The Rupert Murdoch+News Corp+News International+News of the World+phone hacking+police corruption scandal has all of the UK in its grip. Why? Because for a very brief moment, the veil has been ripped away, and we the public get to see the ugly truth behind it.
Look, we expect powerful people to get together. Its not a shock that Media barrons know and socialize with top police and politicians.Its not a big surprise that tabloid editors have government spin doctors on speed dial.
But.
The media- print, tv and cable- the legislature, police, the judiciary, parliament. They all have seperate and distinct roles. They shouldnt be able to be bought off, or influenced, or threatened, by one or other of the group. They shouldnt be spied on. They shouldnt be subject to blackmail or the threat of it. If we have to have politicians, and government, we have to have actual democracy, or the believeable fiction of it.
After all, we keep attacking, bombing and occupying other countries on the basis that a) they want/need 'democracy', or b) we're bringing it to them regardless.
And we do need a free press.
But not a press/media whose 'freedom' means activities that curtail the public's freedoms. That bullies, spies on, corrupts police with bribes, (and cushy jobs after they retire) or ruins the reputations of innocent people. Nor police, or politicians who do that.
The call for a public enquiry into the activities of News International and its executives vis a vis phone hacking and police bribery is fine.
But will it be enough? Look at the connections:
1960s: Murdoch comes to Britain buys the Sun and the News of the World. Later he gets hold of The Times. He's known to have right wing political views and to ensure that his newspapers reflect them. In the 80s, he breaks the hold of the print unions on his publications and moves them literally and symbolically out of Fleet Street.
In the late 80s/early 90s he pilots satellite tv and pay in the UK, with Sky TV. At the same time, over the Atlantic, he was buying the equivalent of the Sun in 1973 (the New York Post) and in the 1980s bought into 20th century Fox, then bought some local tv stations and radio stations from the company that owned them (having to change nationality to do so) and thus had national coverage of US territory via tv and radio stations. He ends up owning Dow Jones, and the Wall Street Journal. Magazines were also being bought in Australia, the UK and the US.
The activities descibed were via companies- usually News Corp or its subsidiaries.Similar activities have taken place in other countries, most notable being satellite company buy ins or takeovers in China (via Hong Kong) and India.
Despite various laws in the countries concerned about monopolies and competition, we've ended up with the concentration of newspapers, magazines, satellite/cable tv, and a major film studio in key parts of the world the hands of Murdoch via a series of linked companies he and his family own and control. And he definately, quite openly, has a political agenda. And you only have to look at Fox News- both how it 'reports' the news, and how its popular commentators give their opinions, to get a good idea of what that is.
When we look at the current scandal in the UK, best remember Lord Acton's dictum:
"Power Corrupts. And absolute power, corrupts absolutely".
Quite.
People have to go to jail. People are going to go to jail. But will it be all of the culpable? The question is, will the UK be able to deal out justice for any law breaking- individual and/or corporate? Will the police and the politicians be able to do their job?
The non-News Corp press are certainly trying- kudos to The Guardian.
Wednesday 13 July 2011
Sunday 5 September 2010
GLOBAL FINANCIAL CRISIS, REDUX: MAYBE WE NEED TO RE-THINK THE LAST 500 YEARS OF MONETARY POLICY...
Have a look at what Ellen Brown says...
Then have a look at what Douglas Rushkoff says...
And then ask yourself: What is the NEXT global financial crisis going to be like?
Then have a look at what Douglas Rushkoff says...
And then ask yourself: What is the NEXT global financial crisis going to be like?
Tuesday 17 August 2010
Friday 28 May 2010
SEX AND THE CITY- THE BEST FILM REVIEW EVER
I have never watched Sex and the City. Never wanted to. But whilst listening to Mark Kermode foam at the mouth about it today on BBC Radio 5 Live, he referred to a review by someone called Lindy West.
So, out of curiousity I googled and... well here's an extract of her review at the Seattle paper The Stranger: Titled 'Burkas and Birkins':
'SATC2 takes everything that I hold dear as a woman and as a human—working hard, contributing to society, not being an entitled cunt like it's my job—and rapes it to death with a stiletto that costs more than my car. It is 146 minutes long, which means that I entered the theater in the bloom of youth and emerged with a family of field mice living in my long, white mustache. This is an entirely inappropriate length for what is essentially a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls.'
and, here's another extract:
'..Feminism! Fuck yeah!
