公仔箱論壇 - Powered by Discuz! Board

標題: [時事討論] 梅鐸打的是甚麼算盤盧峯 [打印本頁]

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2011-7-12 07:26 AM 標題: 梅鐸打的是甚麼算盤盧峯

梅鐸打的是甚麼算盤 盧峯
公仔箱論壇* f* m. A V: {& L) ]
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。6 w& S) R$ K6 ^5 w- L/ x
要選對員工最關愛的老闆,原籍澳洲的傳媒大亨梅鐸可說無出其右。他為了保住得力助手,前《世界新聞報》旗手布魯克斯(Rebekah Brooks),情願關閉這份百年小報也在所不惜。要找另一位像梅鐸的老闆實在不容易。只可惜梅鐸的關愛只限布魯克斯一人,其他幾百位《世界新聞報》員工則沒有份,只能眼巴巴看着報館倒閉,成為犧牲品。當然,梅鐸這個「出人意料」之外的決定絕不是一時心軟或意氣作出的,而是精密政治計算的結果,以保證他在英國政壇、傳媒圈中的影響力。
7 a0 Z7 R7 ^% |( _9 e9 Y6 N, u
對梅鐸而言,他的傳媒帝國不管是報章或電視都不僅僅是生財工具,更是他的政治工具,用以左右政局,擴大影響力。梅鐸旗下的《太陽報》,《泰晤士報》近三十年來在英國政壇呼風喚雨,誰想上台執政,誰要當下屆首相都不能不討好他,都不能不得到他的支持。九二年選前工黨本來形勢大好,很有機會藉經濟低迷擊敗保守黨,中止十三年在野的厄運。只是黨領袖金諾克(Neil Kinnock)不肯賣梅鐸的賬,梅鐸也對金諾克這類老派工黨成員有戒心,不想他成為首相。於是他旗下的「大炮」特別是銷量最高的《太陽報》不斷向金諾克發炮,把他打成冥頑不靈的共產黨殘餘,把他描繪成陰險、不可信、反覆的小人;而保守黨的馬卓安則被說成是誠實可靠的鄰居。在形同洗腦的敵意宣傳下,工黨的優勢逐步縮小,到大選時更反勝為敗,讓保守黨繼續執政,金諾克則要黯然辭去工黨領袖位置。5.39.217.768 k" `' m% S" p( q1 R3 V

吸取了這個可怕的經驗,九四年成為工黨領袖的貝理雅上位後第一時間改善跟梅鐸的關係,全力討好這位傳媒大亨。果然,梅鐸覺得 New Labour的掌舵人孺子可教,又感到保守黨已在位太久,受人厭棄,毅然決定支持工黨。大選前夕,《太陽報》就公開呼籲讀者及選民支持工黨,最終貝理雅及白高敦的新工黨順利大勝,入主唐寧街十號、十一號長達十三年。公仔箱論壇6 B8 J f3 }7 k4 e1 e6 B) s

對英國政壇朝野來說,梅鐸可說是全國影響力以至權力最大的人,比女皇、首相還要厲害,是百分百的造王者( king maker),誰也不想得罪他及他的親信,大家甚至盡可能討好、吸納梅鐸手下紅人為自己服務。醜聞主角布魯克斯的副手幾年前就被保守黨領袖卡梅倫聘為傳訊顧問,後來更成為首相府發言人!* o& o9 [/ t7 N6 y

只是這一次醜聞實在鬧得太大,鬧得太不堪,而且越揭越臭,矛頭已開始從《世界新聞報》指向梅鐸其他報紙,指向梅鐸的親信、兒子以至他本人。為免火燒連環船,為了保住本身的地盤、政治影響力及行將收購的衞星電視業務,壯士斷臂,乾脆棄掉《世界新聞報》這條破船比裁掉個別高層好得多、有力得多,也較容易向政府及公眾交代,至少「惡行」纍纍的報紙已停刊,不會再為禍人間。$ r0 p2 Z1 j4 e9 Q4 z4 I- G

至於保住布魯克斯,最重要還是因為她跟英國兩黨高層、大老(卡梅倫、白高敦、貝理雅)關係甚深,既可以當中間人、傳話人,又可以收風拿消息。對志切保住政治影響力的梅鐸而言,這隻棋子還很有用,有必要留着。一旦爭議之火不熄,進一步燒埋身的話,布魯克斯又可以成為代罪羊,避免兒子及他自己受牽連。算來算去,留住這隻「車」顯然比較上算。

