IlluminatiNewWorldOrder1

Illuminati New World Order 1

Illuminati New World Order 1
 
Click Here For Your Up To Date World Live Sports Scores

Yahoo Money Converter into any currency

Click here to watch great I Player Features from the BBC 

including 
The American Future: A History, by Simon Schama:

What is an American?


While the 2008 presidential campaign is in full swing, Simon Schama travels through America to dig deep into
the conflicts of its history to understand what is at stake right now,,,,

International News Limited Domain Pricing Per Year
.com* $9.99 | .net* $9.99 | .org* $9.99 | .info* $9.99 | .us* $9.99 | .biz* $9.99 | .ws* $9.75 | .name* $7.95
Save even more on multi-year registrations!
Visit International News Limited for the best values on: domain names, domain transfers and more!

Click Here For Your Up To Date World Live Sports Scores

INLNews YahooMail HotMail GMail AOLMailUSA MAILYahooMail HotMailGMail AOLMail MyWayMail CNNWorld IsraelVideoNs INLNsNYTimes WashNs AustStockEx 
WorldMedia JapanNs AusNs World VideoNs WorldFinance ChinaDaily IndiaNs USADaily BBC EuroNsABCAust WANs NZNews QldNs MelbAge AdelaideNs 
TasNews ABCTas DarwinNsUSA MAIL

USA Economist 
also see 
www.YahooUSANews.com and www.YahooUKNews.com 
for world-USA-UK historical Video News for September and October 2008 

Click here for email login for YahooRealEstate.com.au

Visit International News Limited for the best values on:                     domain names, domain transfers and more!
all from $9.99


International News Limited Domain Pricing Per Year
.com* $9.99 | .net* $9.99 | .org* $9.99 | .info* $9.99 | .us* $9.99 | .biz* $9.99 | .ws* $9.75 | .name* $7.95
Save even more on 
multi-year registrations!
Visit 
International News Limited for the best values on: domain names, domain transfers and more!
FULL COVERAGE  News 
Iraq  Zimbabe  Myanmar Radovan KaradzicChina  » All Full Coverage 

ABC News Video  FOX News Video  FOXBusiness Video  CNN Video  AP Video  BBC News Video  Reuters Video  AFP Video  CNET Video
CNBC Video  Australia 7 News Video   Rocky Mountain News Elections Video  CBC.ca Video  NPR Audio  
Kevin Sites in the Hot Zone Video
Richard Bangs Adventures Video  Charlie Rose Video   Expanded Books Video  Assignment Earth Video 
ROOFTOPCOMEDY.com Video 
Guinness World Records Video  weather.com Video  AccuWeather Video  You Witness News User Video

NPR Audio BY CATEGORY Top Stories  Politics  World  Business  Sports  Technology  Health & Science  Arts  U.S. 

VIEW LOCAL VIDEO KVUE-TV Austin  WJZ 13 Baltimore  WBZ Boston  WCNC Charlotte  CBS 2 Chicago

CBS 11 Dallas  CBS4 Denver  13 News, WVEC Hampton Roads  11 News Houston  CBS 2 / KCAL 9 Los Angeles

WHAS TV11 Louisville  CBS4 Miami  WCCO Minneapolis  WWL-TV, Channel 4 New Orleans  CBS 2 New York

CBS 3 Philadelphia KTVK 3TV Phoenix  KDKA Pittsburgh  KGW NewsChannel 8 Portland, Ore.  WRAL.com Raleigh

CBS 13 / CW 31 Sacramento  KENS 5 - TV San Antonio  Channel 8 San Diego  CBS 5 San Francisco

KING5 Seattle  KREM.com Spokane/Coeur d'Alene  KMOV Channel 4 St. Louis  FOX 11 Tucson

Video by Category
U.S. Business  World  Entertainment  Sports  Tech  Politics Science Health Environment Weather Opinion  Odd 

Video by Topic Campaign '08   Wall Street  Iraq  Gas Prices  Mideast Conflict  Climate Change 

More INL News Video !Finance Sports

Hi There...Welcome to Yahoo Real Estate Click here for the cheapest real estate advertising on the internet  http://yahoorealestate.co.uk/

STUNTMAN: Jon Templeton will act as Hugh Jackman's stunt double in the film Australia. Picture: MEGAN BRAYLE


YahooMail  HotMailGMail  AOLMail  MyWayMail  CNNWorld  IsraelVideoNs  INLNs  NYTimes WashNs

  AustStockEx  WorldMedia  JapanNs  AusNs  World VideoNs  WorldFinance  ChinaDaily IndiaNs  USADaily  BBC  EuroNs  ABCAust  WANs  NZNews  QldNs  

MelbAge  AdelaideNs TasNews  ABCTas  DarwinNs USA MAIL 



 
 
Every one is dancing at 72Point.com getting ready for the 2011 New Year after a successful 2009 year as  the leading PR company in the United Kingdom


 

NWO Project Blue Beam and HEAD OF ILLUMINATI Rupert Murdoch Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS

New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46081

 NWO Project Blue Beam and HEAD OF ILLUMINATI



very interesting post. If you dont mind I have some questions and wish to further discuss this and more with you.
I understand that you may be in a position where you cant let go of your identity however please elaborate as much as possible.

To be honest, right now im a lil on the skeptic side of this however I am open to evidence and further sources.

How did you come across this information?

What involvement do you have with this?

Im sure there is alot more that you can say (if you are in the position of knowledge you say you are), please go on....


Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post


PROJECT BLUE BEAM

Project Blue Beam will work on a hybrid of media and the holographs and such use Hollywood SFX. The central hub of Blue Beam is Hollywood, CA.

One of the top guys in Project Blue Beam is Rupert Murdoch who owns News Corps. He is one of the highest ranking Illuminati guys there is and outranks the top Rothschild or Rockefeller or Bush members. President Obama is also involved in Blue Beam and his election was engineered by The Illuminati.
"The central hub of Blue Beam is Hollywood, CA."
- what do you mean by this? please can you add?

what technology specifically will be used?
I know of satelite, haarp, chemtrail, holographic tech. and E.L.F. neural frequencies to name a handful of factors that build towards "Bluebeam".

Is there anything else that we should know about on the subject of the technology that will be used ?

"President Obama is also involved in Blue Beam"
- I get that Obama is a puppet however what does obama specifically got to do with this? how will he be used to aid "project bluebeam".


Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
The point of Blue Beam is twofold: to create a new world religion, and to place power in the hands of giant multi-national corporations, of which there will be two major ones. The World Government will be secondary in power to both the World Bank and the Giant Omni-Corps like Corporation that will form. The political leaders of tomorrow will only be stooges to this corporation.

"there will be two major ones".
- this particularly caught my eye. of course the elite will want to stick to their manipulative shananigans so I can totally see why having 2 major factions, the usual jist of historic wars , however this will be more based on the "war" of the contract, seeing the further restrictions to our "freedoms".

what companies will head these 2 "rival" mega-corps.?

Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
Blue Beam will involve many aspects including the fulfillment of the Book of Revelation, aliens, and even reported time travelers. Most of it will be faked.
please can you add to this....

what events specifically in revelations?
where will these events specifically take place?
aliens? - will it be a "staged" invasion or a two-faced welcoming ceremony of our "newly found friends"?

time travellers? - please do go on...


Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
MAIN THING PEOPLE HAVE WRONG ABOUT BLUE BEAM:

Project Blue Beam is not designed to 'trick people' into thinking it is real like some people think. Instead, it turns the whole world into Entertainment and the idea is just to 'market' the new world religion like you were marketing Star Wars. They are planning to just make it an entertainment thing that people buy or watch for fun like they would The Simpsons or Star Wars or The Matrix, but it will use real people as Divine Figures.
"Instead, it turns the whole world into Entertainment and the idea is just to 'market' the new world religion like you were marketing Star Wars."
- slightly confusing, in a way you are contradicting what you just said in the paragraph previously, please elaborate on this...

"They are planning to just make it an entertainment thing that people buy or watch for fun like they would The Simpsons or Star Wars or The Matrix, but it will use real people as Divine Figures"
- sorry but this is sounding a lil silly, why and what will they be getting people to buy?
how do you mean by watch? this is tricking people, which contradicts what you had just typed. im not saying your lying im just pointing out that there needs to be alot more added to this if we are to take this as a serious warning....
what divine figures do you speak of? how do you mean? and what is it that will make these regular humans seem to be "divine"?


Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
The primary idea with Blue Beam is to take over the world with a Movie Studio.
Thats what I get from what I have researched on project bluebeam.
it is as if they wish t display a new "false reality" over this current 3rd dimension (which as many will know is currently witnessing and so to be experiencing a shift in frequency that will see our interpretation of the electro magnetic spectrum "increase" allowing us to see existence for what it really is.
anyway i can understand why the elite wish to divert us and manipulate us as much as possible in order to stop us from shifting as a collective unified consciousness.

Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
Nobody is going to know how to fight it because it uses entertainment and comedy and a lot of the times it is designed to make fools out of anyone who protests against it by turning the joke on them.
"it uses entertainment and comedy and a lot of the times "
- could you give an example of this?
im sorry but all ive seen so far from the movement of the agenda (attacks, new laws, political economic actions etc) has been nothing short of the opposite to "entertainment and comedy".

how are they going to make an "alien invasion", "revelations" "the rapture" humerous in order to divert us? while also by not tricking us? as you said was untrue of bluebeam's agenda.

Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
Some of the top key pawns in the plan will be playing outrageous characters like Borat, Sacha Baron Cohen's character, and nobody really knows how to fight against something like Borat.
qui? please specify what you mean by this?

political leaders are gonna start acting "kooky", where illuminous stretchy thongs and have bad accents??


Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
ENGINEERING OF SECOND COMING OF CHRIST:

The Second Coming of Christ is supposed to be engineered for 2012. It is a baby that will be born. They have already selected the mother for this child.

They will pass it off that the mother is from the bloodline of the original Jesus Christ, what some call the Merovingian Bloodline, and promote the birth as the fulfillment of Divine Prophecy. Their goal is to get people to see this child as the Messiah when he is just a baby.

The mother is from a rich and wealthy and powerful family. She does not know what is being planned.
by christ do you mean the "antichrist"?

who is the mother? please add more to this, this is interesting and important(in some way).

"Their goal is to get people to see this child as the Messiah when he is just a baby"
- how will they do this? what good would presenting a baby do towards helping the elites agenda?


Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
THE HEAD OF THE ILLUMINATI

I know who the head of The Illuminati is. He is very young and is only like 26 or 27. He is also Jewish. Rupert Murdoch works under him, even though Murdoch is much older than him, and he is using News Corp as part of his plan. He is reportedly like a boy genius or something. He is from New Jersey and went to Harvard.
Im sorry but you must enlighten us (or at least PM me) with who this "illuminati head" is. I can see why they would choose such an academically brainwashed individual to be the apex of there "organisation".

how will they get him into power?

where is he right now?

which country will he emerge and make himself public from?

Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
I will not say his name. He is not that famous so you might no have ever heard his name. However you can Google him and there is info on him on the internet.
how can we google him if you wont say who it is?

Quote:
Originally Posted by babablacksheep View Post
He is the guy who is going to try to be the father of the child as well and his plan is to pass his son off as The Messiah. The mother is much more famous than him because her family is a very well known family.
- please is there any more that you can add to this?




there is one thing that is not being taken into consideration here with this.....

dont over-estimate the gullibilty of the masses 

ok there are a lot of manipulated, mislead people ut there however these are things that are very trivial compared to what you have just said.

Its hard enough as it is to wake those that have not had their eyes "opened" to the "truth" let alone get them to believe that some "real life movie comedy with aliens, trime travelling, revelation, all "promoted" and displayed by "borat" like figures doin a massive advertisement for "star wars" like events that people can "buy" like pay-per-view which penultimately ammounts to the birth and worship of a messiah baby born to a young man with an aristocratic female "...........


ok, the human race are gullible but not bloody idiots. lets give them sme credit eh.

if this is honestly the gameplan of the elite then i can safely say we have got this "revolution" in the bag boys and girls then its time to kick out the jams, bring out the booze n bongs and watch the light show unfold 


look im far from ridiculing you and what you have to say and please do not take offense by it 

I would, and im sure many others to, would really appreciate it if you would enlighten us further with what you have said and please answer the questions I have provided. ive kept the questions simple just now until i see signs that this is definatly legit and worth bringing forth the more "to the point" questions.


thank you fr bringing this information forward, i look forward to your reply

good post jesta. unfortunately, the OP's post has 'self destructed' after you put your questions forward.

*cough*

please go here http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=46093




Mind
Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS



Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS
FREEMASONS



Political Leaders USA

Bill Clinton, Senior Demolay (Masonic youth group)

Newt Gingrich, 33rd Degree Freemason

Bob Dole, 33rd Degree Freemason

Jack Kemp, 33rd Degree Freemason

Storm Thurmond, 33rd Degree Freemason

Colin Powell, 33rd Degree Freemason, U.S. Secretary of State

Jesse Helms, 33rd Degree Freemason

Barry Goldwater, 33rd Degree Freemason

Al Gore, Freemason

George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James Polk, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, James Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Taft, Warren Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, Lyndon Johnson, Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and George Bush were all Masonic Presidents of the U.S.A. All this evidence will be fully documented in my "Masonic Conspiracy" page. (when completed)

Political Leaders Canada

Sir John A. MacDonald, Prime Minister of Canada 1867-1873 & 1878-1891

Sir John J.C. Abbott, Prime Minister of Canada 1891-1892

Sir Mackenzie Bowell, Prime Minister of Canada 1894-1896
Sir Robert L. Borden, Prime Minister of Canada 1911-1920
Viscount R.B. Bennett, Prime Minister of Canada 1930-1935
John G. Diefenbaker, Prime Minister of Canada 1957-1963

Political Leaders Australia
Sir Edmond Barton, Prime Minister of Australia 1901-1903
Sir George Huston Reid, Prime Minister of Australia 1904-1905
Sir Joseph Cook, Prime Minister of Australia 1913-1914
Vincent Stanley Melbourne Bruce, Prime Minister of Australia 1923-1929
Sir Earle Christmas Grafton Page, Prime Minister of Australia 1930-1939
Sir Robert Gordon Menzies, Prime Minister of Australia 1939-1941 & 1949-1966
Sir Arthur William Fadden, Prime Minister of Australia 1941
Sir John Grey Gorton, Prime Minister of Australia 1968-1971
Sir William McMahon, Prime Minister of Australia 1971-1972
Bob Hawke, Prime Minister of Australia

International Political Leaders
King Hussein, King of Jordan, deceased, 33rd Freemason
Yitzak Rabin , assassinated leader of Israel
Yassar Arafat, leader of the PLO
Prince Phillip, British Royalty
Duke of Kent, British Royalty
Winston Churchhill, British Leader

Religious Leaders
Billy Graham, World's most popular 'Christian' evangelist is a 33rd Degree Freemason
Norman Vincent Peale, 33rd Degree Freemason, ex Grand Chaplain of the Grand Lodge of New York, Past Grand Prelate of the Knights Templar and Shriner. (now deceased)
Robert Schuller, 33rd Degree Freemason, Pastor of the Crystal Cathedral and host of the popular "Hour of Power" television programme
Oral Roberts, 33rd Degree Freemason, founder of Oral Roberts University
Jesse Jackson, 33rd Degree Prince Hall Freemason
Louis Farrahkan, leader of the Nation Of Islam
Geoffrey Fisher, Archbishop of Canterbury 1945-1961
Father Francisco Calvo, Jesuit Catholic priest who started Freemasonry in Costa Rica
G. Bromley Oxnam, 33rd Degree Freemason, friend of Billy Graham, head of the FCC churches
Mormons, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints
Joseph Smith, founder of the Mormon cult
Hyrum Smith, brother of Joseph Smith
Brigham Young, 2nd leader of the Mormon cult
Sidney Rigdon, early Mormon
Heber C. Kimball, wished that all men were Freemasons
Spencer Kimball , closet Freemason, grandchild of Herber, friend of Norman Vincent Peale

Economic Leaders
Two of the World's largest international banking dynasties namely the Rothschilds and the Rockefeller family are both Masonic families. Their combined wealth is incalculable. (much more research is in progress and this list will be added to)

Leaders and Founders of Satanic Cults
Aliester Crowley, 33rd & 97th Degree Freemason, self proclaimed 666 Beast, taught human sacrafice, wicked Satan worshipper and master satanist of this century
Gerald B. Gardner, founder of the modern Wiccan (white witchcraft) revival
Dr. Wynn Westcott, member of the Societas Rosicruciana and founding member of the occult Order of the Golden Dawn
Helena Petrovna Blavatsky, female co-freemason, wicked satanist, occult leader and co-founder of the Theosophical Society. Wrote occult classics entitled 'The Secret Doctrine' and 'Isis Unveiled' which state "It is Satan who is the God of our planet and the only God. Lucifer represents...Life...Thought...Progress...Civilization...Libe rty...Independance...Lucifer is the Logos...the Serpent, the Savior". I have recieved evidence that this book is issued inside Masonic Lodge libraries and is being read by Masons and will present the proof soon.

