Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

in the light of murdoch's obvious total dismay at clegg's success...

21 replies

Heathcliffscathy · 22/04/2010 19:31

that's tonight's debate is on Sky?

I wouldn't put dirty tricks including biased editing past them at all...Murdoch is desperate not to have a liberal democrat govt as he holds no sway with them (whereas he has the other parties in his pocket)...

am i a paranoid android?

OP posts:
Claridges · 22/04/2010 22:47

Yes. The debate on Sky was really good. Much better and more lively than ITV. It was also live so I'm not sure how much editing Rupert can be doing from New York.

Original poster
Heathcliffscathy · 22/04/2010 22:48

i'm not paranoid about the polling though am i?

OP posts:
tinkletinklelittlestar · 22/04/2010 22:51

You could be really paranoid and ask why Nick Clegg's sound was lost more than once and why was Gordon Brown's volume lower? I don't like Sky so I watched it on BBC.

Ewe · 22/04/2010 22:54

It was on BBC News as well though and it was offered to BBC and ITV, they didn't want to show it.

I bloody hate Murdoch but I don't think this particular thing is his fault! We have the choice to not watch it on Sky News.

Claridges · 22/04/2010 23:06

Regardless of the YouGov poll I thought Cameron came last and the way he kept leaning into the camera was disturbing. Kay Burley was not good. But I thought the quality of the debate was better and the moderator was a lot better than the ITV guy. The Murdoch's take offence at the level of funding the BBC receives and the role of OFCOM in attempting to restrict the television market. The Tories have made positive noises about abolishing OFCOM and slashing the BBC's funding, so let's see how they manage the third debate. The Murdoch papers have been open in supporting the Tories. Sky News is neutral. Nick Clegg performed really well again and that came across. Brown performed better. But Cameron was quiet and said he 'blown away on his many visits to Afghanistan'. Weird

UnrequitedSkink · 22/04/2010 23:08

Can anyone provide evidence that the YouGov polls are controlled by Murdoch? I thought YouGov was independent?

Ewe · 23/04/2010 13:12

Not conclusive or anything but the CEO and co-founder is standing as a Conservative candidate.

At best it's a conflict of interest.

merryberry · 23/04/2010 14:06

this Mirror* article really made me laugh today. I'm finding watching the media wars as interesting as the political battle.

*was in a greasy spoon with time to kill

UnrequitedSkink · 23/04/2010 21:51

Loved that article The whole Murdoch thing has completely turned me off DC now. If there was any lingering doubt.

TrillianAstra · 23/04/2010 21:59

Your question makes no sense

Am I being unreasonable... that tonight's debate is on sky?

Original poster
Heathcliffscathy · 25/04/2010 15:29

you're quite right trillian, it lacks an 'and therefore'.

terribly sorry.

OP posts:
littlemoominmamma · 25/04/2010 17:23

Isn't the BBC incredibly bias against the conservative party though? They have their star artists campaigning against cuts the conservatives "might" make to their budgets "should" they get into power ATM.

I would prefer to read about the policies than watch any debates to be honest.

UnrequitedSkink · 25/04/2010 21:59

Presumably it's because if the Conservatives get in, and Murdoch calls in his favours, the BBC face large cuts?

Kevlarhead · 25/04/2010 23:08

"Mr Murdoch said free news on the web provided by the BBC made it "incredibly difficult" for private news organisations to ask people to pay for their news."

"It is essential for the future of independent digital journalism that a fair price can be charged for news to people who value it," he said."

Kill off the BBC news website, and people might end up paying to read the Times and Sun online...

Kevlarhead · 25/04/2010 23:12

Got the above from here. Not exactly unbiased but it came up first in google...

Original poster
Heathcliffscathy · 25/04/2010 23:17

it really makes me laugh (otherwise i'd cry) that murdoch thinks that is a reasonable statement!

OP posts:
Ivykaty44 · 25/04/2010 23:18

Hardly though when murdock makes cuts on reporting to line his pockets, not that he is the only one but news is really dull and repetative drivel due to the like of him leading it that way. Cutting reporters to save a few pennies each year does nothing to actually get news stories

Kevlarhead · 26/04/2010 19:03

"Cutting reporters to save a few pennies each year does nothing to actually get news stories"

Yes it does. News International has dozens of spreadsheets, all indicating that less money on unionised journo scum means more money for shareholders. Are you arguing with Mr Murdoch's spreadsheets?

moondog · 26/04/2010 19:10

I thoguht this and wonderdd wqhy not on BBC.
But then thought that might be even worse.
Al Jazeera?

UnrequitedSkink · 26/04/2010 21:56

Moondog - you've lost me??

Kevlarhead - thanks for the link to that article. The Murdochs make my blood boil.

moondog · 26/04/2010 22:05

I mean that it is going to be nigh impossible to get a compeltely impartial broadcaster.

New posts on this thread. Refresh page