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2011-7-12 11:38 AM

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2011-7-12 11:39 AM 編輯
# S- T7 v& q- X0 H
爭獨家不擇手段新聞集團見頂峰  林行止

一、5.39.217.76: `: ]- }+ ?0 G4 o3 E# ^6 f- H

《世界新聞報》（周刊）因被揭發竊聽甚且刪除「新聞人物」手機的內容，在英國引起一片譴責、杯葛之聲，不少讀者表明「棄讀」、廣告商紛紛取消廣告合約，一場改革傳媒以至政治風暴正在醞釀中﹔這種情勢，令事件的「總后台」新聞集團主席梅鐸（默爾多）不得不公開表示「竊聽事件令人憤慨和不可接受」，基於民意難違且擔心會「愈掏愈臭」（最終把他力保的愛將、英國新聞集團的行政總裁布魯克斯拖落水），他遂決定於去周日出版最後一期后停辦有一百六十八年歷史的《世新》。新聞集團一九六九年收購該報，是其創辦大股東梅鐸從澳洲地區小報進軍國際傳媒的第一步，在他的苦心經營下，《世新》銷量從二十萬水平一度增至二百八十余萬（聲稱讀者達七百五十多萬），成為新聞集團的「搖錢樹」（cash cow）。
4 w. i+ r4 V4 N4 @+ J' ^
港人對梅鐸並不陌生，以其曾以高價從李澤楷手上收購衛星電視，他的如意算盤是藉此「進軍中國市場」，可惜，中國的開放並不包括政治和與政治關系牢不可分的傳媒，加以梅鐸意氣風發時說過無遠弗屆無處不及的「衛星電視是對極權政府的威脅」（大意），這使他在試圖打開中國市場上，不管用了多大努力（包括作出很多令自由世界傳媒人齒冷的讓步），仍然處處碰壁，遭受重大挫折（在向中國「叩頭」過程中他離婚並娶了一名比他年輕三十八歲的華裔女士，卻因此「氣走」大子Lachlan）。不久前，梅鐸又為其霍士電影打進中國市場而說「中國電影市場不對外開放，等於中國鼓勵盜版」，試圖藉此刺激中國開放電影市場，但中國隻選擇性開放，每年隻准進口二十部外國、包括二三部霍士電影，對梅鐸來說，這雖是雞肋卻不舍得拋棄。在中國市場，梅鐸碰了一鼻子灰。

不過，就傳媒經營上，梅鐸可說是前無古人的奇才，出身傳媒世家，他對新聞工作有狂熱的愛好，雖然他成為大亨后在「新聞操守」方面劣評無數，在傳媒人中間亦有臭名（比如，收購《倫敦周日時報》時公開承諾給予總編輯、著名報人伊凡士（后封爵）最大的「新聞自主權」，但不數月便把他解雇），惟英國新聞界公認他不算是最差的傳媒老板，因為比他更斤斤計較事事講求邊際利潤及對新聞工作缺乏興趣遑論熱誠的傳媒老板大有人在……。
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb: B/ ?8 u, v! {" x! l
二、

「新聞集團」如今市值近五百億美元，是世上第三大傳媒集團，其能迅速膨脹、不斷擴張，全憑梅鐸的魄力和獨特的財技。他視暢銷的報章刊物為創造流動現金的「印鈔機」（港人都知道在報業全盛時期「印報紙」是「印銀紙」的同義詞），由於天天有現金流入，等於梅鐸有還債的財力，銀行因此對他的貸款需求，幾乎有求必應（當然以其現金流量多寡為計算基准），這令他能不斷在各英語國家進行收購。如今他旗下的報刊，除了不少對老百姓（選民）有重大影響力的所謂「三流小報」（Gutter Press），還有足以左右政情及商業決策的「大報」如《華爾街日報》和《倫敦時報》。值得注意的是，幾乎所有「大報」都賠錢，賺大錢的「小報」因此成為新聞集團的重要財源（新聞集團旗下的「超級大報」《倫敦時報》及《倫敦周日時報》年蝕〔annual losses〕五千萬鎊，全靠《世新》及《太陽報》的盈余挹注）。由於印刷傳媒在網絡興起后，銷量即使不致急挫，亦了無起色，而廣告收益則明顯被網上廣告分薄，這種形勢，令梅鐸除了拓展旗下報章網站之外，尚開始進軍電視及電影這些必然會取代印刷媒體成為最佳現金流來源的媒介……。換句話說，梅鐸頭腦精明，眼光高遠，他從七十年代初期便有效地利用「小報」的大量現金流，向銀行融資而非開新股籌措資金進行廣泛環球性收購，終於締造了一個在英語世界發揮龐大影響力且即使負下巨債仍有不俗盈利的傳媒集團。