Other Famous Freemasons 
Rich DeVos, 33 Degree Freemason, founder of the Amway Corporation
Franz Anton Mesmer, practiced Mesmerism which led to Hypnotism
George Bush, 33rd Degree Freemason, ex-president of the USA, ex-director of the CIA
J. Edgar Hoover, 33rd Degree Freemason, Director of the FBI
Walt Disney, founder of the Disney Corporation
Giuseppe Mazzini, Italian Illuminati leader, friend of Albert Pike, founder of the Mafia

[link to www.whale.to] nOfficial 2012 Countdown: Welcome to the World's Biggest Party!!! [link to www.maya12-21-2012.com]

in5D: [link to www.in5d.com] nNew YouTube Channel: [link to www.youtube.com] 2012 The Online Movie: [link to www.youtube.com]

Re: Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS Quote

US-PRESIDENTS: George Washington, James Monroe, Andrew Jackson, James Polk, James Buchanan, Andrew Johnson, James Garfield, William McKinley, Theodore Roosevelt, William Howard Taft, Warren G. Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Lyndon B. Johnson, Gerald R. Ford.

POLITICAL LEADERS WORLD WIDE: Winston Churchill, Simon Bolivar, Edmund Burke, Benito Juarez, Edward VII, Geroge VI, Bernardo O'Higgins, José de San Martin, Francisco de Paula Santander, José Rizal, José Marti, Pandit Nehru, Lajos Kossuth, Jonas Furrer, Guiseppe Mazzini, Eduard Benes, John A. MacDonald, Aaron Burr, George McGovern, Barry Goldwater, Estes Kefauer, Thomas E. Dewey, Alf Landon, Hubert H. Humphrey, Wendel Wilke, W.E.B. DuBois, William Jennings Bryant, King Hussein of Jordan, Yasser Arafat, Francois Mitterand, Helmut Kohl, Gerhard Shroeder, Tony Blair, Yikzak Rabbin, Cecil Rhodes, Sir John J.C. Abbott, Stephen F. Austin, John G. Diefenbaker, Samuel J. Ervin Jr. (Watergate committee), Benjamin Franklin, John Hancock, Patrick Henry, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Sam Nunn, Lowell Thomas (brough Lawrence of Arabia to pub. not.), Gov. George C. Wallace, Strom Thurman, Jesse Helms, Robert Dole, Jack Kemp, Al Gore, Prince Phillip (GB), Zbigniew Brzezinski, Lord Peter Carrington, Andrew Carnegie, W. Averell Harriman, Henry Kissinger, Richard D. Heideman, Robert McNamara.

MILITARY LEADERS: Omar Bradley, John J. Pershing, Douglas McArthur, General Winfield Scott, Captain Eddie Rickenbacker, Jimmy Doolittle, General Mark Clarkem General George C. Marshall, General Henry "Hap" Arnold, John Paul Jones, Afred von Tirpitz (submarine warfare)

ARTISTS AND ENTERTAINERS: W.A. Mozart, Leopold Mozart, Ludwig van Beethoven, Jean Sibelius, Franz Liszt, Josef Haydn, Irving Berlin, Gutzon Borglum, Charles Peale, Alfons M. Mucha, Richard Wagner, John Philip Sousa, Gilbert & Sullivan, George Gershwin, George M. Cohen, Count Basie, Louise Armstrong, Nat King Cole, Giacomo Meyerbeer, Sigmund Romberg, John Wayne, Red Skelton, Clarke Gable, W.C. Fields, Will Rogers, Burl Ives, Roy Rogers, Danny Thomas, Ernest Borgnine, Oliver Hardy, Tom Mix, Audie Murphy, Gene Autry, Wallace Beery, Eddie Cantor, Roy Clarke, George M. Cohan, Walt Disney, Duke Ellington, Douglas Fairbanks, Leonardo da Vinci, Arthur Godfrey, Bob Hope, Harry Houdini, Al Jolson, Elmo Lincoln (Tarzan), Harold C. Lloyd,.jr, Tom Mix, Ronald Reagan, Will Rogers, Peter Sellers, William Shakespeare, Charles "Tom Thumb" Stratton, Paul Whiteman (King of Jazz), William Wyler (dir. of Ben Hur), Cecil B. DeMille, Sir Arthur Sullivan, John Zoffany.

MOVIE INDUSTRY: Jack Warner, Louise B. Mayer (MGM), Darryl F. Zanuck (20th Century Fox)

INDUSTRY, TRADE, BANKING AND LABOR: Henry Ford, Samuel Gompers, Walter P. Chrysler, John Wanamaker, S.S. Kresge, J.C. Penney, John Jacob Astor, John L. Lewis, Pehr G. Gyllenhammar (Volvo), Percy Barnevik (ABB), André Citroën, Samuel Colt (Colt revolver), Edwin L. Drake (oil), Rockefeller family, Rothschild family, King C. Gillette (Razors), Charles C. Hilton (Hilton hotels), Sir Thomas Lipton (Tea), Harry S. New (Airmail), Ransom E. Olds (Oldsmobile), David Sarnoff (father of TV), John W. Teets, Dave Thomas (Wendy's Rest.), Edgar Bronfman Jr. (Seagram Whiskey), Rich DeVos (Amway), Alan Greenspan (Fed. Reserve), Giovanni Agnelli (FIAT), Peter Wallenberg (SE-Bank Sweden)

ADVENTURERS: Lewis & Clarke, Charles A. Lindbergh, Kit Carson, Roald Amundsen, Admiral Richard Byrd, Commodore Robert Peary, Kit Carson, Casanova, William "Buffalo Bill" Cody, Davy Crockett, Meriwether Lewis, Robert E. Peary (Northpole)

PHILOSOPHERS: Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Gotthold E. Lessing, Voltaire

ASTRONAUTS: Buzz Aldrin, Leroy Gordon Cooper, Donn Eisele, Virgil I. Grissom, Edgar D. Mitchell, Walter Schirra Jr., Thomas P. Stafford, Paul Weitz, James Irvin, John Glenn

WRITERS: Mark Twain, Sir Walter Scott, Rudyard Kipling, Robert Burns, Wassily I. Maikow, Heinrich Heine, Jean P.C. de Florian, Leopoldo Lugoner, Antonio de Castro Alves, James Boswell, Alexander Pushkin, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, Jonathan Swift, Oscar Wilde, Jules Verne, H.G. Wells, Robert Burns, Carlo Collodi (Pinoccio), Edward Gibbon, Francis Scott Key (US NAtional Anthem), Rudyard Kipling, Felix Salten (Bambi), Lewis Wallace (Ben Hur), Alexander Pope

MEDICINE: Alexander Fleming (Penicillin), Jules Bordet, Antoine DePage, Edward Jenner, Charles & William Mayo, Karl & William Menninger, Karl A. Menninger (psychiatrist), Andrew T. Still (Osteopathy)

SCIENCE: Carl Sagan, Hans C. Orsted, J.J Frk. von Berzelius, Alfred Edmund Brehms, Luther Burbank, Johan Ernst Gunnerus, Albert Abraham Michelson (measured speed of light), Gaspard Monge, C.F.S. Hahnemann, Pedro N. Arata, Alexandre Gustave Eiffel, Jame Smithson, John Fitch (Steamboats), Joseph Ignance Guillotin (inventor of the Guillotin), Edward Jenner (vaccin), Simon Lake (submarine), Franz Anton Mesmer (Hypnotism), Albert Einstein, A.J. Sax (saxophone)

LAW: Henry Baldwin, Hugo L. Black, John Blair Jr., Samuel Blatchford, Harold H. Burton, James F. Byrnes, John Catton, Thomas C. Clarke, John H. Clarke, William Cushing, Willis van Devanter, William O. Douglas, Oliver Ellsworth, Stephen J. Field, John M. Harlan, RObert H. Jackson, Joseph E. Lamar, Thurgood Marshall, Stanley Matthews, Sherman Minton, Tom Mix, William H. Moody, Samuel Nelson, William Paterson, Mahlon Pitney, Stanley F. Reed, Wiley B. Rutledge, Potter Stewart, Noah H. Swayne, Thomas Todd, Robert Trimble, Frederick M. Vinson, Earl Warren, Levi Woodbury, William B. Woods

OTHERS: Frederic A. Bartholdi (designed the Staue of Liberty), Daniel Carter Beard (founder of Boy Scouts), Cornelius Hedges (Yellowstone Nat.Park), James Hoban (architect U.S Captial), James Naismith (basketball), Paul Revere (famous American), Rupert Murdoch (media mogul)

EDUCATION: Robert E.B. Baylor, Leland Stanford (Railroads & Stanford University)

RELIGIOUS LEADERS: Father Francisco Calvo (Jesuit Cat. Priest), Geoffrey Fisher (Canterbury), Billy Graham, Rev. Jesse Jackson, Joseph Fort Newton, Robert Shuller, Oral Roberts, Louise Farrahkan (Nation of Islam), G. Bromley Oxman (friend of Billy Graham), Joseph Smith (Mormon cult), Hyrum Smith (Brother), Brigham Young (2nd leader of Mormon cult), Sidney Rigdon (early Mormon), Heber C. Kimball, Spencer Kimball, Aleister Crowley (Satanist), Gerald B. Gardner (Wiccan), Wynn Westcott (Golden Dawn)

ORGANIZATIONS: Jean Henry Dunant (Red Cross), Melvin Jones (Lions Int.), Giuseppe Mazzini (Ital. Illuminati leader), Albert Pike (Ku Klux Klan)

INTELLIGENCE: J. Edgar Hoover, William Casey

[link to www.illuminati-news.com] Official 2012 Countdown: Welcome to the World's Biggest Party!!! [link to www.maya12-21-2012.com]

in5D: [link to www.in5d.com]

New YouTube Channel: [link to www.youtube.com]

2012 The Online Movie: [link to www.youtube.com

Re: Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS Quote

lol @ Burl Ives "Have a holly, jolly Christmas..."
Official 2012 Countdown: Welcome to the World's Biggest Party!!! [link to www.maya12-21-2012.com]

in5D: [link to www.in5d.com] New YouTube Channel: [link to www.youtube.com]

2012 The Online Movie: [link to www.youtube.com

Re: Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS Quote

Initial List of 33rd Degree Masons

Albert Pike addressing the 23 Supreme Councils of the world on July 14, 1889:- "To you, Sovereign Grand Instructors General, we say this, that you may repeat it to the Brethren of the 32nd, 31st and 30th degrees: 'the Masonic Religion should be, by all of us initiates of the high degrees, maintained in the purity of the Luciferian Doctrine. . ."

It is said that only two U.S. Presidents: Abraham Lincoln and John Kennedy, were not either Masons or elite members of affiliated bodies

(King) Umberto Agnelli
Buzz Aldrin
Yasser Arafat
(Patriarch) Athenagoras I
Gene Autry
Tobias Axelrod
Foster Bailey
Admiral G.W. Baird
Achille Ballori
M.H. Barroso
Bernard Mannes Baruch
Harry L. Baum
Justice Hugo Black
Jonathan Blanchard
Tony Blair
John Wilkes Booth
John C. Breckinridge
George Herbert Walker Bush
Senator Byrd
Plutarco Elias Calles
James Cameron
Jimmy Carter
Sir Winston Churchill
Henry Clausen
William J. Clinton
Howell Cobb
James B. Conant
Copin-Albancelli
John H. Cowles
Adolphe Cremieux
Francesco Crispi
Aleister Crowley
Delmar Darrah
Morris B. de Pass
Richard DeVos (Amway)
Walt. Disney
Sen. Bob Dole
General James Doolittle
Gerard (Papus) Encausse
Frederick Engels
Senator Sam J. Ervin
Gerald Rudolf Ford
(King) Frederick II
Giuseppe Garibaldi
Newt. Gingrich
John Glenn
Barry Goldwater
Mikhail Gorbachev
Al Gore
J.J.J. Gourgas
Rev. Billy Graham
James Graham
Col. James "Bo" Gritz
Manly P. Hall
Mark Hatfield
Jesse Helms
Christian A. Herter
Richard Holbrooke
J. Edgar Hoover
Col. Edward Mandell House
King Hussein
Saddam Hussein
Burl Icle Ives
Jessie James
Rev. Jesse Jackson
Lyndon Baines Johnson
Jack Kemp
Duke Michael of Kent
Alexander Kerensky
Spencer Kimball
Henry Kissinger
C. Fred Kleinknecht
Kenneth S. Kleinknecht
Helmut Kohl
Arnoldo Krumm-Heller
Adriano Lemmi
Vladimir Lenin
McIlyar H. Lichliter
Gen. Douglas MacArthur
Sir Henry MacMahon
Robert McNamara
Vasili Maklakov
Domenico Margiotta
Thurgood Marshall
James G. Martin
Karl Marx
(Baron) Yves Marsaudon
Joseph Mazzini
Lord Alfred Milner
Francoir Mitterand
Henry Morgenthau
Benjamin Netanyahu
G. Bromley Oxnam
Olof Palme
Henry Palmerston
Shimon Peres
Albert Pike
Dr. Norman Vincent Peale
Prince Phillip
Roscoe Pound
(Gen.) Colin L. Powell
Yitzak Rabin
Ronald Reagan
Joseph Rettinger
Harman Gansvort Reynolds
Marshall S. Reynolds
Michel Reyt
Cecil Rhodes
Oral Roberts
Franklin D.Roosevelt
Paul Rosen
James Rothschild
Charles Taze Russell
Bishop Carl J. Sanders
Jacob Schiff
Bill Schnoebelen
Gerhard Schroeder
Rev. Robert Schuller
James D. Shaw
Senator Simpson
Joseph Stalin
Rudolph Steiner
R.W. Thompson
Storm Thurmond
Leon Trotsky
Harry S. Truman
Pierre G. Vassal
Paul Moritz Warburg
Earl Warren
George Warvelle
H.G. Wells
William Wynn Westcott
Earl Wheeler
Leo Wheeler
John Yarker
Brigham Young

[link to www.biblebelievers.org.au]
Official 2012 Countdown: Welcome to the World's Biggest Party!!! [link to www.maya12-21-2012.com] in5D: [link to www.in5d.com]
New YouTube Channel: [link to www.youtube.com]
2012 The Online Movie: [link to www.youtube.com

Re: Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS Quote

Morals and Dogma Freemasonry Handbook:

[link to www.freemasons-freemasonry.com] Official 2012 Countdown: Welcome to the World's Biggest Party!!!
[link to www.maya12-21-2012.com]

in5D: [link to www.in5d.com]

New YouTube Channel: [link to www.youtube.com]

2012 The Online Movie:
[link to www.youtube.com

Re: Mind Control, Freemasonry and Illuminati Texts: FAMOUS FREEMASONS Quote

Deeper Insights into the Illuminati Formula

small exceprt

full version is available online at:
[link to educate-yourself.org]

IF THERE IS ANY CHANCE you the reader have had mind-control done to you, you must consider the following book to be DANGEROUS. If you are consulting a therapist for DID (also known as MPD), it is recommended that you consult your therapist before reading this book. The complications that could result for those under mind control learning the truth--could be fatal. The co-authors take no responsibility for those who read or misuse this information. The reader’s mind is like a garden. It may not be time to plant the truth in your mind. Perhaps you need some weeding or ground preparation, before the garden of your mind is ready. Perhaps the weather is too stormy to plant the truth. Pray to the Lord of the Harvest. The blessings that flow from planting the information of this book in your mind, will require the presence of living waters of love. If you do not have love in your heart, this book is not for you. The information contained in this book is the biggest news-story of the 20th century, and still the biggest secret. It will challenge you, shock you, horrify you and hopefully motivate you to redouble your efforts to humble yourself and seek strength from God Almighty.

INTRODUCTION by Fritz

There are many dangers to the human race, some real and some imagined. I believe that the trauma-based mind control which this book exposes is the greatest danger to the human race. It gives evil men the power to carry out any evil deed totally undetected. By the time the astute reader finishes this book, they will be as familiar with how to carry out trauma-based mind-control as some of the programmers. Ancient and more recent secrets will no longer be secrets. Over the years, I have spent thousands of hours studying the Illuminati, the Intelligence agencies of the world, and the occult world in general. The centerpiece of these organizations is the trauma-based mind control that they carry out. Without the ability to carry out this sophisticated type of mind-control using MPD, drugs, hypnosis and electronics and other control methodologies, these organizations would fail to keep their dark evil deeds secret. When one of the mind-control programmers of the Church of Scientology, who has left Scientology, was asked about MPD, he said, "It’s the name of the game of mind control." Research into this subject will never be complete. This book has tried to give a comprehensive view of how the programming is done. The basic techniques were developed in German, Scottish, Italian, and English Illuminati families and have been done for centuries. Some report that some of the techniques go back to ancient Egypt and ancient Babylon to the ancient mystery religions. The Nazis are known to have studied ancient Egyptian texts in their mind control research. The records and secrets of the generational Illuminati bloodlines are very-well guarded secrets.