If this is what modern womanhood means, then just fucking veil me and sew up all my holes. Good night.'
It is an awesome review. Biting.Witty.Scathing. Run.Run to read it. Here is where you'll find it: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/burkas-and-birkins/Content?oid=4132715
So, out of curiousity I googled and... well here's an extract of her review at the Seattle paper The Stranger: Titled 'Burkas and Birkins':
'SATC2 takes everything that I hold dear as a woman and as a human—working hard, contributing to society, not being an entitled cunt like it's my job—and rapes it to death with a stiletto that costs more than my car. It is 146 minutes long, which means that I entered the theater in the bloom of youth and emerged with a family of field mice living in my long, white mustache. This is an entirely inappropriate length for what is essentially a home video of gay men playing with giant Barbie dolls.'
and, here's another extract:
'..Feminism! Fuck yeah!
If this is what modern womanhood means, then just fucking veil me and sew up all my holes. Good night.'
It is an awesome review. Biting.Witty.Scathing. Run.Run to read it. Here is where you'll find it: http://www.thestranger.com/seattle/burkas-and-birkins/Content?oid=4132715
Monday 24 May 2010
THE FINANCIAL CRISIS- A RECAP, A PREDICTION
Its only been 2 years since the US economy almost fell off a cliff, dragging linked Western economies (like the UK) with it.
But some of the public seemed to have forgotten why.
Since the UK election, there's been an understandable concentration on THE DEFICIT. But the message put out seems to suggest it came about due to profligate Government spending. Thus, cuts-deep, painful, punitive- must happen NOW.
Or Else.
Actually, the current high levels of the Deficit are due to Public Sector Money having to bailout banks in the Private Sector.
I repeat. The. Private. Sector.
Billions were spent in a number of countries, shoring up banks, which had Black Holes in their balance sheets. And why did they have them? Because they had become addicted to gambling on mortgages. They'd found a way to generate vast profits by creating a new kind of financial 'instrument', which they could buy and sell on an unregulated market. And eventually, the value of this market outstripped the mortgages....and then some.
So whereas the 'bad' mortgages (i.e mortgages taken out by people, in less than optimum circumstances, with built in interest rate hikes and punitive clauses once arrears appeared) were valued at $800 billion, the Credit Swap Derivatives etc created on the back of them...?
They are a cool $62 trillion.
Yes. Gamblers-in the banking sector- blew $62 trillion when no one was looking.
The US economy is way too big for a mere $800 billion in dodgy mortgages to crash it. Even when fighting two wars. But the banks and investment houses etc exposure to a percentage of a $62 trillion hole made one giant collapse, then the domino effect kicked in. Big financial institutions started crashing or teetering on the brink.Then the US Government-followed by others- had to leap in to prop up the entire banking system.
As the US and Britain prided themselves on having the biggest global financial centres, they had the greatest exposure. Hence giant Deficits. Not all of the Deficit is down to this....tragedy/farce. But the sudden steep rise, and the level of it, and the unmanageable nature of it is.
So.
Gambling. In the Private Sector. Creates a crisis. Requiring government action. Funded by us. For which we- the public- will have to suffer.
PREDICTION.
Northern hemisphere/Western nations will have to get used to higher levels of unemployment and under-employment, higher costs for utilities and food. Less in the way of public sector provided services. And the growing outsourcing of parts of working class skilled jobs and middle class professional jobs to eastern/southern hemisphere countries. Those countries' workforce will be exploited via poor conditions and low wages.
This has happened as- hastened by Globalisation- economic development in the emerging economic giants China, India Brazil- is shifting financial/economic activity in their direction. Why should that make things turn out in the ways predicted?Because western corporations are governed by laws requiring them to put the interests of their shareholders before everything- their workers' jobs, social justice, their own countries' economies via payments of tax and contributions to employees' pensions and healthcare - standards of living in the 'developed countries' will no longer rise. They will start to decline.
'The corporation is the predominant institution in Western society, and there is indeed a yin to its yang. Corporations provide vital jobs, ideas, products, and services. But these are all incidental and secondary to the profit-drive. If a corporation does good for goodness' sake then, by law, it runs the risk of being sued by its shareholders. As its greatest champion, Milton Friedman, told author Joel Bakan: "Its interests are the interests of its stockholders. Now, beyond that should it spend the stockholders' money for purposes which it regards as socially responsible but which it cannot connect to its bottom line? The answer I would say is no." '
That quote comes from an interesting article by Stuart Whatley. You can read it here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stuart-whatley/corporation-reform-financ_b_582770.html
Its on of many articles that can be found, if one looks, that ruminates on what the situation is, and what we can expect the future to bring.