三、tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb" W% I1 `+ a  A% W
公仔箱論壇! O+ d+ }% q, T2 X# `* q
收購英國天空廣播（British Sky Broadcasting, BSkyB），梅鐸看中的當然「這是一家一流企業」，但最重要的是天空廣播的巨額現金進賬，去年下半年該公司的營收便達三十二億英鎊，比○九年同期增百分之十強（今年上半年的數據快將公布），目前新聞集團持有該公司約百分之三十九股權，無權支配這筆巨額現金，梅鐸因此心痒難熬，誓欲全面收購。去年新聞集團出價七十八億英鎊（此間電視說一百四十億鎊，恐誤）收購由投資銀行高盛、投資公司Invesco及沙地王子阿爾瓦德持有百分之六十一左右股權，雙方已進行多次磋商、達成協議，只待政府拍板。TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。0 a# w# `' R/ j0 u9 W' a

梅鐸「有恩」於英相卡梅倫，因此這宗足以改變英國電視媒介生態的收購，成功在望，天空廣播已是梅鐸到口的「天鵝肉」，哪知突然爆出《世報》因竊聽而關閉的丑聞，且由於其他「竊聽事件」數以千計，還牽涉該報總編輯批准記者通過私家偵探賄賂公務員的非法行徑，當局已下令組成兩個專責委員會進行徹查，一場傳媒大掃除的運動正在醞釀，導致新聞集團的這項重大收購被叫停，是卡梅倫首相自保之道。卡梅倫曾聘請○七年在一宗令《世新》皇室通訊員及一名私家偵探下獄的竊聽案時該報的總編輯庫爾森（Andy Coulson）為首相府傳媒總監（已因卷入「竊聽案」而於年初辭職），引起外間對卡梅倫與新聞集團「究竟有什麼外人不知的關系」的揣測……。與如日中天的傳媒巨擘友善，「政治加分」，如今梅鐸「大病纏身」，且病灶未明，當然宜疏遠之以求自清。卡梅倫因此必會趁機與梅鐸劃清界線。6 y& G! \" |3 y0 t; V& z  R. Q
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb2 G& e. p% R0 o+ H/ J' F
這種變化，可說大出梅鐸意外，梅鐸以給旗下編輯絕對新聞自由又能巧妙地令編輯們看他「無形之手」的指揮聞名圈內外。收購《世新》十年後，新聞集團在英國的報章主導了當地的輿論，令戴卓爾夫人於一九七九年坐上首相寶座﹔上台后她「知恩圖報」，競爭委員會遂給梅鐸收購《倫敦時報》及《倫敦周日時報》亮了綠燈﹔前年新聞集團的報刊及電視，突然從工黨擁躉轉而支持保守黨，梅鐸是卡梅倫能夠組閣的大功臣，因此，天空廣播已是他的囊中物，但機關算盡的梅鐸，這次恐怕遭逢滑鐵盧了！
& P. L9 K+ n) D! f
《世新》停刊，因「竊聽」而起，然而，「竊聽」是新聞界行之有年的「採訪」技巧。「竊聽」本為間諜特工的「專用伎倆」，但早為劇烈競爭為「獨家新聞」拚個你死我活的傳媒所採用﹔「新聞工作者」是「斯文人」，不屑亦不嫻熟這種下三流的勾當，因此多請「線人」或私家偵探進行，行不通則設法賄賂相關官員……。近的不說（事實筆者亦因沒興趣而不了解），以遙遠的英國為例，十多年前大家看得津津有味的黛安娜王妃與馬術教練（？）情人電話中互訴「奸」情、查爾斯王子與「老」情人卡米拉（Camilla，今王妃）的綿綿（肉麻之極）「性」話，所以完完整整刊諸報端，便是「竊聽者之功」。可是，當年有誰會想起要追究責任，以這些社會寄生虫做「秀」娛樂人民，是他們的本份。但《世新》的觸須伸得太遠，「竊聽」大眾同情、景仰的人，而且刪除內容，令事件惡化，傷害當事人，因此罪無可赦！5.39.217.76+ C+ o: l0 O  ?3 p) X0 l! [  B$ r/ e
: K. }: y" M! j8 x5 ?! t1 M. w6 L
《世界新聞報》竊聽案是新聞集團從高峰下墜的轉折點。
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb* E$ H: b% I3 {  k, ^
＊一向以來，人們以Tabloid形容「黃色報刊」，這是因為這類報刊大都以小張（十一吋乘十七吋）形式出之﹔近年為「方便閱讀」（尤其是在公共交通工具上展讀），不少所謂「知識分子大報」（highbrow newspaper）如《華爾街日報》已改為Tabloid大小出版，這等於說Tabloid和Broadsheet（十七吋乘二十二吋）隻有體積大小之分，與內容質量無關。本報是典型例子，《信報》是Broadsheet，隨報附送的英文EJ Insight是淺綠色的Tabloid，它沒有文化副刊、娛樂新聞，比《信報》還嚴肅（high brow），因此絕不能因其為Tabloid而稱之為「小報」﹔同理，若《信報》改為小張出版，只要內容不變，便不能稱為「小報」。按上引Tabloid和Broadsheet的呎碼，是美國的量度標准，實際上各地因新聞紙（Newsprint）的呎吋不同而略有分別。