Even when I’ve learned about the location of secret depositories of some of the Illuminati’s secrets in Europe, America, and Asia, their records and secrets are too well-guarded to be examined. The intelligence agencies, such as MI-6 began investigating these mind-control techniques early this century, but their records have been routinely destroyed and tampered with. There are some survivors and professionals who know that the British used programmed trauma-based MPD (DID) agents in W.W. I. In Jan., 1987, Richard Kluft submitted an article to the American Journal of Clinical Hypnosis about 8 MPD patients who were between 60 and 72 years of age. Traugott Konstantin Oesterreich (1880-1949), who was professor of philosophy at Tubingen University, Germany studied MPD and demonic possession and wrote a classic study of it in 1921 entitled Possession Demonical & Other, which was translated into english in 1930. His classic work on this subject provides documented cases which reveal that the basic trauma-based mind-control was going on in Germany, France & Belgium long before the 20th century. Although he is unable to put together all the pieces and the clues for what they are, the reader of this book might enjoy reading the 1930 English translation of his classic work after they finish this book. Oesterreich’s research in early 1900s was the type of research that the Nazi mind-control programmers were very aware of. In 1921, the Germans such as Oesterreich would describe personality switches, by the term "somnambuliform [hypnotic states] possession" or "demonical somnambulism" or what might be called "Besessenheit von Hypnotismus und bösen Geistern."

The ability to study both the spiritual & psychological aspects of mind-control phenomena, is often lacking today. There are exceptions such as Dr. Loreda Fox’s book The Spiritual Dimensions of MPD. In the 1920s, the Germans also were aware that the human mind has a variety of ego-psycho-psysiological states rather than one unified mind, which they termed "Sub jecklose Psychologie" or the psychology of having correlated psychological states rather than the concept of a single ego. The Germans and Italians under the Nazi and Fascist governments began to do serious scientific research into trauma-based mind control. Under the auspices of the Kaiser Wilhelm Medical Institute in Berlin, Joseph Mengele conducted mind-control research on thousands of twins, and thousands of other hapless victims. Himmler supervised genetic research. The Nazi research records were confiscated by the Allies and are still classified. A trip can be made from downtown Washington D.C. on a gray-government van which serves as a shuttle to the Suitland Annex where the government’s secrets are buried including research papers captured from the Nazi Mind-Control research. Most of Mengele’s concentration camp research is still classified. Much of it dealt with mind control. A researcher can visit the top floor, but underground below the top floor are the real secrets. The real secrets are lying in millions of sheets of classified documents hidden behind blast proof doors. There they have vault after vault, and row after row of top-secret files that only a few privileged persons with security clearances above COSMIC--such as with a "C3" or "MJ" security clearance can visit. Everyone with these high security clearances which I have identified is connected to the Illuminati. Each underground area at Suitland Annex has its own subset of secret access words, known only to the initiated. Most of the OSS records have been destroyed, a few have been left, the important ones have been misfiled or remade. (This is according to a reliable British intelligent agent.) Also according to reliable inside sources the CIA is working night and day to remake old records, to expunge all the real dirty secrets from their records. The basement of CIA HQ is known as "the Pit," In the Pit documents are being shredded and burned on a round the clock basis. The large remains of these secrets are sold for landfill. The Illuminati have developed secrecy to a fine art. They train their people in the art of secrecy from the time they are born. Most everything they do, is done orally. They are trained not to write rituals and other things down. There is very little paper trail left by the Illuminati.

The creation of slaves with photographic memories facilitates this secrecy. But this book is not about how they have managed to keep their trauma-based Monarch Mind-Control a secret. They have managed only to keep it a secret to the general public. They have not been able to completely cover-up the millions of wasted lives that their programming has ruined. For many years, they were able to shut-up and quietly discard their programmed multiples by labelling them Paranoid Schizophrenics. But therapists are now correctly identifying these people as programmed multiples and are not only diagnosing them better but giving them better treatment. After Candy Jones’s husband deprogrammed her enough that she could participate in writing a book exposing some of what had been done to her, the secret was out. (See The Control of Candy Jones Hypnotism and the CIA by Donald Bain.) Ever since then, the intelligence agencies and the Illuminati have been carrying out damage control. Their biggest damage control campaign has enlisted the power of Hollywood and the controlled Media. This campaign is known as the False Memory Syndrome campaign, or as those of us who know the facts like to call it ""the false memory spin-drome." The headquarters of the False Memory Spin-drom Foundation is located at 3401 Market St., Suite 130, Philadelphia, PA 19104. Some of the original founders were doctors of the University of Pennslyvannia. The inside story about these early FMS doctors of the University of Pennslyvannia is that they practiced Satanic Rituals during their work days. What is unusual about this--is that generally satanic rituals are performed at night, but these doctors did their coven work during the day. I know about these men. Now you can see why these men started the FMS! They started it to cover their own sins, because many of them were abusers themselves. In other words many of the EMS people are abusers of trauma-based mind-controlled slaves, or the victims of abuse who are in denial about their own abuse from trauma-based mind-control. Martin T. Orn (the person credited with founding the FMS) had ties to the CIA. Two members of the EMS advisory board, Ralph Underwager, Ph.D. and theologian, along with Hollida Wakefield, M.A. let the cat out of the bag when they publicly supported pedophilia (that is adults having sex with children). Their support of pedophilia came in an interview with a Dutch magazine Paidika, The Journal of Paedophilia (Winter, 1993).

Although the False Memory Syndrome Foundation gets upset at any mention that there might be a conspiracy by the perpetrators of mind-control, because conspiracies supposedly don’t and can’t happen, they want us to believe that all therapists are conspiring together to implant false memories of abuse into their clients, which could not be further from the truth. Monarch slaves typically run into a great deal of denial by their therapists that anything like this could be happening. The bottom line is that Multiple Personality Disorder (now refered to as Dissociative Identity Disorder) is a recognized bona fide diagnosis. False Memory Syndrome is not a recognized medical or psychological diagnosis and does not appear in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual III-R nor the recently released DSM-IV. Those who followed Fritz’s writings have learned about the close working relationship between the Mondavi’s and the Rothschilds (see his article about the Mondavi/Rothschild Napa Valley winery). Guess who got the court precedence which gives the EMS some legal ground to attack therapists? The precidence was supposedly a wife who went to a doctor who told her she had syphilis. The wife assumes she got it from her husband and divorces him. Then she learns she doesn’t have syphilis. The husband then sues the doctor. Upon this bizarre case rests the legal precedence for a third party to sue a person who gives advice, such as family members suing a therapist.

Upon this weak precidence, an abusive father who worked for Monday in a winery in California successfully destroyed a legitimate therapist who was trying to save his daughter who was a programmed Monarch victim. Supposedly the therapist had implanted false memories of rape in his daughter, when the record shows that the daughter’s mother told the therapist the girl had been raped by the father. When a valid case of SRA and repressed memories went to trial in Washington state involving a police officer whose family was MPD, Dr. Richard Ofshe of the False Memory Spindrom showed up to cause mischief. And mischief he did work. The case involved the children of a ""Christian"" police officer named Ingram who had satanically ritually abused his family for years. The daughter won in court, but Ofshe of the EMS was not above writing a book full of lies and distortions about the case. Lynn Crook, who was the abused daughter in the case wrote up a paper exposing what EMS person Richard Ofshe did to her, The controlled media is giving full license and great coverage to the EMS people. Rather than fighting the government for scraps of declassified documents which have had their secrets marked out, and which may even be fake documents manufactured by the CIA, I have decided that there is a much better approach to expose the Monarch Mind Control to the world. If a person could never go to Nepal, he can see pictures of it and believe it exists. If a person can not get into the top secret records of the CIA and Office of Naval Intelligence and MI6, they can be given the exact RECIPE for creating a Monarch slave. I believe that by giving the step by step recipe, people will see that A. all the ingredients are available, B. it is possible to combine the ingredients, C. all it takes is the motive to do it, and that motive is self-evident. We’ll even provide some of the names and places as we go along. This book will provide the step-by-step recipe for making a Monarch Mind-Controlled slave, It is a trauma-based mind control which programs multiple personalities using every known technique of mind-control. Every type of mind-control technique has been combined into a group package which makes the total package almost impossible to break. It is this ability to synthesize all these methods into a group package which is so powerful.

Edward Hunter, author of Brainwashing In Red China, testified in 1958 before a U.S. Congressional House Committee on Un-American Activities: "Since man began, he has tried to influence other men or women to his way of thinking. There have always been these forms of pressure to change attitudes. We discovered in the past thirty years, a technique to influence, by clinical, hospital procedures, the thinking processes of human beings. Brainwashing is formed out of a set of different elements ... hunger, fatigue, tenseness, threats, violence, and in more intense cases...drugs and hypnotism. No one of these elements alone can be regarded as brain washing, any more than an apple can be called apple pie. Other ingredients have to be added, and a cooking process gone through. So it is with brainwashing..." Hunter said brainwashing was a Red Chinese threat. He said that the chinese were the ones using these tactics. In reality, this mind control was being done in the U.S. and Hunter was a pawn to help justify the criminal activities of the programmers should they ever be found out behind their cover of "National security." The handlers of mind-controlled slaves carry around a black or grey 3 ring notebook or a lap top computer with the access codes and triggers. Some of the programmers and handlers have this all memorized. The deepest parts, core/gems/executive committee, false trinity etc. are charted in esoteric language such as Enochian, Hebrew (which is considered magical), and Druid symbols. I have never gotten the opportunity to look at one of these, although a number of the slaves who I’ve talked with have while they were being programmed. These notebooks have color-coded graphs showing the arrangement of alters, the structure of the system, the training of the alters, the history of the alters and other details. All the primary tortures carried out on a slave are coded using dates/no.s so that the memories can be pulled up by the programmers. There is a standard set of hand signals, gestures, and codes that allow a handler to work with someone else’s slave, but the accepted code among the handlers is to leave another man’s slave alone. As one leading psychiatrist put it, "Different ideologies use the same methodologies of mind control."

The Illuminati have secretly put in base programming that allows them ultimate control over many of the other groups’ slaves. This will be described within this book.

For both the ease of reading and the ease of writing, I have dispensed with most footnotes. To provide my sources would double the size of the book, and many of them are confidential. (In the past, when I have attempted crediting information, some people have gotten bruised feelings for having been passed over or for being named. When information comes in from several sources, it becomes difficult to pass out credit.) I have made conservative judgement calls about what material I could use. Most of this information has been verified by several reliable sources. Confidential eyewitnesses are often the only source, when there is such a powerful conspiracy to keep this vast NWO mind control secret. Paper trails were not left or are not available. Programmed slaves who have worked for the military as mind-controlled slaves have witnessed their files expunged and sanitized. The New World Order in 1981 made training films for their novice programmers. Monarch slave Cathy O’Brien was used to make both the film "How to Divide a Personality" and "How To Create a Sex Slave." Two Huntsville porn photographers were used to help NASA and the NWO create these training films. Undoubtedly, other porn training films exist too. In others words, there is film evidence of the Monarch Total Mind-control but these porn films are kept in very secure sites. During the last few years, I have visited with ex-programmers, I have visited with hundreds of victims of the Monarch type programming. I have gone to programming sites, I have visited with therapists who work with the victims of this mind-control, and I have met several of the programmers of the CIA/Illuminati face to face in the adventures of trying to save people from their programming.

I hope that God gives me the strength and the opportunity to get the information I have learned out to the world in general. When this information gets out, hopefully it will help lift some of the secrecy of the Monarch Programming. The Monarch Programming is a foundation rock of the New World Order that when pulled up, will reveal the most evil two-legged bugs and slimy critters. When their rock is lifted, they will have to scurry to hide. Because the authors know what the programmers do, they must honestly record several areas of programming that will be controversial. The programmers are very much into demonology. Before therapists close their minds to this subject, the authors would like to point out, that they personally know of cases where Monarch slaves whose Christian personalities & other alters didn’t believe in demonology were talked into participating in real deliverance, and the slaves discovered much to their surprise that work they had unsuccessfully tried to do for years with their therapist was accomplished in a day or two. Some prestigious researchers have decided the subconscious doesn’t exist because they can’t find it--its mysterious. To the man in the street the concept "subconscious" is as mysterious as the concept "demon". Both have been the objects of intense research by U.S./Brit./Ger. Intelligence groups. In fact, many of the concepts in this book have been purposely obscurred by the Illuminati’s control over the media and universities. These obscurred concepts include M.P.D. (DID), recovered memories, hypnosis, demonic possession, aliens, mind-control, the subconscious, a conspiracy to bring in a NWO, truth, etc. The smokescreens of controversy will continue; but those who love the truth, if they seek it, will realize the importance of this book. It’s on public record that MK ULTRA, the mind control research which CIA director Admiral Stansfield Turner admitted to in 1977 spent millions of dollars studing Voodoo, witchcraft, and psychics. On August 3, 1977, at a Senate hearing the then CIA director Admiral Stansfield Turner disclosed that the CIA had been conducting mind control on countless numbers of unsuspecting victims for years, without their knowledge or consent. These CIA mind-control operations were carried out with the participation of a least 185 scientists and at least 80 American institutions, including prisons, pharmaceutical companies, hospitals, and 44 medical colleges & universities. Many of America’s most prestigious institutes of medical research, had cooperated with the CIA. as well as numerous big name corporations. Casey admitted that day that the CIA did mind-control consisting of drugs, hypnosis & electro-shock. A few of the victims of the Monarch Project were even awarded financial compensation for their misery. But what was admitted was admitted in the spirit of covering up the extent of the full truth. The compensation was actually hush money, because victims were given "gag orders" by judges not to talk about what had happened to them. It’s been a disaster for Monarch victims that so many ministers have ignored those words of their Scripture, "For we are not ignorant of the devil’s devices." 2 COR 2:11 This book is a must for those ministers who seriously believe "Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting holiness in the fear of God." 2 COR 7:1. In 2 TIM 2: 19-21, believers who "nameth the name of Christ" are asked to purge themselves of their uncleanliness ( unclean spirits). There are many top notch Christians in the churches today who are under mind-control, incl. many of the Christian leadership. I would like to remind Christian ministers that Isaiah the great prophet said, "The Lord GOD hath given me the tongue of the learned that I should know how to speak a word in season to him that is weary: he wakeneth morning by morning; he wakeneth mine ear to hear as the learned." Ignorance is not godliness. Isaiah learned to speak with the great learned men of his day, just as Paul the great apostle could speak to the learned men of his time. One of the character traits of God is that He is all-knowing. WHO says it is godly to be ignorant? The prophet Daniel said Yahweh God "reveals the deep and secret things." (Dan. 2:22a) God’s instruments will do this revealing. Jesus’ advice to his disciples was in effect to "Be wise as serpents, and gentle as a lamb". This advice certainly applies in helping the victims of trauma-based mind-control. Paul in his letter to the Thessalonians (1 Thes 5:14) says that in effect that different people need different counseling, but they all need to be treated with patience. The first step in suggesting a cure is to find out what happened. That is what this book is about. This book is about how the Occult Network creates the problem that therapists and a few ministers try to deal with. But the keys to open doors to healthy solutions for the victims of trauma-based total mind control will reveal themselves in this book for the reader as this book reveals the nitty-gritty of how the total mind-control happens. Christ came to free the captives (Isaiah 61:1). Satanic ritual abuse has a history that is almost as old as history itself. Good King Hezekiah was a victim as a child of SRA. (2 Chr. 29) who got free. Moses confronted the satanic magic of Pharoah’s magicians who could create live snakes from sticks. The Apostle Paul had to deal with Simon Magus, a leader of what is now known as Satanism. Solomon, one of the greatest men of faith, backslide and became one of the greatest satanists of all history. We have "no fellowship with unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them" (as per EPH 5:11). While we have no fellowship with evil, the mind-control programmers are counting on us being so ignorant of their devices that they can hide their control devices behind perversion & filth that many people shy away from. We must be strong enough to face evil and not shy away from it. The victims of mind-control must look evil in the face & not look away to gain their freedom. We, who want to help them, must be courageous & strong enough to do this too. This book is written for that divine goal "till we all come in the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." Eph. 4:13 If the body of Christ is to attain fullness, we need this book to weed out the hidden terrible cancer that is consuming the body from within. This book is written for ministers, secular and Christian therapists, and truth lovers of all kinds. If you love the truth this book is for you. If you see something good in the human race so that our species should be preserved as well as the spotted owl and the sand flea, then this book is for you. IF YOU LOVE THE TRUTH, this BOOK is for YOU.
Official 2012 Countdown: Welcome to the World's Biggest Party!!! [link to www.maya12-21-2012.com]

in5D: [link to www.in5d.com] New YouTube Channel: [link to www.youtube.com

New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part One


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part Two


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained -  Part Three


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained -  Part Four


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part Five

New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part Six

New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part Seven


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part Eight


New World Order -Illuminati -Freemason-Bilderberg -Trilaterial Commission -Council On Foreign Relations Explained - Part Nine 
 
 

Father and Sun: how the Murdoch dynasty handover crippled Labour



James Robinson


James Robinson is Observer media editor. He was previously deputy business editor at the Sunday Express and worked as a reporter for Sunday Business and, before that, the Birmingham Post. He supports West Bromwich Albion

Father and Sun: how the Murdoch dynasty handover crippled Labour
The extraordinary run-in between the Sun and the prime minister over Afghanistan last week was a sign of a more aggressive approach from the tabloid as Rupert Murdoch's son James puts his stamp on the media empire.
James Robinson is Observer media editor. He was previously deputy business editor at the Sunday Express and worked as a reporter for Sunday Business and, before that, the Birmingham Post. He supports West Bromwich Albion

In the 1990s, when the Sun enjoyed unparalleled influence, its editor Kelvin Mackenzie could tell the prime minister John Major that he was about to pour "a large bucket of shit" over him.