The biggest emerging economies have societies that wont allow their corporations to operate in the same way.
Remember the banking crisis. Because if we don't -and fail to take the appropriate steps in changing both regulatory law and company law-it will happen again.
And given that western economies will have shrunk, and the countries with the emerging economies are better at remembering, and don't/can't let corporations operate in the ruthless and reckless way we do,if they have taken their rightful place in the various international financial institutions, they wont be helping next time round.
But some of the public seemed to have forgotten why.
Since the UK election, there's been an understandable concentration on THE DEFICIT. But the message put out seems to suggest it came about due to profligate Government spending. Thus, cuts-deep, painful, punitive- must happen NOW.
Or Else.
Actually, the current high levels of the Deficit are due to Public Sector Money having to bailout banks in the Private Sector.
I repeat. The. Private. Sector.
Billions were spent in a number of countries, shoring up banks, which had Black Holes in their balance sheets. And why did they have them? Because they had become addicted to gambling on mortgages. They'd found a way to generate vast profits by creating a new kind of financial 'instrument', which they could buy and sell on an unregulated market. And eventually, the value of this market outstripped the mortgages....and then some.
So whereas the 'bad' mortgages (i.e mortgages taken out by people, in less than optimum circumstances, with built in interest rate hikes and punitive clauses once arrears appeared) were valued at $800 billion, the Credit Swap Derivatives etc created on the back of them...?
They are a cool $62 trillion.
Yes. Gamblers-in the banking sector- blew $62 trillion when no one was looking.
The US economy is way too big for a mere $800 billion in dodgy mortgages to crash it. Even when fighting two wars. But the banks and investment houses etc exposure to a percentage of a $62 trillion hole made one giant collapse, then the domino effect kicked in. Big financial institutions started crashing or teetering on the brink.Then the US Government-followed by others- had to leap in to prop up the entire banking system.
As the US and Britain prided themselves on having the biggest global financial centres, they had the greatest exposure. Hence giant Deficits. Not all of the Deficit is down to this....tragedy/farce. But the sudden steep rise, and the level of it, and the unmanageable nature of it is.
So.
Gambling. In the Private Sector. Creates a crisis. Requiring government action. Funded by us. For which we- the public- will have to suffer.
PREDICTION.
Northern hemisphere/Western nations will have to get used to higher levels of unemployment and under-employment, higher costs for utilities and food. Less in the way of public sector provided services. And the growing outsourcing of parts of working class skilled jobs and middle class professional jobs to eastern/southern hemisphere countries. Those countries' workforce will be exploited via poor conditions and low wages.
This has happened as- hastened by Globalisation- economic development in the emerging economic giants China, India Brazil- is shifting financial/economic activity in their direction. Why should that make things turn out in the ways predicted?Because western corporations are governed by laws requiring them to put the interests of their shareholders before everything- their workers' jobs, social justice, their own countries' economies via payments of tax and contributions to employees' pensions and healthcare - standards of living in the 'developed countries' will no longer rise. They will start to decline.
'The corporation is the predominant institution in Western society, and there is indeed a yin to its yang. Corporations provide vital jobs, ideas, products, and services. But these are all incidental and secondary to the profit-drive. If a corporation does good for goodness' sake then, by law, it runs the risk of being sued by its shareholders. As its greatest champion, Milton Friedman, told author Joel Bakan: "Its interests are the interests of its stockholders. Now, beyond that should it spend the stockholders' money for purposes which it regards as socially responsible but which it cannot connect to its bottom line? The answer I would say is no." '
That quote comes from an interesting article by Stuart Whatley. You can read it here:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/stuart-whatley/corporation-reform-financ_b_582770.html
Its on of many articles that can be found, if one looks, that ruminates on what the situation is, and what we can expect the future to bring.
The biggest emerging economies have societies that wont allow their corporations to operate in the same way.
Remember the banking crisis. Because if we don't -and fail to take the appropriate steps in changing both regulatory law and company law-it will happen again.
And given that western economies will have shrunk, and the countries with the emerging economies are better at remembering, and don't/can't let corporations operate in the ruthless and reckless way we do,if they have taken their rightful place in the various international financial institutions, they wont be helping next time round.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