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2011-7-12 12:19 PM

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2011-7-12 12:25 PM 編輯
5.39.217.762 _- j9 K# b5 h
This media is corrupt – we need a Hippocratic oath for journalists
George Monbiot The Guardian
公仔箱論壇; n- Y7 e+ R8 ]6 [
Is Murdoch now finished in the UK? As the pursuit of Gordon Brown by the Sunday Times and the Sun blows the hacking scandal into new corners of the old man's empire, this story begins to feel like the crumbling of the Berlin Wall. The naked attempt to destroy Brown by any means, including hacking the medical files of his sick baby son, means that there is no obvious limit to the story's ramifications.
8 Y; B+ P. D$ h" @
The scandal radically changes public perceptions of how politics works,the danger corporate power presents to democracy, and the extent to which it has compromised and corrupted the Metropolitan police, who have now been dragged in so deep they are beginning to look like Murdoch's private army. It has electrified a dozy parliament and subjected the least accountable and most corrupt profession in Britain –journalism – to belated public scrutiny.
# }. Z2 l7 o# S% g- e/ @ K
The cracks are appearing in the most unexpected places. Look at the remarkable admission by the right wing columnist Janet Daley in this week's Sunday Telegraph. "British political journalism is basically a club to which politicians and journalists both belong," she wrote. "It is this familiarity, this intimacy, this set of shared assumptions … which is the real corruptor of political life. The self-limiting spectrum of what can and cannot be said … the self-reinforcing cowardice which takes for granted that certain vested interests are too powerful to be worth confronting. All of these things are constant dangers in the political life of any democracy."
( V" s# H9 ]- k. V
Most national journalists are embedded, immersed in the society, beliefs and culture of the people they are meant to hold to account. They are fascinated by power struggles among the elite but have little interest in the conflict between the elite and those they dominate. They celebrate those with agency and ignore those without.tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb2 }+ Z' m: Q/ q
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。, b6 ~( ^) a3 V9 H) b( z
But this is just part of the problem. Daley stopped short of naming the most persuasive force: the interests of the owner and the corporate class to which he belongs. The proprietor appoints editors in his own image – who impress their views on their staff. Murdoch's editors, like those who work for the other proprietors, insist that they think and act independently.

It's a lie exposed by the concurrence of their views (did all 247 News Corp editors just happen to support the invasion of Iraq?), and blown out of the water by Andrew Neil's explosive testimony in 2008 before the Lords select committee on communications.tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb+ f' G# ^- ]8 ^* L: \6 \

The papers cannot announce that their purpose is to ventriloquise the concerns of multimillionaires; they must present themselves as the voice of the people. The Sun, the Mail and the Express claim to represent the interests of the working man and woman. These interests turn out to be identical to those of the men who own the papers.

