him in order to arrive at an informed decision on the matter, equates to strongarming said process through sheer financial muscle, but your call.
And I think you're forgetting kitten-ball in all of this.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:25, Reply)

but the biased pre-determined scare-tactics narrative being pushed to get people to act is a Fox News tactic no? One proven to work admittedly ;)
At the very least it's a little ironic.
P.S. Kittenball is straight out of the World of Goo
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:29, Reply)

I hesitate to google it from work... Pic was facebook'd to me last week - no idea of its origins.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:32, Reply)

Here's some gameplay of level 1 www.youtube.com/watch?v=pMyY7jo7PRQ
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:44, Reply)

is a fountain of right wing bullshit.. and why not. If I owned a media empire I'd make sure the editors were running anti Conservative stories 24/7.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 10:52, Reply)

( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 11:02, Reply)

it says 'NRA4EVER' or summink like that.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 11:20, Reply)

it was a joke from the '100th Episode' special. It actually says "ERR"
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 13:28, Reply)

Or, you know, read a book or something.
What people do with their private property, be it my back garden or someone's multi-billion pound corporation, is their own affair.
( , Wed 7 Jul 2010, 13:26, Reply)

News Corp have the biggest share and therefore control over BSkyB anyway. With the other 60% of the shares they'll just get 100% of the profits.
( , Fri 9 Jul 2010, 18:50, Reply)