Last week's coverage of the Jacqui Janes affair suggests the paper has lost none of its power to intimidate, despite falling sales. Gordon Brown's correspondence with Janes, the mother of a soldier killed in Afghanistan, and his subsequent apology, which was secretly taped, dominated the headlines.

The growth of the internet may hasten the hour when the sun finally sets on Rupert Murdoch's tabloid, but it can still make the political weather.

Peter Mandelson took to the airwaves last week, claiming that Murdoch had done a deal with the Tories, promising slavish support – and unstinting criticism of Brown – in exchange for policy concessions.

Brown's phone call to Janes, meanwhile, was quickly followed by another to Murdoch, whom the prime minister described last week as "a friend". During that conversation, Brown told Rupert Murdoch that the Sun'svitriolic attacks over his letter to Janes had been unwise and unfair. He made his points firmly, but was careful to avoid sounding riled. There is a recognition in government that the electorate is unlikely to vote for a man who is bullied by a newspaper proprietor.

Brown and Murdoch have forged an unlikely friendship, based in part on a shared admiration for America, but the prime minister may have been appealing to the wrong man. Murdoch has handed control of his British operation to his younger son, James, who now oversees the European and Asian arm of News Corp, the media conglomerate his father controls, and is being groomed to take charge of the company. One senior industry source with intimate knowledge of News International, the Murdoch subsidiary that owns his UK papers, said that Murdoch senior is "not really interested in Britain" at all.He has been based in America for many years, but his purchase of theWall Street Journal, now the biggest-selling paper in the US, has kept him busy. He is also gearing up for a fight with Google over copyright, a battle he believes he must win to ensure consumers pay for his newspapers' online content. Murdoch didn't phone the prime minister before the Sun loudly declared it had lost faith in Labour on the day of his speech to party conference, according to the source. That should not be regarded as a snub, he added. Murdoch is simply detached from events in the UK. It was Rebekah Brooks (née Wade), the former Sun editor and now chief executive of News International, who delivered the news of the Sun's U-turn to Peter Mandelson after failing to get through to the prime minister. Brooks's importance cannot be overstated. She acts as a foil for Murdoch, an American who can hardly be expected to share her instinctive understanding of the concerns of Sun readers. She was also behind the paper's increasingly rabid attacks on the Ministry of Defence over the summer, which made the Janes controversy such a compelling story for the Sun.Fleet Street sources point out that Brooks began an email exchange with the MoD several months ago, as her time as editor of the Sun drew to a close.She wanted the department to give her reporters better access to Helmand province, where British troops were fighting and dying as they battled to regain control. The department was not keen on the idea but Brooks persisted. The email requests became demands, and their tone grew more belligerent. Shortly afterwards, when it became clear that the MoD was not willing to cooperate, Brooks told it: "The gloves are off." The Sun's coverage has been hostile ever since, offering unqualified support for British troops while traducing their political masters. Its subsequent decision to ditch Labour and back the Tories gave the Jacqui Janes controversy added impetus. Some senior executives who had not relished supporting Labour in the first place seized on the chance to mount a highly personal attack on a man who represents many policies they detest.Murdoch claimed last week that the decision to abandon Brown had been taken by "the editors in Britain" who "have turned very much against Gordon Brown, who is a friend of mine. I regret it." The 78-year-old has always taken the major editorial decisions at the Sun, and to imply that its new editor, Dominic Mohan, could switch its political allegiance without his consent is, at the very least, disingenuous. Crucially, however, it is James Murdoch who masterminded the timing of the decision to swing behind David Cameron, and set the hostile tone of the paper's coverage. "James is behind the decision to make it tough and bloody because he wants to be like his dad," said one acquaintance.The problem, according to his critics, is that he has his father's aggression but does not share his political instincts. Murdoch junior ran pay-TV giant Sky for five years before his promotion in 2007 and his business acumen is not in doubt, but when Rupert placed James in charge of his British operation, he was expecting him to spend as much time in Westminster as he had in the City. Like his father, the 36-year-old James is firmly on the right, but he subscribes to a particularly trenchant form of free market orthodoxy. Those who know him describe him as a radical libertarian who believes that government should stay out of the public sphere, limiting its role to defence and policing. The News International observer described last week's coverage as "bullying" and "mean-spirited", and suggested it was motivated by a genuine dislike of Brown. "The lunatics are now running the asylum," he said. "Back in the day, an editor might disagree with Rupert, but he was a serious person; there were proper checks and balances. If they went over the top Rupert would pull them back." There is little doubt that the Sun's support will give Murdoch leverage over a Conservative government, and that power is already being used. Brooks is thought to have told Andy Coulson, the Tories' director of communications, that the paper could not back David Cameron while Dominic Grieve remained shadow home secretary. He was replaced by Chris Grayling shortly afterwards. Few were surprised when the paper backed Cameron, but James Murdoch's decision to do so long before an election, and risk the ire of an administration that will still be in power for many months, was a bold move. Government sources deny it took revenge on Murdoch last week by placing Ashes cricket matches between England and Australia — currently broadcast by Sky — on the list of "crown jewels" that must be broadcast free-to-air, but it was a timely reminder of how it can make life difficult for the Murdoch empire. Nor is there any hope of a reconciliation. Brown has tried to woo James, said a senior political source, but with little success: "Despite Brown's efforts there is no personal connection between the two men like there was with Rupert." Cameron, in contrast, was quick to cosy up to James, and cemented those ties by hiring the former News of the World editor Coulson, who is close to Brooks, and is also a friend of Mohan. Along with Brooks's new husband, racehorse trainer Charlie Brooks, they form a coterie who occasionally socialise at weekends in north Oxfordshire, where the Brooks have a home – as does James's sister, Elisabeth, with her husband, Matthew Freud. Cameron's constituency is also in the county. The Labour party has tried to portray the Tory leader and his new friends in the press as a wealthy, impenetrable clique, although Labour's own relationship with News International is also built largely on a network of fragile friendships. There are rumours of a loss of nerve at the Sun, meanwhile, following a public backlash over its personal attack on Brown. The fact that it spelt Janes's name wrong on its website is acutely embarrassing. Murdoch is heavy-hearted about abandoning Brown. He is not convinced by Cameron, but he know it makes good business sense to back him. In the end, that is the only consideration that really counts

Documents produced by Nick Davies involve senior News of the World journalists in Mulcaire affair

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2009/jul/14/news-world-new-evidence


Murdoch must turn Fleet Street into Quality Street if he wants us to pay

http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/2009/nov/15/rupert-murdoch-google-content-payment
Content is already available free - and consumers never paid a realistic price for it anyway

Rupert Murdoch's declaration, in an interview with Sky News, that he was thinking of barring Google's search engine from indexing all of News Corporation's websites, had a magnificent Canutian ring to it and got the blogosphere in a tizz. Some commentators saw it as an early sign of dementia; others interpreted it as an invitation to Microsoft to do an exclusive deal.

Cory Doctorow, for example, thought Murdoch is "betting that one of Google's badly trailing competitors can be coaxed into paying for the right to index all of News Corp's online stuff if that right is exclusive. Rupert is thinking that a company such as Microsoft will be willing to pay to shore up its also-ran search tool, Bing, by buying the right to index the fraction of a fraction of a sliver of a crumb of the internet that News Corp owns".

The prevailing sentiment however can be summed up as a paradox: nobody thinks that a "screw-you-Google" strategy makes sense, but they assume that Murdoch knows something they don't, and that the strategy will make sense when all is revealed. In that way, the Digger is rather like Warren Buffett: his past investment record is so good that people are wary of questioning his judgment.

I have no idea what Murdoch's thinking, but I know what he's thinking about, and that's "content". Everyone's thinking about it too. Content takes many forms – news, opinion, features, audio, video, images – but they can all be lumped into one broad category: information goods.

These goods cost money to produce, so the producers need to earn revenues from them. Until recently, that was relatively easy to do, which is how owners of newspapers, magazines, broadcasting networks, record labels and movie studios became rich and powerful.

This happy state of affairs, however, is terminally challenged in a networked world in which people expect to access information goods for free and where perfect copies can easily – and illicitly – be made. Therefore, the Murdoch argument runs, we must return to the world as it used to be, where people are forced to pay for content.

But if you want to return to the past, it makes sense to understand it, and here we run into some puzzles. Take the notion that, in the good ol' days of print, customers paid for content.

Shortly before writing that sentence I was handed a copy of the LondonEvening Standard, which contained lots of "content" but was, er, free. And although this is the most conspicuous example in the UK of printed content being given away, free newspapers have been thriving for decades. The only thing that marks out the Standard from a provincial freesheet is that its content is of a higher class. So even in the newspaper world, lots of content has been free for ages.

But surely people who buy the Sun, Telegraph, Mail and Times are paying for content? Maybe they are, but we'd need to know what proportion of those publications' revenues came from cover sales rather than from advertising to know how much their readers are actually paying for the content. If newspapers had to recoup the costs of content-creation solely from retail sales, cover prices would be a lot higher and circulations correspondingly lower. So let's not kid ourselves: even in the print days consumers weren't paying anything like a realistic price for content. Why should things be any different in an online world? But what to charge? Here the print world gives contradictory advice, as a visit to www.newsstand.co.uk will show you. On the one hand, theEconomist sells there for £4.29 an issue and the New Yorker for £4.92, whereas Nuts costs £2.47 and Zoo is £2.37. Quality content clearly commands a higher price. But why is Ideal Home £6.65 per issue and World of Interiors £5.85? There's no real rationale here, beyond charging what different markets will bear. In the print world, in other words, higher prices could be justified by having better content – but also just by having glossier layout, heavier paper, better colour reproduction, etc. The trouble is that glossy production values don't cut much ice online. We're moving to what essayist Paul Graham calls "post-medium publishing" (bit.ly/ZBhb8), where the intrinsic quality of the content will determine what people will to pay. If the Digger really wants to charge for his stuff, it had better be good.

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/nov/14/peter-preston-sun-gordon-brown

The Sun got too hot without its coolest head

Media

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2008/mar/14/murdoch

Murdoch's printing empire http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2009/jul/14/news-world-new-evidence

News of the World phone hacking: Guardian shows MPs new evidencehttp://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2009/jul/14/news-world-new-evidence

A peek inside News International's new £350m print plant in Broxbourne, Hertfordshire
  • Rebecca Lovell and Stephen Brook
  • guardian.co.uk, 
  • Monday 17 March 2008
  • http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/video/2009/jul/14/news-world-new-evidence
  •  

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/nov/14/peter-preston-sun-gordon-brown

  • The Sun got too hot without its coolest head

     

    Les Hinton, now departed for Dow Jones, would never have allowed the paper to make such intemperate attacks on Gordom Brown

    Les Hinton, chairman of News International. Photograph: Murdo Macleod

    Two little words sum up what may be one big problem. Those words are "Les" and "Hinton". Quiet, shrewd Les, now running Dow Jones forRupert Murdoch in New York, used to be top dog in Wapping. He didn't let his ego get in the way. He let Rupert be Rupert, descending from New York on sub-royal tours. And he let editors edit, giving prudent advice when asked. But now he's gone. And now things seem a trifle problematic. What, asks Melanie Reid in the Times, are we supposed to think when "a disabled man is being humiliated for his handicap? Nice. Really nice". Yes, "there's something pretty vile about the personal attacks being levelled at" our PM. Gordon Brown is attacked for failing to bow at the Cenotaph (when he is said to have become disoriented – his wretched eyesight problem). It's "public bullying" he does not deserve. It's like watching "the wings being pulled off flies". And the wing-puller in chief of course, is the Sun, just across Wapping's forecourt. What Lord Mandelson swiftly labels "crude politicking" even splits Murdoch paper from Murdoch paper. It also sets TV and political circles chomping, as the Indy asks on its front page: "Has Cameron done a deal with Murdoch?" That's a crudely discomforting question to pose at this stage. It doesn't help Dave or Rupe or son James (in his own Wapping top slot). Fragmentary polling shows that the world in general, and many Sunreaders in particular, think the confrontation between an outraged mother of a war victim and a battered, obviously saddened prime minister has been crassly handled. Public sides with Gordon shock. It was theSun wot lost it? But go back more forensically to the paper's treatment of Mrs Janes and Brown last week. Front page headlines: "PM sends gaffe-strewn note to soldier's grieving mum then fails to bow at the Cenotaph". Leader page cartoon of premier holding scrawled letter that says: "Er, Sory Gordon". An editorial pillorying his "slapdash condolences" headlined: "Shoddy, PM". And, of course, that covert tape recording of the phone call he made to say sorry again. Didn't it occur to anyone at Bun HQ that readers might indeed find this treatment shoddy? Which is where the departed spirit of Les Hintonwalks Wapping's byways again. Dominic Mohan was Rebekah Brooks's hand-picked successor in theSun chair when she moved up to succeed Les as News Internationalchief. He was in situ when the paper turned floridly against Brown (though that had been predictable for months, because Murdoch never backs obvious losers). But nobody could possibly think that Brooks is sitting at some distant desk with the phone off the hook. Would Hinton, if still around, have been consulted about the Sun's Sorry blast? Of course. Brooks as editor would have wanted his political counsel, since Rupert himself has long been a welcome Brown visitor to Numbers 10 and 11. So, unless incredibly foolish, Mohan must have called Brooks first. In which case, the buck travels up, not down. Brooks has been in plenty of scrapes before, but she always had Les around to calm her down. Now she's flying solo. Now she's the political adviser to James, who is congenitally unlikely to phone his dad and ask whether the he wants a few adjectives toned down. Let's be charitable on the politicking front. All incoming governments pay their dodgy dues at the court of King Rupert. Talk of done deals is far ahead of reality: the relationship between Downing Street and Wapping is much broader-brush than that. But the presence of James Murdoch, master of BSkyB and lord of the print, makes the lobbying harder to manage. It runs up an obvious flag marked "TV interests". And the new presence of Brooks, who invited both Dave and Gordon to her nuptials a few months ago, makes the cruelty of the Sun's vituperation look idiotically inhumane. Rupert, far away in Oz, says that he still respects Gordon himself. Gordon, newly sympathetic on Today, says he still respects Rupert, too – but that this (he's obviously been told from afar) was something handled by those who run "the British operation". So, more of a domestic botch than an international battle royal. Crude? To be sure. But, worse (as cool, lost Les might sadly observe): plain dysfunctional.