So the right wing papers run endless exposures of benefit cheats, yet say scarcely a word about the corporate tax cheats. They savage the trade unions and excoriate the BBC. They lambast the regulations that restrain corporate power. They school us in the extrinsic values – the worship of power, money,image and fame – which advertisers love but which make this a shallower, more selfish country. Most of them deceive their readers about the causes of climate change. These are not the obsessions of working people. They are the obsessions thrust upon them by the multimillionaires who own these papers.
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb' X: T$ p" i0 \! S7 F! `
The corporate media is a gigantic astroturfing operation: a fake grassroots crusade serving elite interests. In this respect the media companies resemble the Tea Party movement, which claims to be a spontaneous rising of blue-collar Americans against the elite but was founded with the help of the billionaire Koch brothers and promoted by Murdoch's Fox News.

Journalism's primary purpose is to hold power to account. This purpose has been perfectly inverted. Columnists and bloggers are employed as the enforcers of corporate power, denouncing people who criticise its interests,stamping on new ideas, bullying the powerless. The press barons allowed governments occasionally to promote the interests of the poor, but never to hamper the interests of the rich. They also sought to discipline the rest of the media. The BBC, over the last 30 years, became a shadow of the gutsy broadcaster it was, and now treats big business with cringing deference. Every morning at 6.15, the Today programme's business report grants executives the kind of unchallenged access otherwise reserved for God on Thought for the Day.The rest of the programme seeks out controversy and sets up discussions between opponents, but these people are not confronted by their critics.

So what can be done? Because of the peculiar threat they present to democracy there's a case to be made for breaking up all majority interests in media companies, and for a board of governors, appointed perhaps by Commons committee, to act as a counterweight to the shareholders' business interests.公仔箱論壇; j1 ?: J' I7 h9 O- g7 M
! S4 i0 n- ]% R; y) c7 w3 |+ Q
But even if that's a workable idea, it's a long way off. For now, the best hope might be to mobilise readers to demand that journalists answer to them, not just their proprietors. One means of doing this is to lobby journalists to commit themselves to a kind of Hippocratic oath. Here's a rough stab at a first draft. I hope others can improve it. Ideally, I'd like to see the National Union of Journalists building on it and encouraging its members to sign." O; c) J3 w) C6 f& ^+ w
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。; P# O9 j2 q7 c* q, c( a
'Our primary task is to hold power to account. We will prioritise those stories and issues which expose the interests of power. We will be wary of the relationships we form with the rich and powerful, and ensure that we don't become embedded in their society. We will not curry favour with politicians,businesses or other dominant groups by withholding scrutiny of their affairs,or twisting a story to suit their interests.

"We will stand up to the interests of the businesses we work for,and the advertisers which fund them. We will never take money for promulgating a particular opinion, and we will resist attempts to oblige us to adopt one.

"We will recognise and understand the power we wield and how it originates. We will challenge ourselves and our perception of the world as much as we challenge other people. When we turn out to be wrong, we will say so."
公仔箱論壇6 y/ j( |+ h' d; p
I accept that this doesn't directly address the power relations that govern the papers. But it might help journalists to assert a measure of independence, and readers to hold them to it. Just as voters should lobby their MPs to represent them and not just the whips, readers should seek to drag journalists away from the demands of their editors. The oath is one possibletool that could enhance reader power.公仔箱論壇# a* X) i1 w+ q5 m- f4 `+ V6 K/ @
5.39.217.76: H8 v1 b8 r1 y; G' o
If you don't like it, suggest a better idea. Something has to change:never again should a half a dozen oligarchs be allowed to dominate and corrupt the life of this country.

