And the future for News International??

NEWS CORPORATION WITHDRAWS PROPOSED OFFER FOR BRITISH SKY BROADCASTING GROUP PLC

News Corporation (“News Corp”) announces that it no longer intends to make an offer for the entire issued and to be issued share capital of British Sky Broadcasting Group PLC (“BSkyB”) not already owned by it.

Chase Carey, Deputy Chairman, President and Chief Operating Officer, News Corporation, commented: “We believed that the proposed acquisition of BSkyB by News Corporation would benefit both companies but it has become clear that it is too difficult to progress in this climate. News Corporation remains a committed long-term shareholder in BSkyB. We are proud of the success it has achieved and our contribution to it.”

@BBCNews

Ofcom still reviewing under 'fit & proper' criteria News Corp's ownership of the 39% of #BSkyB it currently owns http://bbc.in/qd0yJj
2 minutes ago via TweetDeck

@BoycottMurdoch

If you haven't yet been to foxnewsuk.com, you definitely should.
half a minute ago via web

carmen wrote:

@BoycottMurdoch

If you haven't yet been to foxnewsuk.com, you definitely should.
half a minute ago via web

hehehehehe

www.foxnewsuk.com

Murdoch's biggest setback?
Robert Peston

In a business career of more than half a century, has 80 year-old Rupert Murdoch ever experienced such setbacks to his business ambitions?

The quintessential media mogul sees himself - rightly some would say - as the founder of British Sky Broadcasting, the UK's biggest broadcaster by revenues.

So to be told by politicians, who till recently were seen by some as his creatures, that he shouldn't press ahead with his attempt to own all of BSkyB, and then to have to do what they urged, well it is a humiliation of a kind that is somewhat unusual for him.

And, to state the obvious, that humiliation comes only a few days after another act that caused him acute pain, the closure of the News of the World, once his favourite newspaper.

Of course it would be wrong to overstate the damage to his News Corporation empire, owner of vast chunks of the US and global media industry.

It still remains immensely profitable. And News Corp still owns 39% of BSkyB, a business that bucked the recent recession to continue increasing its profits - to something like £1bn in the past year.

This will have been an 'incredibly painful' decision for Murdoch
But no one - including Mr Murdoch - can be certain what will emerge from either the police investigation or the judge-led public enquiry into alleged wrongdoing at the News of the World.

With the police as yet having contacted only the tiniest fraction of the thousands of people whose phones may have been hacked by a private detective in the employ of the News of the World, it is probable that there will be week after week of new shocking disclosures about the privacy of individuals being invade improperly.

And overnight there have been signs of contagion to other countries where News Corp has important assets: Senator Jay Rockefeller, the chairman of the Senate's commerce committee, urged US government agencies to probe whether the News of the World instigated attempts to hack the phones 9/11 victims and other American citizens.

So there could be further damage to the reputation of News Corporation, damage which could alienate advertisers and buyers of its newspapers and entertainment.

If that translated into losses of revenue, it would be easier for Mr Murdoch to shrug that off, if his recent investments had gone spectacularly well.

But he has written down the value of Dow Jones, owner of the Wall Street Journal - and he lost a fortune on the sale of MySpace, one of the original social networks.

Mr Murdoch would probably concede that in recent years he has not been infallible.

@oflynnexpress

Tom Bradby on ITV news speculating on whether the Times will survive as "it loses a lot of money". This story is extraordinary.

Panda wrote:Carmen......excellent.

I love the imagination of these clever people , where did you find this?

@BBCLauraK

@BBCLauraK
2.30 Tuesday afternoon at Culture Committee - you can put it in your diaries after all!
half a minute ago via web
Reply Retweet

@BBCLauraK
And Cutlure Committee sending summons for both the Murdochs
1 minute ago via web

BREAKING - Rebekah Brooks WILL attend committee on Tuesday, Rupert Murdoch will not, James Murdoch is not available on that date
1 minute ago via web

Panda wrote:There has just been a comment about the Meeting in Parliament next Tuesday where the Murdochs and Brooks are summoned to appear.
Since the Murdochs are not British there is no compulsion for them to attend but it would show signs of guilt on their part if they refused. Murdoch
is no pushover and will be closeted with his Lawyers no doubt and take the 5th Amendment.

@BBCLauraK

James Murdoch did offer another date to turn up in Aug - but cttee wouldn't accept it - they're issuing speaker's warrant to him + his Dad
2 minutes ago via web

carmen wrote:

Panda wrote:Carmen......excellent.

I love the imagination of these clever people , where did you find this?

the link was doing the rounds of twitter.

Here's the link for any potential bidders

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=230646778819#ht_932wt_1167

And here is the text of James Murdoch's letter to the culture committee.


Dear John

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

Unfortunately I am not available to attend the session you have planned next Tuesday.

However, I would be pleased to give evidence to your committee on either the 10 or 11 August. Naturally, if neither of these proves suitable I would be willing to consider any alternative dates you suggest.

I hope this is of help to the committee.

Yours sincerely,

James Murdoch


Rupert Murdoch's US holdings account for a dominant part of its more than $32bn global annual revenue Photograph: Pool/Reuters
11.59am: Here's what Rupert Murdoch said in his letter to the culture committee chairman.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

Unfortunately, I am not available to attend the session you have planned next Tuesday. However, I am fully prepared to give evidence to the forthcoming judge-led public inquiry and I will be taking steps to notify those conducting the inquiry of my willingness to do so. Having done this, I would be happy to discuss with you how best to give evidence to your committee.

