Quote:
Originally Posted by Broadbandings
But hey, it's Sky right? Monopoly, evil Rupert Murdoch, must be stopped at all costs. Which is fine except when a body that's supposed to foster competition is the one doing the stopping at all costs. Maybe a remedy is needed, maybe other operators just need to grow a pair and start bidding with Sky for the new content and either let Sky sell on their platform directly or pay up, either way this remedy that Ofcom want to employ is really very OTT. Who'd have thought a Labour dominated regulator would be overbearing and want to control everything because they know best 
|
Yes. That is basically what it is all about.
Murdoch is just getting stronger and stronger to the point where he will have more power than the prime minister. We seen this in '97 when Blair had to kowtow to him because he thought he would lose the election without the support of Murdochs papers. I have heard tories say several times in parliament that no one knows what Blair promised him. Now we don't know what Cameron has promised to get Murdoch's papers on his side. I have even heard it said that Blair and Murdoch had many telephone conversations in the run up to the Iraq war. This is someone who is unelected misusing the power his vast media empire gives him.
Is it correct that the Tories have said they will change the legislation that mean broadcasters have to be impartial? Murdoch already said a couple of years ago that he would like Sky news to be more like Fox news and if he gets his way the BBC would also be gone. This man who does not live in this country and pays little or no tax will be the most powerful man in the land.
As for all the other 'poor old sky' stuff in your post, well whatever happens Sky will be laughing all the way to the bank. What I want to see is the consumers interest protected. Lets say for instance that I want Movie channels in HD (which I dont). Why should I be restricted to only one supplier? There is no way VM or BT could set up their own channels because Sky (and some credit to them here) have the market totally sewn up. Why should the richest company be able to buy up most of the sport and then tell me I can only watch it if I sign up to their sports channels. You can argue that is unfair on Sky but I dont have shares in Sky, it is the consumers interest I want protected. Left alone there would soon be only one company, which is bad enough for the tv consumer but that monopoly owned by Murdoch would be a disaster politically for this country.