作者: aa00 時間: 2011-7-12 06:51 PM

新聞自由 ≠ 免死金牌

「5W1H」是選修媒體研究課程，第一天上課講師在第一堂課就告訴學生們，一則新聞內容所包含的最基本元素。

這5W分別代表了Who,What,When,Where,Why, H則是How。媒體工作者的責任之一就是要將一件新聞事件，當中所涉及的人物，發生了什麼事，時間和地點，以及原因和它是如何發生的，清楚明白的告訴讀者和觀眾。
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb; C; u# _& o! w( U
在課堂上，講師也告訴學生們，媒體被稱為「無冕之王」，是行政、立法、司法三權外的第四權。所以，媒體的責任亦包括監督政府，用以制衡前三者，避濫權與偏誤的發生。5.39.217.76- F9 Q' @& `& j' R& F; T3 d
公仔箱論壇* b$ ~( ^0 A8 P& v
這時候，講師拋出了個問題「你的受訪者願意接受採訪，對方要求你不能錄音，但是你又要保護你自己，你該怎麼做？」5.39.217.76/ c  H% @4 l' T
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。% p" ?* S2 Q+ y( ^7 {8 V" m
課堂上，各種答案都有，甲說：「現場要有第3人在場」；乙說：「尊重受訪者的意願」；丙說：「採訪過程中，我先錄音，不讓受訪者知道。但事後會告訴對方。」
公仔箱論壇( d$ N2 y' I- s* J" B
擁168年歷史的英國小報《世界新聞報》在7月10日出版最後一期，之後正式宣告結業。原因就在於報社記者和高層逾越了身為媒體工作者該有的規範，被揭發徵聘私家偵探竊聽公眾的手機，甚至被揭賄賂員警以獲得內幕消息。
5.39.217.764 v9 s2 K/ u2 Z
曾幾何時，被視為維護公眾權益、揭發名人濫權（花邊）醜聞、受人尊敬的第四權，淪落成過街老鼠，《世界新聞報》成了全英國人的公敵，人人喊打。

而且，一粒老鼠屎壞了一鍋粥，因為前人和一些高層違反了新聞守則，結果要全報社的200多名員工因報社關閉而失業，被迫共同承擔不是他們犯下的罪行。( k6 B1 w9 W) c, t# x) ]

《世界新聞報》為亡羊補牢，提出免費版面給慈善機構打廣告，同時把最後一期的收益捐給慈善機構，但是無團體和組織願意（敢）接受這番美意。2 H3 {- [( ]6 h/ Y" |1 i# ~
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。; b8 o# y7 `( Q/ i. ~& n$ w1 e/ t
「新聞自由」的確是媒體工作者享有的基本權益和權利，也是在遭到國家機器不合理對待和打壓時，最好的護身符，但絕不是傳播業者的免死金牌。5.39.217.767 ~$ t7 u  V8 l$ {6 C

這是因為傳播的力量無遠弗屆，其影響力不容小覷，尤其是在現代科技，如網絡發達的協助下，推波助瀾的效果是難以估計的。/ v8 s0 Z; E& k/ p9 k- L1 J

另一方面，「自由」的附帶條件下，是記者跟蹤和報導的人物，是攸關公眾利益，例如一名政客包養小三、小四甚至小五，開銷花費是否有用到民脂民膏。% q+ q: k" ?1 t$ K$ Y  p

又或者是，遊行集會是民主國家人民的基本權利，警方卻暴力對待，甚至將催淚彈射到公共禁區，媒體當然有「自由」去評論或譴責涉及單位。

至於去侵犯公眾隱私、竊聽與公眾利益無關，卻只是為了刺激銷售量或收視率，滿足普羅大眾的偷窺慾，這種譁眾取寵的「自由」根本就是扭曲了「新聞自由」的基本精神和貶低了其價值。

因此，媒體工作者應該自律、自省，謹守分際，做到不讓一字失真、一語失實的公正與客觀報導，不要親手毀了那頂戴在頭上的「皇冠」！
公仔箱論壇) q1 j: I' b  T
東方群英:  薛佩菱
公仔箱論壇! p0 e& F; y/ f. d

公仔箱論壇9 M0 I; q; Z+ @6 b
來源 / 版權所有：  以上所述媒体 5.39.217.76$ A4 G; |6 ]; n+ i
(以上内容摘自或摘译自其它媒体，不代表發帖者观点)

作者: aa00 時間: 2011-7-14 04:33 PM

2011.07.13 5.39.217.76* j- d5 N4 }7 `- [

tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb3 R/ o8 ]+ k, W1 N+ c8 H; U

默多克丢了卒子也未能保车
5.39.217.768 r5 e! e3 [4 {( D; D

5.39.217.764 [% o$ D8 j, Z6 b/ R! e7 C' l

Großansicht des Bildes mit der Bildunterschrift: 美国新闻集团总裁默多克/ t/ \2 y5 Y# R& E+ y, {* X