    Views on the news; Murdoch's madness, moree bnaking reduancies and bonuses for Barclays bigwigs

     

     

     

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/nov/13/views-on-the-news-rupert-murdoch-lloyds-redundancies

    Views on the news:

    Bloggers unite in their dim view of Rupert Murdoch and his views on Google, but further job losses at Lloyds reset the dividing lin

    • Teena Lyons
    • guardian.co.uk, Friday 13 November 2009 14.29 GMT
    • Article history
    • Who would have believed it? This week Rupert Murdoch succeeded where countless other stories have failed - uniting business bloggers to one dominant viewpoint. "It is a novelty to see a Guardian Comments with near unanimity,"summarised gpjcyprus after hundreds wrote in to disparage this week's tale that the media baron is considering blocking news from his media empire from Google's search index. ItalioDutch imagined the scenario: "Breaking news: Pope to visit Iran. "From The Guardian: Pope's visit to strictly Shiite country first ever. "From the New York Times: Pontiffs visit already historic. "From Le Monde: Benoît XVI au pays des Ayatollah "From The Times: 403 forbidden "That is going to be a fantastic success." "News International – big. Google – bigger," said kingfelix. "Murdoch has forgotten the first rule of bullying (which is his business model), the bully must be stronger than those it targets. "Google won't be getting its dinner money stolen or its PE kit flushed down the bog." "Excluding yourself from the single biggest source of web traffic?" wroteSsieth. "What could possibly go wrong with that plan?" "What a numpty," concluded Tisiphone. Fortunately there were some banking stories out this week that helped restore the combative status quo. Lloyds' announcement that it was cutting a further 5,000 jobs, for example, got a mixed reaction. Fabiusmaximus a blogger who claims unfair treatment from the bank, had little sympathy for the workforce: "May I be the first to say what goes around comes around. Happy redundancy." Robotier on the other hand sympathised with the human cost, adding: "It must be a barrel of laughs working in the lower echelons of Lloyds now. The ones below the ivory towers. Especially if you've just been redeployed from Bank Of Scotland and thought you'd escaped the guillotine. "I really feel for anyone who has worked hard for a career in banking because all they've got to look forward to now is consistent job insecurity and an expectation to jump through flaming hoops as Lloyds take advantage of the workforce." Siff had an interesting point: "Did you notice the way they worded the job cuts announcement? Only so many jobs will go because we are going to get rid of this many contractors and temporary staff. Contractors and temps are obviously some sort of subhuman who don't register as staff and presumably will not register as unemployed either." And so to Barclays, which is on track for record profits and is, apparently considering pay rises for its top bankers. Vernier could not resist commenting on the name of the bank's chief operating officer: "Can't help noticing one banking bigwig rejoices under the name of 'Rich Ricci'. "Presumably, he will now be changing his name to: 'Mega Rich Ricci'". And, do you think MadBillMcMad was being ironic by writing: "I think these guys work and they deserve their bonus. If it was that easy then why don't we all just do it? Just take your money out of the banking system and invest it elsewhere. "I have some magic beans you can buy." You decide. Of course, most bloggers are quite clear in their views on bankers and bonuses, a view reiterated after Hector Sants, the Financial Services Authority chief executive, said that bankers had not learned lessons from the financial crisis. Eckythump begged to differ: "They have learned that if they screw up they don't need to worry because the taxpayer will bail them out and they can continue to rake in their massive bonuses." Of course, for a lively analysis on lessons learned, you really need look no further than a discussion on house prices. Jpwill2009 was one of many who was less than impressed to hear house prices are rising at the fastest rate since 2006: "Celebrating house inflation again? It's like Groundhog Day. If houses go much higher we'll all be living with our head in the clouds." LeeWashington was not the only one to smell a rat following the news that the number of homes repossessed in the UK have risen by 3% in the third quarter: "If repossessions are up and house prices are rising because of a shortage of property for sale, does this mean the banks aren't putting the houses back onto the market?" Indeed, said harmonyfuture: "They [the banks] take cheap taxpayer money, lend to themselves via shadow companies to prove to government they are lending whilst propping up the asset value of their newly acquired, knock down priced property portfolio. This is anti competitive insider dealing and requires proper investigation." Credit card firms were in the firing line too, with outof offering a firm warning for those who are considering charging an annual fee to cardholders once again: "The credit card companies have to tread very carefully here. "If they alienate too many customers (and any sort of fee will do that) then they will no longer have the critical mass necessary to force retailers to accept their cards." For any bloggers who think the economy is getting better – and there are not many – EvilMike had a sobering tale, who wrote following the announcement that unemployment figures rose by the smallest amount since the recession: "I lost my long term contract job (8 years) at the end of September. Because of money I'd been saving for the last 12 months (I could see the writing was on the wall...) it's not worth me registering as unemployed. I'm looking for another job now. I'm sure there are plenty more people like me out there who don't appear in the statistics." Indeed, according to nocod: "There should soon be an upsurge of jobs in the wheelbarrow making industry as we cart our wages home. "Recession not even started in my book." However, BrownsHeadDownToilet thought there was room for one more on the list of unemployed, posting: "I would like to see Mandelson join their ranks." Best not to start discussing this one with the current mood of harmony on the boards. Keep them coming

     

     

     

     

     

     

     
     
     
      
    23 Oct 2009:  

    Barely a day passes in which a story doesn't emerge about Rupert Murdoch'sdetermination to charge for content. If he isn't speaking about it himself, his senior executives are doing so

    23 Oct 2009:  

    Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group, has attacked Rupert Murdoch's dominance, through BSkyB, of the UK's pay television market

    23 Oct 2009:  

    News Corp boss says US television site Hulu could stage an abrupt turnaround and begin charging viewers to watch online

    22 Oct 2009:  

    John McQuaid: Instead of defending Fox News as one of their own, the US media should join the White House's war against the network

    22 Oct 2009:  

    Media companies may be suffering from recessionary woes, but there is no shortage of bidders for the Travel Channel, the satellite and cable network

    Nick Griffin, BNP Leader
    21 Oct 2009:  

    Far-right party leader claims Question Time appearance will be 'a stage-managed farce'

     

     

     

    21 Oct 2009:  

    A survey among 2,000 Britons found that paid content has not much of a chance in the UK

    19 Oct 2009:  

    There are, naturally enough, all sorts of rumours about Rupert Murdoc

     

    h's exact plans for erecting paywalls on his Wapping newspaper websites

    19 Oct 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch is clearly determined to ensure that nothing produced by his media group is going to be free. He said that News Corporation would be seeking fees from American cable and satellite operators to carry his Fox TV network

    19 Oct 2009: This is not personal | Getting the Humph | Political U-turn
    Models at Paris Fashion Week 200919 Oct 2009: The company is outflanking online publishers by providing access to a network of 1,300 quality sites, attracting 110m unique users a month
     
     
    18 Oct 2009: Murdoch station finds allies among liberal American media after White House attack
    16 Oct 2009: News Corp annual meeting highlights tensions between Fox News and White House

    Why media moguls are losing their power

    16 Oct 2009: 

    Though I am late in pointing to these pieces they deserve as wide an audience as possible within the media world

     

    14 Oct 2009:  

    Michael Tomasky: Fox News is clearly an arm of the Republican party. Obama is right to throw caution to the wind and treat it as such

    14 Oct 2009:  

    Seen from the outside the saga of the London newspaper war over the past couple of years looks decidedly odd. That's reflected well in an excellent piece by Philip Stone

    12 Oct 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch's daily business newspaper, the Wall Street Journal, is expected to be named as the largest US paper by weekday circulation when the latest ABC figures are released in a couple of weeks time

    9 Oct 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch is determined to make search engines pay for content. Along with Associated Press chief Tom Curley, he called for online outlets using editorial material to pay for it

    7 Oct 2009:  

    Has Rupert Murdoch lost the plot? As absurd as it may to suggest that one of the world's most successful media moguls may be in any kind of danger I argue in my London Evening Standardcolumn today that his News Corporation business is facing a genuine crisis

    7 Oct 2009:  

    Has Rupert Murdoch lost the plot? As absurd as it may to suggest that one of the world's most successful media moguls may be in any kind of danger I argue in my London Evening Standardcolumn today that his News Corporation business is facing a genuine crisis

    5 Oct 2009:  

    Plan to offer special benefits for a £50 annual fee marks shift from growing audience to making money from regular readers. By Chris Tryhorn

    The Sun switches its support to Conservative
    5 Oct 2009: Peter Wilby:Never mind its readers, the Sun's effect on other media outlets is all-pervasive, and losing its support is disastrous for Gordon 
     
     
    5 Oct 2009: The Sun's decision to withdraw its support from Labour just hours after the prime minister's speech raises questions about the media's influence on British politics. By James Robinson and Stephen Brook
    Apple iPhone
    5 Oct 2009:  

    Financial Times, Radio Times and Spectator join the race to make money out of 'apps'. By Richard Wray

     

     

     

    Rupert Murdoch4 Oct 2009: Rupert Murdoch has ordered his lieutenants to fix a price for internet news, but the answer remains stubbornly elusive
     
     
     
    4 Oct 2009: Rupert Murdoch's bestselling tabloid can have only minimal influence on the next general election
    2 Oct 2009:  

    What can David Cameron do for Rupert Murdoch in return for the media mogul granting him support by The Sun?

    2 Oct 2009: Letters: You are quite right to highlight the dangers to the BBC that would be posed by a Tory government
    1 Oct 2009: Mick Fealty: The Murdoch press in Ireland is again pushing an anti-EU line – but only half-heartedly as it sees its readers losing interest
    01.10.09: Steve Bell on Labour falling out with The SunCartoon, 1 Oct 2009:  

    Party unhappy as tabloid swings in favour of the Tories


     
     
     
    1 Oct 2009: Simon Hoggart: Golly, Labour loathe the paper that has supported them in the last three elections
    1 Oct 2009: Editorial: Rupert Murdoch's decision to pull the plug on New Labour as much as nine months before an election may be bad news for Gordon Brown, but it is potentially even worse news for the BBC
    Tony Woodley rips up the Sun30 Sep 2009: Rupert Murdoch, who once thought David Cameron a 'lightweight', seemed to begin approving of the Tory leader in 2007
     
     
     
    30 Sep 2009: Leader of opposition Labour party voices fears of a 'two-speed Europe'
    30 Sep 2009: Relations between Murdoch papers and government disintegrates as tabloid swings in favour of Tories
    30 Sep 2009: Seumas Milne: Brown is moving away at last from his embrace of corporate elites, but it is likely to be too late to save his government
    30 Sep 2009:  

    Jonathan Freedland: Conference season 09: Politicians should expect press scrutiny and tough questions. But this sledging of Gordon Brown is ugly and undemocratic

    30 Sep 2009:  

    Brighton conference reacts with standing ovation as Tony Woodley rips up newspaper headlined 'Labour's lost it'

    The Sun newspaper
    30 Sep 2009:  

    Harriet Harman launches angry attack on Rupert Murdoch's tabloid for declaring support for David Cameron

     

     

     

     

    30 Sep 2009: Lance Price: Successive governments have been in thrall to it. The media is obsessed with it. But who really cares if the Sun won't back Labour?
    30 Sep 2009:  

    With brutish timing, the sleepy old rottweiler of Wapping gnashes its yellow teeth

    The Sun front pages composite image 30 Sep 2009: Tabloid deals blow to Gordon Brown after conference speech
     
     
     
    28 Sep 2009:  

    PaidContent: Rupert Murdoch claims that readers are 'happily' willing to pay, if publishers get the system right

    25 Sep 2009:  

    Watch this Fox News clip. A Florida law professor, Jeremy Levitt, argues with the right-wing presenter Bill O'Reilly over a claim that the channel has fomented racial tensions in its reports onPresident Obama

    21 Sep 2009:  

    The market research revelation that only 5% of UK web users would pay for online news doesn't surprise me in the least. But I doubt that it will stopRupert Murdoch in his tracks



     
     
     

    More on the Murdoch Empire
     

    Media Monkey's Diary 16 Nov 2009:  

    Read Media Monkey's diary from the Monday section

     

    Media Monkey's Diary

    Badge media monkey blog

    Media Monkey's Diary

    ?The biter, it seems, has been bit. It is only a few short weeks since the BBC came under fire for scheduling Strictly Come Dancing against ITV1's The X Factor, only for the celebrity dance show to take a drubbing in the ratings. Now Top Gear is back on BBC2 but – what's this? – an hour later than its normal 8pm start time on a Sunday night, to avoid a clash with the ratings behemoth that is ... The X Factor. "We had no choice really," said Top Gear producer Andy Wilman. "X Factor on at the same time with the results show, Cowell on storming form, the whole nation glued – we know when to bravely bugger off and wait until the storm passes." If only they had thought of that with Strictly Come Dancing.

    ?BBC trustee David Liddiment may as well tear up his review of Radio 2 and go home, after the station's star DJ, Chris Evans, had the last word on complaints from commercial radio that the station was targeting too young an audience. Evans, who will take over the breakfast slot in the new year – around the same time that Liddiment is due to publish his findings – bemoaned the "obvious unhealthy lazy arguments from certain members of the media" that Radio 2 had gone too young. "Anybody who works in radio knows that we are not chasing the younger listener, we are chasing the family. Whether you are seven years old or 107 years old ... we're not chasing, that's who we've always aimed Radio 2 at, and I'm very happy to be part of that armoury." Targeting seven-year-olds? It's even worse than commercial radio thought.

    ?Among the many BBC executives' expenses claims was the £19.13 put through by Richard Deverell, chief operating officer for the BBC's new northern base in Salford, spent on external hospitality "trying to persuade him to join the BBC". We know not who it was, or whether it was successful, but we wonder whether Deverell could have tried a bit harder.

    ?The London Evening Standard's list of the 1,000 most influential Londoners is not entirely ruthless when it comes to defining a "Londoner", it would appear, containing as it does the likes of Rupert Murdoch, David Beckham, Madonna and California-based Apple designer Jonathan Ive. They are many things, but not necessarily what you would call London-based.

    ?Monkey has just got over Charles Spencer's review of Anna Friel in Breakfast at Tiffany's ("long stretches of the action in her underwear … a thrilling frisson of eroticism"), only to find the Daily Telegraph theatre critic has been at it again. Spencer, you'll recall, coined the phrase "theatrical Viagra" for Nicole Kidman's performance in The Blue Room. The new object of his affection is Kelly Brook in the theatre version of Calendar Girls. "It's true that Miss Brook seems to find it pretty tricky to walk and talk at the same time," wrote Spencer. "But my, what a delightful eyeful Kelly Brook is, shaking her great mane of golden hair like a proud lioness and covering her modesty with iced buns." Is that a theatre review in your pocket or are you just pleased to see me?

    ?To the British Society of Magazine Editors awards at the Park Lane Hilton, where the host and resident BBC1 standup comic Michael McIntyre enjoyed lots of fun at the expense of Fabulous magazine until informed it was part of the News of the World. "Oh," he said. "That's my life ruined then." The NME-turned-Top Gear editor, Conor McNicholas, organised the bash and said the next edition of Top Gear will feature the top 10 songs to drive to, admitting it would be made up of the top 10 he was playing in his car. You can take the editor out of NME ...

    ?Monkey's number of the week: 666,000. The peak audience for Sky1's unfortunate attempts to contact Michael Jackson from beyond the grave with the help of Derek Acorah on the entirely taste-free Michael Jackson: The Live Seance. We always thought it was a bad idea.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/mediamonkeyblog/2009/nov/16/media-monkey-diary

    15 Nov 2009: The extraordinary run-in between the Sun and the prime minister over Afghanistan last week was a sign of a more aggressive approach from the tabloid as Rupert Murdoch's son James puts his stamp on the media empire.
    15 Nov 2009:  

    John Naughton: Content is already available free - and consumers never paid a realistic price for it anyway

    14 Nov 2009:  

    Les Hinton, now departed for Dow Jones, would never have allowed the paper to make such intemperate attacks on Gordom Brown

    13 Nov 2009:  

    Bloggers unite in their dim view of Rupert Murdoch and his views on Google, but further job losses at Lloyds reset the dividing line

     

    Mark Thompson13 Nov 2009:  

    Steve Busfield: The corporation has real questions to answer on top salaries. But that's not why it's under attack

    As the BBC gets more transparent, so do its enemies' motives The BBC has real questions to answer about the salaries of its top executives. But that's not why it's under attack

     

     

    The BBC's Mark Thompson: unlikely to jump ship for ITV. Photograph: Richard Sake

    The BBC gets a serious kicking today over the salaries of senior executives – not surprisingly led by the Murdoch press.

    The Times splashes: "37 BBC staff earn more than the Prime Minister."The Sun adds: "Oceans of BBC exes." (See what they did there? Mark Thompson stayed in the Las Vegas hotel featured in Ocean's Eleven).

    The Telegraph weighs in with: "BBC pays its 100 most senior staff £20m a year." And the Daily Mail adds: "The bloated Beeb: BBC pays out £20m to top 100 'decision-making' executives including the 'outreach boss' (so that's where the licence fee goes)." (The Mail, of course, pictures Jay Hunt because, counter-intuitively, there is nothing the Mail hates more than a successful woman).

    In these straitened times, with media organisations cutting back all around, it is easy to target BBC salaries. Thompson argues that the corporation must pay "market rates". That might have been true a few years ago. But it certainly isn't true now. Very few of these execs are likely to jump ship to ITV. And the digital revolution companies may have created some billionaires but, on the whole, they are leaner, smaller organisations than the traditional media behemoths. But once salaries have risen, it is hard to claw them back. Not many people like taking a pay cut.

    And now, with the economic meltdown sapping the BBC's commercial rivals, and a Tory government on the horizon, this makes the corporation vulnerable. The "even greater transparency" offered by the BBC in the interests of accountability has just been made into a new stick to beat them with. And allowing Tory MP Philip Davies to say: "It illustrates probably better than anything else than we have ever seen why the BBC's funding needs to be radically reduced to enable it to focus on what it should be doing."

    And therein lies the rub. Some BBC salaries may be unnecessarily high. It is ridiculous that 37 BBC staff are paid more than the prime minister. Although maybe that is a reflection of the peculiarly low pay grade afforded the chief executive of UK plc. The BBC is a big organisation that does require a lot of managing.

