CI
I'd query that assertion. I'd say they had plenty of evidence that both Rupert and James Murdoch turned a willful blind eye to events through either not bothering to read emails or showing general disinterest. Whether it was deliberate ignorance of events, or malicious intent to cover up those events, either way, that definitely makes both of them, unfit to lead a major multinational company, or indeed anything more important than a lemonade stand.
BR
The trouble is though he is tarring completely innocent 'undelings' with the same brush. As BSkyB pointed out this morning they are only 39% owned by News Corp and should be judged on their broadcasting history, not the actions of a company which is also ran by one of it's shareholders.
One of the reasons I personally didn't have much of an issue with News Corp taking control of BSkyB is the perception is they have 100% ownership anyway, even though in fact 61% could be owned by the Pope for all we know - though probably not the best example when thinking of "fit and proper" people to run international organisations.
I think the committee have overreached. By inserting the 'unfit' remark the result was a politically charged document rather than an objective report. Clearly Murdoch has questions to answer but making broad statements just to get big headlines is the wrong approach.
Nick Robinson reporting tonight that Tom Watson has said he went after Murdoch in the way he did so that the blame wouldn't lie wholly with 'undelings'.
Be interesting to see if Sky comment on the Ofcom investigation when they announce their quarterly earnings in the morning - I guess they probably won't.
Nick Robinson reporting tonight that Tom Watson has said he went after Murdoch in the way he did so that the blame wouldn't lie wholly with 'undelings'.
Be interesting to see if Sky comment on the Ofcom investigation when they announce their quarterly earnings in the morning - I guess they probably won't.
The trouble is though he is tarring completely innocent 'undelings' with the same brush. As BSkyB pointed out this morning they are only 39% owned by News Corp and should be judged on their broadcasting history, not the actions of a company which is also ran by one of it's shareholders.
One of the reasons I personally didn't have much of an issue with News Corp taking control of BSkyB is the perception is they have 100% ownership anyway, even though in fact 61% could be owned by the Pope for all we know - though probably not the best example when thinking of "fit and proper" people to run international organisations.
IS
Such changes would have been decided by now, the tender documents for the next auction are being sent out any time now
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/02/fa-cup-espn-premier-league
The nature of the Premier League auction this time around might be completely different thanks to the fallout from Murphy v MPS. In particular, this could be a pan-European auction with no 3pm games up for sale at all in Europe.
Such changes would have been decided by now, the tender documents for the next auction are being sent out any time now
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/may/02/fa-cup-espn-premier-league
GM
Oh goody! Anyone else they need to book while they're at it??
Brooks has now been charged.
Oh goody! Anyone else they need to book while they're at it??