鉴于英国政府和议会中反对派的压力，美国新闻集团总裁默多克放弃了全面收购英国最大的私人电视台BSkyB的计划。有专家认为此事是默多克这位在澳大利亚出生的美国媒体大亨所经历的最"严重的羞辱"。

公仔箱論壇6 H4 W; @) q* P3 L+ q  x+ ]
公仔箱論壇9 f! {5 \' T$ c, j+ u3 t; c% V
默多克旗下的英国报社《世界新闻报》所卷入的一系列窃听事件已经成为了英国近几年来最大的媒体丑闻。受其影响的包括皇室成员、政客、恐怖袭击事件受害者和在战场上牺牲士兵的家属。; C" D* w% l1 ?) f% g! h0 r
收购英国私人付费电视台BSkyB的计划曾被视为新闻集团历史上最有抱负的收购行动,而现在发生的这一切来的比想象的要快，默多克的新闻集团撤回了收购BSkyB的申请。这也响应了英国议会本周三（7月13日）一致提出的要求，首相卡梅伦当天在议会中表示："我认为，这家企业现在不应该把精力放在收购上，而是应该先收拾好自己的烂摊子。"
卡梅伦在下议院的发言中明确表示，将针对此丑闻展开全面、独立的调查。负责调查此案的法官莱韦森（Leveson）将获得全面的调查权限。卡梅伦保证，"他将有权传唤证人、记者、媒体企业管理人员、警察和各党派的政客。并让他们在公开的场合下宣誓作证。"公仔箱論壇- u# J* c' K0 w9 c5 c% D* D! o
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。3 D9 T, S- V" l1 d; \' h
公仔箱論壇" e! c2 x3 |) y) ?( n

Bildunterschrift: 英国警方已经开始全面调查《世界新闻报》的窃听丑闻
- t0 K0 c( W5 jtvb now,tvbnow,bttvb$ x, p  M  h- g8 Q' j7 x
英国政界重新反思政治与媒体的关系3 o% I( E1 Z. I1 Q
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。, J, M7 u$ l  Q' S

7 t7 x/ S0 w8 h
卡梅伦知道，曝光的窃听丑闻已经为英国政坛的形象带来了许多负面性的影响。许多人严厉抨击英国政坛和媒体的暧昧关系。议会中的一位普通议员说："整个事情中最令人感到不安的就是政客和媒体从业者的暧昧关系。"
这位议员用历史提醒人们，前首相布莱尔（Tony Blair）在执政期间就已经将政界与媒体的合作推向极致。因为"自从托尼·布莱尔于90年代飞往澳大利亚拜访默多克开始，各党派的领导人就认为有必要与媒体大亨们搞好关系。现在的问题是，未来的党派领导人是否还认为有必要出席这些人的生日宴会，他们是否能与这些媒体企业家保持距离。究竟是这个国家的公共利益还是媒体集团的利益能够占上风。"5.39.217.76# [8 o9 C5 }% ?1 r  ~/ E
英国首相卡梅伦承认，媒体和政治的关系已经开始朝着错误的方向发展："两者相互的关系确实已经不太正常，这种关系越来越近。人们已经用了太多的时间在媒体上宣传自己，从而没有时间去真正的解决问题。"
但是卡梅伦强调：媒体和政治相互依存的关系将仍然存在。"我们不会一下子都跑到修道院里面（面壁思过），我们需要一种关系，政客在此能够尝试让媒体接受他们自己的观点。我们的义务也包括向公众解释，我们究竟想为这个国家做些什么。民主的意义在于：在解释的过程中执行权利。为此，我们需要媒体的支持。"
因此，莱韦森法官的任务不仅仅是要查出窃听丑闻的规模和背后的指使者。他还应该为重新定位媒体与政治的关系提供建议。无论如何，默多克帝国已经失去了英国市场的份额：新闻集团仍仅持有BskyB39%的股份，而《世界新闻报》已经不复存在。
作者：Sebastian Hesse 编译:任琛公仔箱論壇6 p% H/ h# u8 x. z
责编:石涛

" a" k8 o9 m# u- J/ ]