    But the real reason it is getting a caning here is because the Tories have realised that there is a lot of political support to be gained by attacking the BBC. Not as a straightforward votewinner, but by ensuring the support of papers from an organisation with an inbuilt desire to weaken the BBC.

    Rupert Murdoch wants to make money from the web. The free nature of the web is his biggest problem. But the fact that there is an enormous news organisation in Britain providing for free a lot of the things that he thinks News Corp should be paid for is also a pretty big stumbling block.

    The BBC should be accountable. Perhaps some of its executives are paid too much. But the BBC is also a national asset that shouldn't be beaten up for everything that it does.

    And although of course they aren't funded by the licence-payer, it would still be interesting to know how many News Corp executives are paid more than the prime minister.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/organgrinder/2009/nov/13/bbc-enemies#start-of-comments

    Prime Minister Gordon Brown
    13 Nov 2009:  

    Prime minister and media tycoon spoke after paper's coverage of 'misspelt' letter to Jacqui Janes

     

     

     

    Gordon Brown in Afghanistan13 Nov 2009: Prime minister dismisses reports he is planning to talk to the Taliban
     
     
     
    Murdoch and Brown13 Nov 2009: What the media mogul and the prime minister have said about each other over the years
     
     
     
    Andrew Flintoff celebrates after running out Ricky Ponting during the fifth Ashes Test at the Oval
    13 Nov 2009: Sports governing bodies set to protest as former FA executive director confirms proposed expansion of 'crown jewels' list. By Owen Gibson
     
     
     
    Sun front page - 8/11/2009
    Audio (34min 51sec), 13 Nov 2009:  

    The Sun goes to town on Gordon Brown. Plus, Melvyn Bragg returns to BBC television. And which columnist would you pay to read online? With Matt Wells, Maggie Brownand Steve Ackerman

     

     

    13 Nov 2009:  

    David Banks was one of the first print journalists to grasp both the theory and practice of digital journalism

     

    Rupert Murdoch
    13 Nov 2009:  

    It makes them look unprincipled and probably won't help them win elections either, saysAlexander Chancellor

     

     

     

    England celebrate winning the Ashes at The Oval12 Nov 2009: Battle between Rupert Murdoch and No 10 hots up as government prepares to accept review recommendations
     
     
     
    12 Nov 2009:  

    Lola Adesioye: By backing Glenn Beck's wild rant that Barack Obama is racist, Rupert Murdoch is as incendiary as his Fox News pundits

     

     

    Joaquin 12 Nov 2009: Joaquin 'El Chapo' Guzman is at 41, beating Medvedev, Sarkozy and Chávez, while Mexico's president misses out
     
     
     
    12 Nov 2009:  

    I generally admire the writings ofChrystia Freeland, the US managing editor of the theFinancial Times, but I haven't much time for her statement applauding the "end of the oversupply of journalism."

    12 Nov 2009: Michael White: Gordon Brown deserves some sympathy – the fast-spinning news industry is as potentially destructive as the financial markets
     
    Ricky Ponting and the England team12 Nov 2009: Steve Busfield: Review of 'crown jewels' events - including The Ashes cricket – comes hot on the heels of the Sun turning on Gordon Brown
     
     
     
     
    12 Nov 2009: PM's official spokesman attempts to play down significance of call, saying the two men were in regular communication
     
    12 Nov 2009:  

    Jack Shafer, Slate's excellent media commentator, has seen through the charging-for-content smokescreen erected by Rupert Murdoch in a piece headlined Read between the lies

    12 Nov 2009:  

    Prime minister phoned News Corp chief to complain about paper's campaign against the government's handling of the Afghanistan war. By Roy Greenslade

    11 Nov 2009:  

    Sandra Guzman alleges that Rupert Murdoch's US newspaper fostered a 'hostile work environment'

    hairman and CEO of News Corporation Rupert Murdoch
    11 Nov 2009: News Corporation put on defensive after chief backs Fox News presenter over 'very racist' comment by president. By Chris 
     
     
     
    11 Nov 2009:  

    "Give Brown a break"... "Whilst I have every sympathy with Mrs Janes for the loss of her son, personally I would have been more touched that Mr Brown took the time to personally write to her to offer his condolences"... "I hate to say this, BUT, well done Mr Brown for at least writting a letter, right spelling or not"...

    11 Nov 2009: The media mogul's latest target is Google
    Rupert Murdoch10 Nov 2009: Cory Doctorow: Rupert Murdoch wants to remake the web as a toll both, with him in the collector's seat, but the net won't shift to his will
     
     
     
    10 Nov 2009:  

    In using Jacqui Janes's grief in this way, the newspaper is harnessing its traditional pro-squaddie stance to its Labour-bashing campaign

    10 Nov 2009:  

    News Corp chief says prime minister is a friend, but his government has been a 'disappointment'. By Chris Tryhorn

    10 Nov 2009: News Corp chairman says papers will probably cut themselves off from Google once they start to charge online. By Chris Tryhorn and Bobbie Johnson
    10 Nov 2009:  

    Last week I ran a posting headlined A newspaper lesson for Gordon Brown - Murdoch is not your friend. I argued that the prime minister was fooling himself if he thought the News Corporation chairman was still his mate after agreeing that The Sun should back the Tories

    10 Nov 2009:  

    Further to yesterday's story about Rupert Murdoch's search engine sabre-rattling, Murdoch could block Google searches entirely, he also launched yet another assault on the BBC

    Rupert Murdoch9 Nov 2009: The News Corp chief could be shooting himself in the foot if he withdraws stories from Google News
     
     
     
     
    Rupert Murdoch
    Poll, 9 Nov 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch says he may block Google News from displaying News Corp content to persuade people to pay for his newspaper sites. Who will win this corporate battle?

     

     

     

    9 Nov 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch says he will remove stories from Google's search index as a way to encourage people to pay for content online

    9 Nov 2009:  

    When I posted an item on Friday that mentioned the closure of London Lite, a commenter (courtstown) took me to task for a lack of empathy towards staff who will lose their jobs

    9 Nov 2009:  

    Yet another digital headache for Rupert Murdoch. His News Corporation is paying more than $1m (£600,000) a month to rent an empty office complex in Los Angeles that it has been unable to sub-lease since scrapping an ambitious plan to moveMySpace and its other digital businesses there

    9 Nov 2009:  

    Can Murdoch make a paywall work?


    8 Nov 2009:  

    As Murdoch hesitates, there are no simple solutions over charging for digital content

    6 Nov 2009:  

    Lord Rothermere, owner of the Daily Mail & General Trust, once rejected launching a free newspaper in partnership with the Norwegian media conglomerate Schibsted because, supposedly, he had no faith in freesheets

    6 Nov 2009:  

    When I posted yesterday on the remarkable candour of Rupert Murdoch in admitting that he was holding discussions with Telegraph Media Group about website paywalls, some commenters suggested that The Guardian might be involved too

    Rupert Murdoch
    5 Nov 2009:  

    Talks with other publishers to introduce charging on news websites will undoubtedly attract the attention of competition authorities, warns UK expert

     

     

     

    5 Nov 2009: Three key exchanges in Murdoch's conference call with reporters about the News Corporation quarterly results
     
    5 Nov 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch's statement about the likelihood of his

     

     newspapers missing the deadline to charge for content reveals the difficulties he is having in convincing rival news companies to join his paywall construction company

    Rupert Murdoch5 Nov 2009:  

    News Corp chief says schedule for online charging slipping


     
     
     
    4 Nov 2009:  

    UK's largest news aggregator publishes open letter denying it is undermining publishers' businesses. By Mercedes Bunz

    4 Nov 2009:  

    So the prime minister thinks The Sun, in trying "to become a political party", has made "a terrible mistake". Where has Gordon Brown been living all his life?

    Gordon Brown at Chequers4 Nov 2009: Prime minister criticises Sun's 'terrible mistake' in backing Conservatives. By James Robinson

     
     
     
    3 Nov 2009:  

    Culture secretary warns of threat to arts sector's independence and encroaching influence of Rupert Murdoch

    2 Nov 2009:  

    The headline on the press release, "News International to stop distributing 'bulks'", may not be quite what it says on the tin

    A commuter reads The Wall Street Journal while waiting for his flight1 Nov 2009: Wall Street Journal editor Robert Thomson is fiercely guarding his boss's pay wall for digital content

     

     


     
     
     

    Rupert Murdoch: 'There's no such thing as a free news story' http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/dec/01/rupert-murdoch-no-free-news?CMP=AFCYAH
     News Corp chief Rupert Murdoch tells US regulators that users will pay for news – and aggregation is theft
     
    undefined

    Rupert Murdoch: customers are smart enough to know they must pay. Photograph: Shannon Stapleton/Reuters

    Rupert Murdoch has today reiterated his belief that internet users will pay for content, saying they would be happy to shell out for "information they need to rise in society".

    Murdoch, the chairman and chief executive of News Corporation, gave a wide-ranging address to US media regulators that attacked internet news aggregation as "theft" and claimed that advertising-only business models were dead.

    "From the beginning on, newspapers have prospered for one reason: giving readers the news that they want," he said. He said newspapers should not blame technology if they failed. "If we fail, we fail like a restaurant that makes meals that no one wants to eat." His company's customers were "smart enough" to know they had to pay for news, Murdoch told a US Federal Trade Commission workshop on the future of journalism in the internet age. Referring to his much-criticised plans to put his newspaper sites behind a paywall, Murdoch said he had succeeded before when nobody had believed he would, adding: "We started Fox when everyone said it couldn't be done." One News Corporation newspaper, The Wall Street Journal, already charges for content and has 1 million subscribers. "We will expend to extend this model to all our news organisations such as the Times in London. At The Times, there are journalists who invested days and weeks into their stories, and our customers are smart enough to know that they can't get something for nothing," he said. "Producing journalism is expensive. We invest tremendous resources in our project from technology to our salaries. To aggregate stories is not fair use. To be impolite, it is theft. "Without us, the aggregators would have blank slides. Right now content producers have all the costs, and the aggregators enjoy [the benefits]. But the principle is clear. To paraphrase a great economist, [there is] no such thing as a free news story." Murdoch said that making the reader pay was the only way to create future revenue streams: "The business model that relies on advertising-only is dead. Online advertising is increasingly only a fraction of what is being lost from print advertising, and it is under constant pressure." Murdoch, who read his speech from printouts and not his laptop at the FTC workshop, announced that News Corporation had worked on a two-year project to spread news content from TV and newspapers to mobile devices, because "today's news consumers do not want be chained to boxes in their homes". He attacked plans to protect newspapers with public funds, saying it could damage democracy. It would lead to "papers giving up their rights to endorse politicians". "In other words, it subsidies their failures. The press is the only institution that is truly accountable. The founding fathers put the first amendment first for a reason." Murdoch ended his speech with a plea to adhere to a series of clear principles in the digital world. "Let them innovate when they want and how they want. Let consumers pay. Let aggregators desist and start employing their own journalists. "When we think of the future of newspapers, we think of the future of democracy. It doesn't matter if we are reading our news from paper or on another device, but the basic truth is that to make informed decisions free man and women need news. If they come on electrons or dead trees is not that important. Therefore the news industry should remain free and competitive." Two men heckled Murdoch as he ended his speech, shouting from the audience: "Do you agree that Obama is a racist?" This was a reference to the controversy surrounding Glenn Beck, the presenter on News Corp-owned Fox News, and his controversial criticism of the US president. Murdoch did not reply as he left the stage at the FTC event and the two men were ushered out quickly.

    • To contact the MediaGuardian news desk email editor@mediaguardian.co.uk or phone 020 3353 3857. For all other inquiries please call the main Guardian switchboard on 020 3353 2000.

    1 Dec 2009: 

    "How will journalism survive in the internet age?" is no ordinary workshop: it's held by the Federal Trade Commission and attended by Rupert Murdoch and Arianna Huffington. By Mercedes Bunz

     

    Les Hinton1 Dec 2009: Chris Elliott:'News is a business and we should not be afraid to say it', proclaims News Corp's Les Hinton to newspaper congress

     

     
     
    30 Nov 2009: Partnership involving Rupert Murdoch's son and a nephew of Conrad Black reported to be looking to buy US trade titles. By Chris Tryhorn
    28 Nov 2009: 

    Michael Binyon's valedictory piece forThe Times today, after 38 years with the paper, gives a candid insight into journalism past with several entertaining anecdotes

    Artist's impression of revamped Wapping complex
    27 Nov 2009:Redevelopment of News International's 11-acre site, which will house staff from other News Corp businesses, gets green light from Tower Hamlets council. By Abul Taher
     
     
     
    26 Nov 2009: 

    The Daily Mirror has been running an investigation this week entitled "Tory cash - the truth". On Tuesday, it was right on the money by accusing shadow chancellor George Osborne of a dodgy expenses claim, eliciting a later response through gritted teeth that it was "a submission error".

    Conspiracy of silence as nationals ignore News of the World's £800,000 payout

    25 Nov 2009: 

    Imagine for a moment that a bank employee in the City of London was awarded £800,000 for unfair dismissal after a lengthy period of bullying by his or her boss. I haven't the slightest doubt that it would be a major news item in every newspaper - from the Financial Times to the Daily Star

    25 Nov 2009: Apple device owners are more willing to pay for content online than others, finds survey – but news is a sticking point. By Richard Wray
    24 Nov 2009: 

    Dan Kennedy: In cosying up to Google's main competitor, Bing, Rupert Murdoch proves once again that he can't be dismissed so easily

    24 Nov 2009: 

    Rupert Murdoch's talks with Microsoftabout removing his newspapers' stories from Google, and giving index rights to Bing instead could be a pivotal moment in internet economics, writes John Gapper

    24 Nov 2009: 

    Alexandros Stavrakas: The argument over file sharing is redundant: creative businesses must change, and the social value of free must be recognised

    24 Nov 2009: 

    Steve Busfield: As News Corp talks to Microsoft over Bing deal, how can the publisher ensure only paying customers see its online content?

    Rupert Murdoch
    23 Nov 2009: 

    The talks with Microsoft, which are at an embryonic stage are part of Rupert Murdoch's drive to create new online revenue streams

     

     

     

    Richard Bacon
    Audio (39min 20sec), 26 Nov 2009: 

    Emily Bell,Richard Bacon, Benjamin Cohen, and Josh Hallidayjoin Matt Wells to talk about the future of print, broadcast and online media. Is there any hope for an industry in crisis?

     

     

    23 Nov 2009: 

    Ever since The Sun switched its allegiance from Labour to the Tories there has been an assumption of some kind of deal between Rupert Murdoch and David Cameron

    23 Nov 2009: Editorial: Instead of building on a positive vision of Digital Britain, the government has capitulated to the fears of music and movie moguls struggling to defend their multi million-pound businesses
    23 Nov 2009: Editorial: Instead of building on a positive vision of Digital Britain, the government has capitulated to the fears of music and movie moguls struggling to defend their multi million-pound businesses
    Response: 23 Nov 2009: The smart party will not let Murdoch dominate | Cameron bound | An ego-heavy media
    Ben Bradshaw
    23 Nov 2009: 

    On the eve of the bill determining Britain's digital future, Ben Bradshaw attacks the Tory leader's 'pact' with the Murdochs and defends the BBC, if not its Trust, from its 'circling enemies'. He speaks to James Robinson

     

     

    22 Nov 2009: If the Tory leader wins the next election, he faces a media battle between News Corp and Google which could split his inner circle
    22 Nov 2009: Newspapers protest at free BBC online news, but press websites are already outgunned by cable networks
    20 Nov 2009: Times and Sun publisher says database of 20 million people enables it to assess which are the most valuable customers. By Sarah Hartley
    20 Nov 2009: 

    James Murdoch's speech to investors in Barcelona the other day revealed the direction thatNews Corporation plans to take in the coming years. His key quote:

    20 Nov 2009: 

    Monkey reports that movie director Edgar Wright is unhappy that The Times ran his blogged tribute to the actor Edward Woodward without his permission as if it were an article written for the paper. How dos this square with Rupert Murdoch's intense dislike for the theft of online content, I wonder?

    19 Nov 2009: 

    Charging to read news content is like 'putting genie back in bottle', says Biz Stone

    Jack Straw and Lord Mandelson greet the Queen and Prince Philip at the state opening of parliament
    19 Nov 2009: 

    Labour colleagues are concerned business secretary could set precedent that would allow Tories to help Murdoch take on Google

     

     

     

    Steve Bell 19.11.09
    Cartoon, 19 Nov 2009:

    Steve Bell's If ...

