it appears that most of my time today is going to be dedicated to wiping Finn’s runny nose. It’s like a faucet. I did discover, however, that the British committee charged with investigating (pdf) Rupert Murdoch’s News Corporation has determined that Murdoch “is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company.” I can’t pretend to understand the UK’s regulatory scheme, but it seems like this particular use of language might be important:

More than 6,000 possible victims [of illegal spying] have been identified and the police have so far made a number of arrests in connection with an investigation reopened in January 2011 – although no charges have yet been brought.

Media regulator Ofcom is currently looking into that issue, and reacting to the report, a spokesman said: “Ofcom has a duty under the Broadcasting Acts 1990 and 1996 to be satisfied that any person holding a broadcasting licence is, and remains, fit and proper to do so.

David Cameron’s official spokesman said the government would consider the report’s findings.

Asked whether the prime minister regarded Rupert Murdoch as a fit person to run a media company, he said: “That is a matter for the regulatory authorities, not for the government.”

So, it appears that the committee’s finding is not binding on the regulatory agency but it might inform their opinion. The committee’s ruling on Murdoch and his son was split, with all the Tories claiming it was partisan.

Labour MPs and the sole Liberal Democrat on the committee, Adrian Sanders, voted together in a bloc of six against the five Conservatives to insert the criticisms of Rupert Murdoch and toughen up the remarks about his son James. But the MPs were united in their criticism of other former News International employees.

I’d love to see a similar ruling from our own Congress. Wouldn’t you?

0 0 votes
Article Rating