5.39.217.765 i( ~  z& N0 X8 C

來源 / 版權所有：  德国之声8 X, g( W4 y7 ^5 L
(以上内容摘自或摘译自  德国之声，不代表發帖者观点)

作者: felicity2010 時間: 2011-7-14 11:08 PM

本帖最後由 felicity2010 於 2011-7-14 11:17 PM 編輯

News International scandal: The sky falls in
The Guardian 13 July 2011公仔箱論壇5 G" a: X% V0 @% ?, P; `% {

[attach]1426755[/attach]5.39.217.76/ f% o2 {: [% j2 L2 m
5.39.217.76+ |) ^  V) r- m  U
It is a measure of how much has been achieved in this revolutionary week that by the time David Cameron set out details of the inquiry into media and police standards on Wednesday lunchtime, and News Corporation announced it was dropping its bid for BSkyB soon after, both things seemed natural and unavoidable. A wave of public and political contempt is reshaping the landscape. At the start of the month no senior politician dared defy Rupert Murdoch. Now, all of them have. Party leaders united around the terms of the inquiry and the Labour-sponsored Commons debate – itself presaged by the collapse of the deal it had been arranged to condemn.5.39.217.76+ ~$ p- n1 U. K' {- a8 U# |
  E8 v! ^, v1 _
Yesterday Wednesday brought a drama in four acts. At prime minister's questions Mr Cameron sought unsuccessfully to rid himself of the taint of proximity to the News International executives who oversaw phone hacking, of which more in a moment. In his Commons statement, the prime minister set out the terms of an inquiry into media standards of extraordinary scope and potential. By mid-afternoon, News Corporation pulled the plug on the BSkyB deal: a victory for plurality over the power of a rootless corporation. In particular it was a success for Ed Miliband, whose decision to break with News International has become the definitive act of his leadership so far. Finally, Gordon Brown delivered a powerful speech whose justified moral outrage was only equalled by its divisive consequences in the chamber.
tvb now,tvbnow,bttvb: q8 `# h. b/ ?2 P: j4 a8 V" w' w
Mr. Brown presented himself in retrospect as a white knight who stood up to the Murdoch empire, only to be let down by the timidity of others. Not everything at the time was like that. The Brown government was far from pure in its dealings with the press. But the former prime minister was on firmer ground when he questioned Mr. Cameron's record. The prime minister's response raised further significant questions about his slapdash approach to phone hacking and the appointment of Andy Coulson as his media adviser.
5.39.217.76. m1 A+ V  w8 A0 Q7 K- @
In February 2010, this paper ran a story which should have given Mr Cameron pause for thought. For legal reasons it contained only limited details of the News of the World's decision, while Mr. Coulson was editor, to employ a private investigator who had served a seven-year sentence for perverting the course of justice and who had been charged with conspiracy to murder. Believing that Mr. Cameron should be made aware in private of the full details, the Guardian passed them to his senior adviser, Steve Hilton.
公仔箱論壇. D& u  F1 N5 D$ E: d& Q+ X2 U2 l
In the Commons, however, Mr. Cameron told MPs that the Guardian passed no significant private information about Mr. Coulson to his staff. That is incorrect. Second, he suggested that the Guardian had been able to put all the significant facts of the story in the public domain at the time. That is incorrect, too. Third, he claimed that the fact that the editor of the Guardian, Alan Rusbridger, did not mention the story to him at two later meetings implied it was not important. That is an evasion: the first meeting followed the private warning and the second took place after Mr. Coulson had resigned. Mr Cameron could have been in full possession of the facts, and acted on them, had he chosen to be. Instead he gave Mr. Coulson a job in Downing Street.
TVBNOW 含有熱門話題，最新最快電視，軟體，遊戲，電影，動漫及日常生活及興趣交流等資訊。6 T$ j- x! d7 f) c3 E3 x
This matters because at the core of the whole affair lies the shoddy and secret way in which some powerful media groups have dealt with political leaders from both main parties. In this, Mr. Cameron may not even be the greatest sinner. But he happens to be the prime minister who must address all what has gone on. He cannot do so properly while he continues to evade the truth of his own past dealings.The world is changing. Mr Murdoch's spell has been broken. The BSkyB deal is off. The inquiry can lead to a cleaner, more plural, future. Mr. Cameron is trapped by his past.

歡迎光臨公仔箱論壇 (http://5.39.217.76/)