     

     

     

    18 Nov 2009: Changing connections | Acta-ing up | Old MacDonald, virtually | Engines of change | Glazed over | Farming for energy | Rupert's net vendetta
    18 Nov 2009: 

    Hardly a day goes by without a poll saying how many people will or will not pay for access to online news. Today's survey, courtesy of Forrester Research polled 4,000 people in the US and found that 80% will not pay for online newspapers or magazines

    17 Nov 2009: Micro-payments dismissed in favour of charging for 24-hour access to day's edition of the paper. By Chris Tryhorn
    17 Nov 2009: 

    On this day 40 years ago I was a small cog in what proved to be a giant wheel of change in the British newspaper trade. At 22, I was a raw down-table news sub on the first issue of a tabloid newspaper,The Sun

    Steve Bell's If ... 17.11.09Cartoon, 17 Nov 2009:

    Steve Bell's If ...

     

     

     

    Rupert Murdoch16 Nov 2009: 

    Findings from a study by Boston Consulting Group across nine countries show regular internet users would be prepared to pay a monthly fee for online news

     

     

     

    16 Nov 2009: Shadow culture secretary reacts to Lord Mandelson's accusation that Tories have 'formed a contract' with News International. By Mark Sweney
    16 Nov 2009: 

    The backlash against The Sun for its treatment of the Gordon Brown letter to Jacqui Janesabout the death of her soldier son in Afghanistan was clear in the weekend newspapers

    Steve Bell If ... 16.11.2009
    Cartoon, 16 Nov 2009:

    Steve Bell's If ...

     

     

     

    16 Nov 2009: 

    Emily Bell: Rupert Murdoch's threats to block the search engine and build a paywall signal to politicians that he wants something done

    16 Nov 2009: 

    On the eve of the relaunch of Wall Street Journal Europe, its new editor-in-chief explains why she returned to journalism and how she will take on Google

    16 Nov 2009: C4 needs foresight | It's a free world | SideWiki sideswipe | No web lifeline for Lite
    16 Nov 2009: C4 needs foresight | It's a free world | SideWiki sideswipe | No web lifeline for Lite

     

     
     
     

    72 Point Press Coverage Want to achieve national or regional press coverage for your product or brand?
    Click here to enquire about any of our Services Or simply call us on 0117 9066 555.


    72 Point achieves more press coverage than any other PR agency and we have packages to suit both large and small companies. For as little as £1,500, 72 Point will:  Draft a full, branded press release for you - incorporating all your KEY PR messages  Use our unrivalled relationship with the national and regional press to actively sell in your story  Distribute your release to all the national and key regional press via our exclusive in-house newswire (established 40 years) Send you full cuts when your brand appears in the press We can help achieve wide-spread awareness of your brand. Fill in our contact form for further information. 0845 6384200 http://www.72point.com/

    21 Sep 2009:  

    The market research revelation that only 5% of UK web users would pay for online news doesn't surprise me in the least. But I doubt that it will stopRupert Murdoch in his tracks

    20 Sep 2009:  

    Peter Preston: Rupert Murdoch collects all the blame for Fox News

    17 Sep 2009: Italian PM's firms accused of blocking ads from Murdoch-owned satellite broadcaster Sky Italia. By John Hooper in Rome
    17 Sep 2009:  

    The feud between Rupert Murdoch and Italy's prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi, took another turn yesterday

    16 Sep 2009:  

    Rupert Murdoch is back on optimistic form, arguing that US advertising markets are "very much better than they were four months ago."

    Google in Zurich
    15 Sep 2009:  

    Web firm Google says Fast Flip pages will give publishers the bulk of ad revenue

     

     

     

    10 Sep 2009: MPs will hear from Les Hinton as part of committe's inquiry into press standards, privacy and libel
    8 Sep 2009:  

    I wonder if this will work. It's a letter sent privately to Rupert Murdoch and then, rather bravely, posted for public consumption

    7 Sep 2009:  

    Polly Toynbee: I would eat a rack of hats if the party's leaders had the bottle to set national politics alight. There is nothing left to lose

    7 Sep 2009:  

    Murdoch should copy BBC | Look at state of US news

    6 Sep 2009: The big issue
    1 Sep 2009: Jonathan Freedland: Rupert's son is bent on continuing the war his father started. But he'll find Auntie matches the NHS in public affections
    31 Aug 2009: Editorial: James Murdoch would like the British media to be more like the US system, but the mixture of public and private broadcasters works well in the UK
    28 Aug 2009: Emily Bell: The MacTaggart lecture was an interesting contribution to the post-Darwin debate about nature versus nurture
    James Murdoch delivering the MacTaggart lecture
    28 Aug 2009:  

    News Corp chief describes UK TV as 'Addams Family of world media' in hard-hitting MacTaggart lecture. ByJames Robinson

     

     

     

    Rupert and James Murdoch montage
    28 Aug 2009:  

    Maggie Brown: As he delivers the MacTaggart lecture tonight, James Murdoch faces an industry vastly changed from the one his father 

     

     

     

    26 Aug 2009: Mohan joins pantheon of former showbusiness column editors who went on to run the tabloid
    25 Aug 2009:  

    Dan Kennedy: If advertisers can force Fox News talkshow host Glenn Beck off the air and prevent his hateful lies from spreading, good for them

    25 Aug 2009:  

    Dan Kennedy: If advertisers can force Fox News talkshow host Glenn Beck off the air and prevent his hateful lies from spreading, good for them

    24 Aug 2009:  

    What's the future for London Lite now that thelondonpaper is on the verge of closing? Lite, published by the Daily Mail & General Trust, is entwined with the London Evening Standard and has always had some advantages over its News International rival

    A disgarded wet copy of the London Paper
    24 Aug 2009:  

    Declaring that free has no part in the future of news, Rupert Murdoch pulled the plug on his freesheet. Ciar Byrneand Ben Dowell report as a bitter rivalry with Associated Newspapers ends

     

     

     

    23 Aug 2009: Dominic Mohan favourite to land role, but Murdoch may have to be convinced
    23 Aug 2009:  

    Peter Preston: Rupert Murdoch, to his great credit, does not kill newspapers lightly

    21 Aug 2009: Simon Fletcher: London's newspaper market should learn from the demise of the first publication to try to break the Evening Standard's monopoly
    21 Aug 2009:  

    Some 24 hours behind the news, I'm breaking into my holiday to write this...

    20 Aug 2009: News Corp chief's pay falls following advertisivng slump
    18 Aug 2009:  

    paidContent: They are talking up pay walls because they think if more titles join them it will boost their own pay plans

    14 Aug 2009:  

    Fancy chartering a yacht? Then why not enjoy a week aboard Rupert Murdoch's 184ft (56m) Rosehearty, described as an "aluminium masterpiece" with a "stunning interior by famous French designer Christian Liagre". It isn't exactly cheap. For just one week the rental charge is $310,000 (£200,000). Still, a media mogul running a loss-making corporation has to make ends meet somehow. Sources (plus pictures):Cityfile/monacoeye

    Rupert Murdoch13 Aug 2009: News Corporation chairman makes his 183ft 'aluminium masterpiece' available to hire
     
     
     
    10 Aug 2009:  

    Simon Jenkins: A paywall will only delay newspapers' Dunkirk. But I saw the future at Glastonbury – it's time for print to go live





    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/sep/21/charging-for-content-rupert-murdoch

    Murdoch's digital news cartel will not persuade people to pay for content


    The market research revelation that only 5% of UK web users would pay for online news doesn't surprise me in the least. But I doubt that it will stop Rupert Murdoch in his tracks. According to the survey, by Harris Interactive, if people are confronted by their favourite news site charging for content, then 74% of them will find another free site. That's just as I would expect. I am convinced that paywalls will fail. Say, however, there is no other free site available? By which I mean a site with similar values to the one people currently choose. In Britain, there will always be the BBC - unless the Murdoch-inspired anti-BBC propaganda forces it to close or to reduce its online service. I don't see how any paper will circumnavigate that problem. In the US, there is no equivalent to our public service broadcaster. So let's imagine that Murdoch's attempt by his own News Corporation to stitch together a digital news cartel comes off. He may persuade all the leading newspapers and publishing companies - from the New York Times and the Washington Post, for example, to the sites owned by Gannett (such as USA Today) and Tribune - to erect paywalls at the same time. Would that work? Well, there are still the TV news sites, such as ABC News (which managed to attract 16.3m uniques in July, edging it into the top five US news destinations). So he would need to persuade them too. Then there is the Associated Press to think about. It is owned by the major publishers, but would have to cease its current deal with Google. Of course, news is only one part of the websites' offerings. Each carries commentary, analysis and opinion by bylined contributors who are often sought by users. These could prove more of a lure in specific instances. But what about being able to access a range of columnists? Would people be happy to pay subscriptions to, say, three sites in order to be able to read contributions by commentators? That's very doubtful. Murdoch has confronted and overcome orthodoxy throughout his career. In so doing, he has always stressed that he has defeated "the establishment" on behalf of "the people" (the audience, the readers, the viewers). His mantra: I am giving the people what they want. This time, by contrast, he appears to be flying in the face of peoples' wishes. He is taking away from them what they want. It is his first major strategic error and I am convinced that charging for content - no matter how justified it might appear - will not work.

    Sources: PaidContent/Media Guardian

    BlairwasagoodPM

    22 Sep 2009, 7:54PM

    Murdoch is just going to add the Times to one of his Sky packs - so people will not actively be choosing to pay for it but their overall subscription will go up £2 a month and it will be included. Since Sky is a monopoly they can do that.


    Waltroon

    21 Sep 2009, 1:58PM

    Here is the problem: newspaper circulations and ad revenues are in freefall. Millions of people prefer the online versions and – a bit like Kim Fletcher and his wife Sarah Sands – prefer their papers in aggregate. Sadly, the digital titles generate very little cash. Readers who used to consider it obvious that news came at a price – a cover price – now want it for free.

    Murdoch has read the runes and has decided that the old rules should still apply: if you want to read his stuff, you're going to have to pay him for the privilege.

    Will it all work out? I don't know. Young people read less real news than they used to. My son and his friends – all graduates – hardly read news at all. But it seems to me that Murdoch at least has logic on his side. If his model fails, then I have no idea what will happen.

    You disagree, Herr Professor. Presumably you don't receive cash for anything you do and are kept afloat by advertisers who support your many platforms.

    Or have I got that wrong?

    BlairwasagoodPM

    22 Sep 2009, 11:41AM

    What journalist is going to want to write for papers who lose 95% of their readers overnight? Journalists need reach, it's their oxygen.

    ClaireinOz

    21 Sep 2009, 11:16PM

    Please, Roy, it's people's, not peoples'. Sub, anyone?

    Anecdotal evidence indicates that in-depth news and comment is becoming increasingly peripheral to the lives of generation Y, or Z, or whatever it is these days. Younger twentysomethings are already out of the habit of reading anything more demanding than special-interest blogs and their mates' Facebook entries. Do we really want to drive them - as well as older generations - further away from "serious" sites?

    AJFrance

    22 Sep 2009, 12:06PM

    i gave up newspapers some years ago. I thought I rediscovered news recently online but I didn't, I rediscovered the discussion. The problem with offering news is that people will be selective in what they read. I f i were to subscribe to a guardian site I would expect a good coverage of those things that interest me or I would stop using it. I would also stop if I felt the site was being apologist for any group. I have been in France for two years and the cost of reading any english paper is extortionate so I read the french Midi-Libre in the bar. A genuine free press in every sense of the word.

    I remember my Dad taking me to the Library to read the papers when I was little. The internet will be used in the same way. The only solution would be a paywall for everything. I suppose when the paywall hits the western press then we will all watch al-jazeera.

    forthurst

    22 Sep 2009, 12:06PM

    Murdoch should at least be congratulated for attempting to create a more viable delivery model in respect of the established newspaper titles than existed before. The question is to what extent readers value content which has been shaped to confirm a very specific world view. This issue does not have to be faced nearly as starkly by sites which offer specialised content e.g. the FT.

    There exists also the question of whether much of what passes for journalism offers any essential added value rather than a mere distraction which could be obtained from innumerable free sites. What value can be placed on the opinions or reportage of an English graduate when operating well outside their sphere of competence?

    On the web there exists specialist sites where the content and journalistic endeavour is highly focused. These potentially must be attractive to advertisers and cohorts of readers. This raises the question as to whether general news media have a future per se.

    Lastly there is the issue of censorship: it has been very noticeable, for example, how poor the reporting on the 'War on Terror' has been from 9/11 onwards. It is also very noticeable that when a major newspaper attempts to dangle its toes in the water, they are met with a solid wall of anger from a select group. So the question is to what extent should newspapers be constrained by the opinions of a self-important minority when there are so many blogs that put up two fingers and discuss freely areas where others fear to tread? How much longer can you get away with reporting casualty figures or suggesting the war is a mistake without examining the question 'why' until a satisfactory answer is given.

    jonnyankles

    22 Sep 2009, 11:04AM

    @emilybell, 'curtailing the delivery system' has worked extremely well as a model for lots of other successful information-based businesses - all of them in fact! and the idea that online news delivery has a billion potential business models floating around, is severely limited if you want to remain a quality news organisation. this will always cost a lot of money

    i know it's easy to claim that a cranky old man like Murdoch doesn't understand the rules of the intertubes (personally I think he might), but what about the whizz kids at Google? they have recently announced a content-payment structure ... i think they're a much better chance to do it successfully (despite the fact about 95% of their ideas fail) as they're in a strong position to leverage news providers to partner with them

    EastFinchleyite

    22 Sep 2009, 10:14AM

    There is another factor to consider. The existence of web based news services has changed the relationship between writer and reader. It was a clear one way transfer with the old paper based systems (if you ignore readers letters). Now its has become much more bothway.

    For example, Roy's original article ATL is 462 words long including headings.

    The comments BTL so far up to Harbinger at 8.51am are 3622 words. This means that, purely in numbers of words, in this isolated case 89% of this part of the Guardian has been contributed free by the readers. I make no allowance or adjustment for quality either way!

    If Murdoch's papers have a similar arrangement then setting up a paywall will cut his publications off from a large amount of content which they get for free at the moment.

    harbinger

    22 Sep 2009, 8:38AM

    The bottom line is that Murdoch has tried this before and quietly dropped the scheme. Why he thinks it's going to work a second time around beats me.

    harbinger

    22 Sep 2009, 8:51AM

    @AlanRusbridger -
    I for one praise The Guardian for its digital content and further more its editorial attitude and guidelines.

    The Guardian unlike every other newspaper trusts its readers and allows them as much freedom as possible. And furthermore as Alan here demostrates is prepared to join in the discussion.

    The contrast with Murdoch's empire is very stark. It is run on autocratic lines where only those opinions that broadly conform to those of the newspapers are allowed. Some criticism gets through for the sake of face saving, but in reality commenting on Murdoch's websites is a bit like offering a comment to the old Pravda.

    The Mail group is just as bad, probably worse when it comes to censorship and complete disdain for what readers actually think.

    The Telegraph is a bit of an eye popper. Either the only people who read the Telegraph are Colonel Blimps, or they are the only ones allowed through, or God forbid the world is full of Jingoists!

    harbinger

    22 Sep 2009, 8:51AM

    @AlanRusbridger -
    I for one praise The Guardian for its digital content and further more its editorial attitude and guidelines.

    The Guardian unlike every other newspaper trusts its readers and allows them as much freedom as possible. And furthermore as Alan here demostrates is prepared to join in the discussion.

    The contrast with Murdoch's empire is very stark. It is run on autocratic lines where only those opinions that broadly conform to those of the newspapers are allowed. Some criticism gets through for the sake of face saving, but in reality commenting on Murdoch's websites is a bit like offering a comment to the old Pravda.

    The Mail group is just as bad, probably worse when it comes to censorship and complete disdain for what readers actually think.

    The Telegraph is a bit of an eye popper. Either the only people who read the Telegraph are Colonel Blimps, or they are the only ones allowed through, or God forbid the world is full of Jingoists!

    jochebed2

    22 Sep 2009, 8:42AM

    Mr Greenslade, Mr Rusbridger, the EU could use its own cartel law and ban Murdoch from using OUR taxpayer-funded satellites for his transmissions and then having the chutzpah to double- or triple-charge EU citizens for using their own satellites for his TV and web content. (We still boycott Murdoch at our house; its feasible).

    What about lobbying the EU on behalf of the independent media and their supporters?

    Corinthian11

    22 Sep 2009, 8:29AM

    My morning routine used to involve reading the Guardian Newspaper either on my way to work or during lunch break. Since the advent of the digital version and as I now work from home, I dip into it during the day and every now and again I feel compelled to add my thoughts on emotive subjects or to cheer on columnists such as Hadley Freeman, Marina Hyde or Charlie Brooker.

    Would I pay for the privilege? - absolutely not. I'd find another distraction. The reason is, I don't really come here much for 'news' I come to be entertained when I'm bored or the work is at a lull period.

    The web is a big place... start erecting digital turnstiles and people like me who don't really care much whether you exist or not will merely drift away to find other things to pass the time.

