News International and BSkyB

Given the fact that there are currently 3 investigations into NewsCorp's activities, in the UK, US and Australia, and given that NewsCorp is a global company based in the US, and given the fact the story has been covered at various lengths and times in the UK, Ireland, Europe, US, Canada and Australia, I think it's pretty safe to believe the story is of global interest and could have a global impact.

Yes, the events in July when the story exploded and the News of the World closed made the news all over the world and this is the follow on from that.

Obviously the Murdoch angle is a big factor, but of course that's taken a bit of a backward step with Piers Morgan. The thing that makes it a big story is the way it's multi-faceted - it involves media, business, showbiz, royalty, sport, crime, politics and the police, in fact it's got everything except sex and religion!

All the news outlets around the world can get something from it, even if it's just a chance to screw a rival.

The noose is tightening around BSkyB now. The unthinkable, a few months ago, that Ofcom might decide that BSkyB is an unsuitable licence holder must be getting closer.

BSkyB's Sky News having admitted to limited hacking today is very telling.

I'm surprised that none of the news outlets appear to be going near it! Surely this is reportable news?

I think it is safe to assume that some other broadcaster could have done the same as well.

ITV News' exclusive last week about the requests put in from newspapers to a private investigator also included ITN, although I don't think they mentioned any other broadcasters. I think this got very if not no coverage on other broadcasters about what ITV News had 'discovered'.

It's the same reason why no one else puts pressure on other newspapers outside of News Intl due to have an axe to grind.

What will happen if BSkyB lose their licence then?
I think it's also telling that Sky News have admitted their hacking just days after Murdoch Jr resigned. Coincidental?

Would Murdoch be willing to do a News of the World on Sky News to try and save BSkyB if it comes to that - after all they've long said it isn't profitable.

It is a difficult one - in the two cases here I don't really see that Sky had any justification in hacking their emails, but for example in the Guardian's reporting of the story if they could get their hands on an email which proved the large scale hacking going on by News Corp that could arguably be justified.

And give us The Sun TV, 10 months down the line?

Presumably that would be Jeremy Darroch's call, not Rupert Murdoch's.

I can't seeus having a closure of Sky News. The NotW comparison isn't quite justified. The extent of hacking in the latter was far greater than Sky News, and was often for more "celebrity scandal" than criminal activity. Additionally, the reprocussions of closing Sky News would be far greater than NotW.

Most likely outcome? Some sackings and a fine I reckon.


With regards to Sky News not being profitable, I feel the broadcaster have a duty to provide news, in the same way ITV and Channel 5 do.

It would never come to the stage where Ofcom just took away all of Sky's broadcasting licenses. Sky are 'too big to fail' - they are the biggest broadcasting company in the UK with a massive turnover and thousands of staff. To pull the plug would be unthinkable.

The worst case is that they'd just get News Corp to divest it's stake, although I'm not sure that Ofcom could do that by themself. Of course they could use the threat of license removal but Sky would call their bluff for the reasons above.

Also there's the factor of the platform. As far as I know that's not actually licensed, only the channels on it. Even if the unthinkable did happen then there's not really any way that Ofcom could stop Sky running the platform, albeit with none of their own channels on it

If that was the case then of course they would.... they offered to offload it to get the takeover through. But this time round it's about the whole of Sky rather than just Sky News.


It is a difficult one and all hinges on it being 'in the public interest'.

Much of the 'hacking' that's been revealed to have been done by the press, especially the NOTW has been celebrity tittle-tattle rather than anything actually important. Some arguably were, such as the 'hacking' that was done as part of investigations for The Observer.

The John Darwin story for which the Sky News 'hacking' happened is a tricky one. There was a crime being committed, but whether there was a public interest is arguable as is whether it is Sky News' role to investigate on behalf of the police. And of course what they did was illegal, no matter what the intention behind it