Tag Archives: Media Bill

On one side

That is the setting I was confronted with early this morning. I actually am not sure where I stand, this happens. It started with the Guardian article ‘Telegraph takeover: UK issues ‘stop meddling’ order to UAE-backed consortium’ (at https://www.theguardian.com/media/2024/jan/30/telegraph-takeover-uk-issues-stop-meddling-order-to-uae-backed-consortium). As such there are issues. In the first we get “The UK government has issued a legal order stopping a UAE-backed consortium from meddling with the Telegraph, including making any changes to top management and editorial executives, until investigations into its proposed takeover are complete.” As such, this is the Telegraph, not some newspaper with credibility like the Times. The Telegraph has been throwing its credibility down the drain faster than a nymphomanic hooker on roofies (just saying). 

We are also given “Lucy Frazer, the culture secretary, issued the pre-emptive action order after RedBird IMI’s last-minute move to create a new UK holding company to house the Telegraph and the Spectator if its complex deal with the Barclay family to take control goes through.” So it was pre-emptive? Fair enough but in that same light we got last November “Lucy Frazer said the Media Bill puts ‘protection of our free press’ at its core.” I don’t think she has a clue what freedom means until it serves HER purpose. In all this there is a side the Guardian and plenty of others ignore. It is seen with “house the Telegraph and the Spectator if its complex deal with the Barclay family to take control goes through.” As such who spoke to the Barclay family on this? I cannot find any article in that regard. This is just another Islamophobia setting and the media is key to reducing that tension, so I wonder what Frazer has on her order list. We can assume that “It is the latest skirmish in the battle for control of the Telegraph in a pivotal year for UK politics, with a general election due to be held in the autumn.” You see the Telegraph is conservatively tainted, as is Lucy Frazer. Is there a chance that they fear that reduced exposure could cost them the elections? It is highly speculative from me, but we cannot see ANY evidence that the acts by Sheikh Mansour bin Zayed Al Nahyan are evil, nothing more than a man being a shrewd business man and I think the UK needs more of those (but that too is my speculative view). Still there is an enormous amount of evidence missing. So what made this deal is such a “complex deal with the Barclay family”? It could be, but we aren’t given this part are we. Just a lot of emotions of some cultural sheila in the fear group (Australian expression). You see what everyone is forgetting is that the Barclay family is largely linked to the Telegraph Media Group. It represents (apparently) a value  in the region of £500m to £700m. Lets not forget how they were duped by Bjorn Lomborg’s climate propaganda, covid misinformation and that list goes on for some time, so how is not prosecuting those people, avoiding Leveson and some other small stuff serving the people and selling the paper to a UAE corporation is not? Lets not forget that the UK has 12 daily newspapers in circulation. As such I have questions and so should you. Perhaps there are valid reasons to fear PR settings, but that fear was taken away from that person in the Mummy 4 (Rupert Murdoch), so why are they still afraid? I think I know, but I will let you figure that part out for now. We are also given ‘Telegraph could become ‘PR arm’ of UAE after proposed takeover, MPs warned’ (source: Guardian) and  consider that the UK population is 68 million, the Daily Telegraph represents a circulation of around 318,000 a day, that represents a mere 0.4%, so where is the danger? I cannot see it, but perhaps someone will put out a much larger article (in an actual newspaper) to debunk my setting and give us the real deal. I could be wrong, I really could be and I am not certain where I stand, but at present it seems that this Frazer girls is responding to a different match ring and we aren’t told what exactly it is. 

The other part is that (no matter how complex), was the move legal. So now we are stopping legal moves whilst governments all over the world can’t be bothered to stop criminals? What kind of place are they running there? 

I will let you figure it out as you start the midweek and I await the arrival of Thursday.

Leave a comment

Filed under Finance, Law, Media, Politics