I hope this is of help.

Yours sincerely,

Rupert Murdoch

11.54am: Here is the full statement from the culture committee.

The Commons Culture, Media and Sport Committee has this morning received letters from Rupert Murdoch, Chair and CEO of News Corporation, James Murdoch, Chairman and Chief Executive of News Corporation (International), and Rebekah Brooks, Chief Executive of News International, in response to its invitation to appear before the Committee.

Rebekah Brooks has accepted the invitation to appear before the Committee next week. Rupert Murdoch has indicated he is unable to attend to give evidence, and James Murdoch has indicated he is unable to attend on the specified date but offered to appear at an alternative date, the earliest of which was August 10th. The letters are attached.

The Committee has made clear its view that all three should appear to account for the behaviour of News International and for previous statements made to the Committee in Parliament, now acknowledged to be false.

Accordingly, the Committee has this morning decided to summon Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch to appear before the Select Committee in Parliament at 2.30pm on Tuesday 19 July 2011.

@julianhuppert

Formal summons are now being delivered to both Murdochs by the Deputy Sergeant at Arms #fb #live #phonehacking #notw

carmen wrote:

Panda wrote:There has just been a comment about the Meeting in Parliament next Tuesday where the Murdochs and Brooks are summoned to appear.
Since the Murdochs are not British there is no compulsion for them to attend but it would show signs of guilt on their part if they refused. Murdoch
is no pushover and will be closeted with his Lawyers no doubt and take the 5th Amendment.

According to Tom Watson MP, nationality isn't an issue - if they're on UK soil, they can be summoned, declared in contempt of Parliament and arrested by Sarjent at Arms - although what happens after that is a bit unknown!

And here is the full text of Rebekah Brooks's letter to the culture committee.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

I am writing to confirm that I am available to appear before the committee on that date and welcome the opportunity to do so.

As you are well aware, the Metropolitan police investigation into illegal voicemail interception continues and we are fully cooperating with that. Aspects of the work to which your committee may wish to refer are likely to be relevant to that investigation. Indeed, the police have already asked us specifically to provide information about those matters.

I understand that various select committees have approached the police over time in relation to this and other cases. The police's position has been to co-operate where this did not directly impact on the investigation in question. In those cases where it did potentially impact, the police have historically declined to comment at that stage. Our understanding is that this approach has not been challenged. Given that we are in the midst of an investigation, and we do not want to prejudice it, I hope you will understand why we feel it would not be appropriate to respond to such questions at present in order to be consistent with [the] police's approach, and that as a result this may prevent me from discussing these matters in detail.

I hope this is of help, and look forward to hearing from you to discuss exact timings and other details.

Yours sincerely,

Rebekah Brooks

@GeorgeMonbiot

explosive sggstn from @ChrisBryantMP: House shld consider emergency motion on Monday to arrest murdochs if continue to refuse to attend.

carmen wrote:

And here is the full text of Rebekah Brooks's letter to the culture committee.

Dear John,

Thank you for your letter of 12 July, on behalf of the committee, inviting me to give evidence to you on 19 July.

I am writing to confirm that I am available to appear before the committee on that date and welcome the opportunity to do so.

As you are well aware, the Metropolitan police investigation into illegal voicemail interception continues and we are fully cooperating with that. Aspects of the work to which your committee may wish to refer are likely to be relevant to that investigation. Indeed, the police have already asked us specifically to provide information about those matters.

I understand that various select committees have approached the police over time in relation to this and other cases. The police's position has been to co-operate where this did not directly impact on the investigation in question. In those cases where it did potentially impact, the police have historically declined to comment at that stage. Our understanding is that this approach has not been challenged. Given that we are in the midst of an investigation, and we do not want to prejudice it, I hope you will understand why we feel it would not be appropriate to respond to such questions at present in order to be consistent with [the] police's approach, and that as a result this may prevent me from discussing these matters in detail.

I hope this is of help, and look forward to hearing from you to discuss exact timings and other details.

Yours sincerely,

Rebekah Brooks

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2011/jul/14/nickclegg-phone-hacking#block-24

Margaret wrote:Do you think she's going to try 'can't comment due to investigation' issues?

Mike Naworynsky, the deputy serjeant-at-arms at the Commons, is on his way to Wapping now, we're told, to deliver the summonses to Rupert Murdoch and James Murdoch ordering them to attend next week's culture committee hearing. Apparently he won't be wearing ceremonial outfit ("tights").

John Whittingdale said that Kevin Maxwell was the last person to receive a summons of this kind ordering him to attend a select committee hearing. Maxwell turned up.

Earlier (see 8.36am) Whittingdale talked about John Junor being ordered to attend parliament in 1957. To clarify: Junor was the last person ordered to attend the Bar of the House (ie, to come to the chamber itself) after being accused of a contempt of parliament.

If the Murdochs refuse to comply with the summonses they are receiving from the select committee, the committee could then report them to the Commons for contempt. At that point, the only sanction available to parliament would be to call them to the Bar for a reprimand.

@GeorgeMonbiot

This is now a straightforward power struggle between Murdoch and parliament. Democracy demands that parliament wins.