3 ms·
You knew I'd be citing the Grauniad because they're the only national newspaper that was covering the story in depth. (Until The Independent jumped on board, la
by cstross 15y ago
You knew I'd be citing the Grauniad because they're the only national newspaper that was covering the story in depth. (Until The Independent jumped on board, late in the day.) The Murdoch press and their rival tabloids were all keeping mum, and The Telegraph wasn't touching it either (possibly out of a misplaced sense of loyalty to the PM).
Politicians and rival media outlets are afraid of the NewsCorp empire. They own 30% of the UK newspaper market and a big chunk of its TV programming, and they have long memories. Not people you would want to have holding a grudge against you if you worked in that industry or had to run for re-election.
- speckledjim 15y agoI knew you'd cite the grauniad because they're pretty much the opposite politically to NOTW/The Sun etc. Of course they'd be attacking.
- socksy 15y agoIsn't that irrelevant? It doesn't stop them from being right, and it's a little hard to skew losing advertisers as a good thing...
- seabee 15y agoActually the Telegraph ran several articles on the issue, including front pages. They are hardly fans of Murdoch. The Guardian really went for it though.
- v21 15y agoYeah, the Telegraph have been going great guns recently. But the Guardian have been hammering away at this for yonks. (I am reminded of the expenses scandal - The Guardian had a journalist who was petitioning the government to release the expense data for years, but didn't get anywhere except repeated trips to the courtroom. Then the Telegraph gets copies leaked from within the expenses office. It's a dirty world out there...)