    Impressive

    22 Sep 2009, 4:00AM

    Emily Bell - I'm no Luddite when it comes to online opportunities to spread news to a wide audience and make money out of it. I don't want to uninvent the internet, so apologies if my earlier contribution suggested otherwise.
    My interest is content quality, not the medium of delivery. Elsewhere on this site I've been castigated by posters for apparently wanting to flush all papers down the plughole right now.
    I agree these are still early days, horribly exciting days, if you like.
    However, it's a fact that if you going to charge for viewing, or to make your money from advertisers impressed by the passing eyeball numbers, then you will need good content to lure an audience. And that has a price.
    It's great that the Guardian is open about the current gap between accrued revenue on this excellent site against operating and Capex costs. It's still a sound investment for the future.
    I think the real danger is to the big regional groups as they belatedly try to gear up for the adventure. Many are already running their limited lifespan print operations on an editorial shoestring and their content will not have the gravitas to hold an audience.
    What a dilemma.... their weakened newspapers are losing a dying or disinterested readership too quickly, and not making enough money to properly fund website development or sustain editorial operations capable of changing up a gear and producing dynamic content for print or online.
    Some are turning themselves inside out to solve this and, as the internet adventure settles down into a more lucrative future, they will face two further threats to their online revenue streams.
    Firstly, start-up costs and overheads for a website are much lower than those for a print operation. I reckon a couple of good, commercially aware journalists and a part-time ad rep will be able to give them a run for their money in some markets.
    The regional media operations also face losing a chunk of their bread and butter advertising because web-savvy small businesses are picking up customers directly through their own online sites. They don't need a middleman, at least not one that wants to charge what the traditional newspaper groups will need to do to make their required profit margins.
    This week, having had to break into my home following a lost key fiasco, I simply put the name of my small town and 'odd job man' into Google. Up came names within a 10 miles radius, mostly on 'homemade' off-the-shelf websites. A phone call later I had a guy living three street away willing to come round the next day to fix my door.
    I didn't even need to go to the local newspaper website, and he hadn't paid to advertise. He told me he stopped 'using the papers' about a year ago and relied on his 'page' and people passing on his website address and mobile number via email and social networks.
    He provided an excellent service. Unless media businesses do the same they will have wasted online investment money while not making the maximum out of their print offerings in the meantime.

    pauljaymes

    22 Sep 2009, 1:34AM

    Let Murdoch and others charge for their news content and go out of business. I see only a bunch of regurgitated PR material and week-old blogger stuff there anyway. The real news is on the blogs - like Guido Fawkes - and low budget sites like IndyMedia and Holy Moly - way before it ever gets to established media. Take last week's tube map 'river-gate' as an example. It was all over the blogs days before any print journalists picked it up.

    All a lot of traditional print titles are doing now is acting as aggregators and editors for news content that's already out there - some may think there's value in that, but it's exactly what twitter, facebook, delicious and others are doing in a much more automated and faster way. And the kids just aren't reading tabloids any more.

    If RM wants to make money from selling internet content in this world, it's going to have to be pretty special content. I'm thinking less news, more exclusive interviews. To sell, you have to provide content you can't get anywhere else; like the sports on Sky.


    FreshTedium

    22 Sep 2009, 7:32AM

    Newspapers and their ilk will always get a small slice of total ad revenue as long as Google dominate so dramatically the placement of ads across the internet. If they wanted to make more they would invest jointly in a competitor and then cease buying from Google en-masse.

    LordWotWot

    22 Sep 2009, 10:22AM

    As much as I hate the vile Murdoch Empire and everything it stands for, I think caution is required when assuming charging for online news will fail. Here is a vicious media group who can swing a general election with a biased newspaper cartel. News International now provide all commercial radio news in the UK (and beyond). Who would have thought in 1988 that we would have to pay to watch most sport on TV? - This group has a history of getting its way - I wouldn't be surprised if it owned the worldwide web in a few years

    AJFrance

    22 Sep 2009, 12:06PM

    i gave up newspapers some years ago. I thought I rediscovered news recently online but I didn't, I rediscovered the discussion. The problem with offering news is that people will be selective in what they read. I f i were to subscribe to a guardian site I would expect a good coverage of those things that interest me or I would stop using it. I would also stop if I felt the site was being apologist for any group. I have been in France for two years and the cost of reading any english paper is extortionate so I read the french Midi-Libre in the bar. A genuine free press in every sense of the word.

    I remember my Dad taking me to the Library to read the papers when I was little. The internet will be used in the same way. The only solution would be a paywall for everything. I suppose when the paywall hits the western press then we will all watch al-jazeera.

    BlairwasagoodPM

    22 Sep 2009, 7:54PM

    Murdoch is just going to add the Times to one of his Sky packs - so people will not actively be choosing to pay for it but their overall subscription will go up £2 a month and it will be included. Since Sky is a monopoly they can do that.

    Carnac

    22 Sep 2009, 6:36PM

    The simple reason that the Murdoch clan want the BBC to charge is to create another monopoly for themselves in the UK.

    The demise of newspapers is near because of censorship of contributors. It will be the blogs that will win if newspapers charge for onine content.

    hass

    22 Sep 2009, 6:29PM

    I think one problem is, is that the product (news) is in many cases non-essential or not good enough. As someone with an interest in economics I find the blogs (and often their comments) more useful and better than the pay for sites (a lot of which insisted there would be no crisis). Non-essential would be the celebrity and much of the sports journalism. I think in the future there will some paid for news sites, and these will be of high quality (e.g. the FT) but the weaker ones (I can't see a valid online model for the Sun), will go back to being print only and the rest won't survive. It's partly the media's and Murdoch's fault for dumbing down over the past 30 years. Murdoch is part of the problem and not part of the solution.

    arisyakob

    22 Sep 2009, 6:04PM

    indeed - the idea that there are only two models to monetise content is short sighted - i don't think the world is going to change back to the way it was because Murdoch is a recidivist ;-)

    I wrote a piece about this for Contagious Magazine:

    http://farisyakob.typepad.com/blog/2009/06/the-content-republic.html

    @faris

    jembajdjemba

    22 Sep 2009, 4:50PM

    The essential problem here as I see it is the Murdoch sites, in the UK at least, aren't ones that are worth paying for. The Times has dull regurgitated articles and a style that seems to have missed any of the advances in website design over the last few years. The Sun is The Sun and offers little compelling reason to pay for sensationalist showbiz gossip and over the top football coverage when superior versions can be found elsewhere.

    To convince people to change, there needs to be carrot as well as stick.

    ondwanaland

    22 Sep 2g009, 4:44PM

    harbinger

    "commenting on Murdoch's websites is a bit like offering a comment to the old Pravda." You can say that again!

    during the Gaza massacre i left a mild-mannered comment on a Danny Finkelstein article supporting the Israelis. Not only was it never posted, but after 36 hours there were only 16 posts. All of them supporting Israel.

    Disgraceful. Thank god for the Guardian

    RGreenslade

    22 Sep 2009, 4:26PM

    Contributor

    The comments have run on without my being able to respond until now. There is an obvious forecasting split between those who believe paywalls will work and those who don't. We shall, of course, see about that.

    I note that <strong>Alan Rusbridger</strong> and <strong>Emily Bell</strong> have dealt with Guardian online's losses and revenue. So I've no need to add to that, except to say that GMG's financial numbers are transparent.

    And, lest the point did not get across, <strong><em>ALL</em></strong> media companies are in trouble. I spoke about this last week in an interview with <strong>Rory McLeod</strong>. Hear it at

    http://www.nationalbroadcastingschool.com/blog/?p=287

    @<strong>Waltroon</strong>, I am a paid contributor to The Guardian, online and print (as you probably well know).

    @<strong>ClaireinOz</strong>, I plead guilty to the subbing error. Your other point is one that I am pursuing all the time. There is a profound change in interest in news, and not only from the emerging generation.

    @<strong>SidSmith1</strong>, an interesting idea. Google will like that one.

    @<strong>newsinusacom</strong>, in answer to your questions: I don' have a final salary pension, let alone a generous one.

    I did benefit from my university fees being paid but, as a mature student, I paid for everything else (by casual subbing at weekends on the <strong>Sunday Mirror</strong> and <strong>Reveille</strong>).

    I am not a media Trustafarian ring fenced from this current economic downturn. I am in the same perilous boat as all working journalists.

    I most certainly am concerned about the levels of debt run up by the government, as every citizen should be. My children and my children's children may well suffer in future.

    If there is only one show in town providing news, whether the BBC or BBC/Google, it is plainly not plural and definitely not in the best interests of democracy. (By the way, the BBC agrees).

    Finally, I have never owned any Google shares, directly or indirectly. The only shares I own, or have have ever owned, are some 200 Trinity Mirror shares. I bought them during the post-Maxwell period specifically to enable me to attend annual meetings and obtain early copies of annual reports and accounts. They are, in financial terms, worthless. And they have not stopped me from being critical of Trinity Mirror when I felt it necessary.

    BernardoB

    22 Sep 2009, 3:47PM

    I make a point of never knowingly paying for anything connected with Rupert Murdoch, if I can help it. The exception being Fox Films.

    FAFENG

    22 Sep 2009, 3:37PM

    @Landice
    22 Sep 09, 3:12pm
    I wonder what they'd be holding it (their nerve) for? As @emilybell has said

    Guardian's digital revenues have grown ten fold in eight years, to approaching £30m

    There are examples of youtube, amazon and others
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2009/sep/16/facebook-money
    or maybe Guardian will become official Google partner, break even and remain free!

    wikipedia

    22 Sep 2009, 3:34PM

    News reporting has historically been a losing proposition, more often than not. That fact hasn't always been seen as an impossible situation, either.

    We've had people buying a newspaper simply as a platform for their own views (Col. McCormick at the Chicago Tribune, Hearst) - if you want to make a small fortune in newspapers, start with a large fortune. Of course that meant the playing field wasn't level, because the (losing) newspapers were being subsidized by other sources of income. Remember when Murdoch did his price wars to destroy his competition? Same thing. That's what people do when they hold the public in contempt - they don't believe in the free market of ideas, but try to emulate the old robber barons of industry by making themselves the only game in town.

    TV news used to be subsidized by the more popular, cheaper-to-produce entertainment programs (watch "Good Night and Good Luck"), same as local phone service was once subsidized by long-distance. For better or worse, those days are gone. Now everything's supposed to be its own profit center.

    The US has PBS (TV) and NPR (radio) and I would guess those are getting more popular for news as network news gets shorter and fluffier, and cable news gets more partisan and less reliable. Americans also have access, through the internet, to news media from around the world - including the Guardian. Obviously that means the Guardian is much more influential now, as are their commentators.

    Remember when the NYT put all their columnists behind the pay wall? Krugman suddenly went from being read by everyone to being read by relatively few - and this in the middle of the economic debacle. What Murdoch defines as 'good' is what the rest of us define as 'bad'.

    The current problem seems to be that advertising isn't working as a subsidy. Either advertising techniques have to improve, or another subsidy has to be found or invented. I just don't think online subscriptions are going to work.

    ...
    SidSmith1

    22 Sep 2009, 12:43PM

    I think it might work.

    Google is talking about administering such a set-up. It needs to operate as follows:

    A known company (eg, Google) runs a one-stop registration process. You get access to every major newspaper in the world. It's cheap.

    If it became popular, you might even find sites that are currently free, including blogs, opting to move inside the system on the basis that tuppence a month is better than now.

    Sazclark

    22 Sep 2009, 12:20PM

    Rupert Murdoch already has an exceptionally well proven business model for charging for content that used to be free. It's called the Sky Sports Pack, Children's Pack, News & Events Pack etc.

    As Film 4 found out, it's true that very few people are interested in paying to subscribe to individual channels/publications. But Sky has proved that people are perfectly happy to pay for a combination pack of services that appeal to their particular interests.

    Ask consumers if they would pay for a package of internet services (say a 'current affairs pack', a 'music pack' or a 'sports pack' that included the leading publications in the field as well as video content and access to comment from the leading experts) and, I think, you'll get a rather different answer.

     
     
     

    Murdoch lost millions on his London free and achieved nothing in the process

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2009/aug/21/rupert-murdoch-freesheets
    Some 24 hours behind the news, I'm breaking into my holiday to write this...What was the point? What did Rupert Murdoch achieve beyond losing pots
    of money for his own company, News Corporation, while ensuring that his rival, Daily Mail & General Trust, lost pots more?

    I am sorry about thelondonpaper journalists losing their jobs, of course. Stefano Hatfield and his team are not to blame for what has happened.

    But I cannot mourn the closing of a paper that should never have been launched in the first place. It has accomplished nothing of benefit for London (despite my colleague, Stephen Brook's belief that it punctured the London Evening Standard's relentless negativity and Simon Fletcher's argument about
    it challenging a monopoly).

    In truth, it was a quasi-paper, a worthless article that made no positive impact of any kind, on London or on journalism. It looked fine enough.
    There were occasional articles of interest. But the overall package, with its repurposed agency copy and accent on entertainment trivia, was wholly unmemorable.
    Then again, it did not purport to be anything else. It was published to be discarded. It was journalistic sleight of hand, the culmination of the British popular
    newspaper trend throughout the last 40 years - a paper with content to amuse and not a paper with content to use. It interested the public
    (well, it diverted some of them) without concerning itself with the public interest. Like almost all free newspapers (with honourable exceptions)
     it was designed to turn a profit - from advertising revenue - and the editorial content was nothing more than a superficial dressing.
    Of course, the difference with thelondonpaper is not only that it never did turn a profit, it never had a hope of doing so.
    It was published specifically to spike DMGT's guns and to make life impossible for the Standard. It certainly achieved that. It was a war of
    attrition launched by a media mogul who could not bear to see that another media outfit had managed to put one over on him by making money
    from the morning free, Metro. Much as I admire Murdoch, I think his strategy stank. He has crippled DMGT and forced it into a sale of the Standard.
     He has suffered losses himself, but the big loser is undoubtedly Lord Rothermere's company.

    On Murdoch's part, it has been a disgraceful business from pointless start to humbling finish.

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/24/thelondonpaper-rupert-murdoch-news-international

    Why Murdoch closed the London Paper

    Having declared that free has no part in the future of news,
    Rupert Murdoch last week pulled the plug on his London freesheet, ending a bitter rivalry with Associated Newspapers

     

    Waste paper … Rupert Murdoch no longer considers the London Paper a valuable part of his empire.
    Photograph: David Levene.

    When he closed Britain's first national colour newspaper, Today, in November 1995, Rupert Murdoch was quoted in the paper's final edition:
    "I have never closed a newspaper in this country and I hope I never do so again."

    But Murdoch is a businessman and last week he looked on as his son James, head of News Corporation in Europe and Asia, announced plans to
    close the evening freesheet the London Paper next month.

    Journalists on the title were "shaken, shocked and very disappointed" when Clive Milner, chief operating officer of Murdoch's UK newspaper empire 
    News International (NI), told them of the decision. "We had no inkling until we got an email that there would be a meeting at 1 o'clock when we had gone to press,"
     says one staffer. "Even then we weren't expecting this because we often have update meetings. But a pep talk and two PowerPoint slides
    later it was clear we were closing." The London Paper's editor, Stefano Hatfield, who only learned of its demise a couple of days before his workforce,
    is speaking to each of the 40 journalists – out of a total staff of 60 – to discuss their redundancies. He hopes to find jobs for as many of them as possible
     elsewhere in Wapping, including at the new Sunday Times website, one of the few places in the industry still recruiting. The announcement surprised
    media observers. Three-quarters of a million pounds had been invested in the London Paper's website this year. Despite making a pre-tax loss of £12.9m
     in the year to 29 June 2008 – the last set of figures available – the NI title appeared to hold the upper hand against its Associated-owned free rival,
    London Lite. Besides, if anyone could take on Lord Rothermere in the London market, it would be the Murdochs. As recently as February,
    when Associated sold majority control of the paid-for London Evening Standard, the London Paper crowed in a full-page advert that its readers had helped
    to bring about the "fire sale". Despite this, an internal review recommending the closure of the London Paper convinced James Murdoch, who is understood
     to have taken the decision within the past two weeks once he saw the group's year-end figures. Rebekah Brooks (née Wade), who is taking over as
    chief executive of News International next week, was away when the announcement was made. But she has never made a secret of her disdain for
     free newspapers and, despite her new role, had not joined the board of NI Free Newspapers, the publisher of the London Paper.
    The real driving force behind the decision is Rupert Murdoch's new-found evangelism for paid-for content.
     This month he declared News Corp's mission is "to increase our revenue from all our content". A loss-making free paper does not fit into this vision.
    Given the advertising downturn, most analysts expect the London Paper's losses over the past 12 months to have worsened. Douglas McCabe, a media
    analyst with Enders Media in London, says: "Murdoch is saying 'enough is enough'. He's saying newsrooms have value and by giving away free content
    you devalue them. It would be somewhat ambiguous to start charging for online news and still give away news in a free paper."
    It all seemed so different three years ago when, irritated by the success Associated was enjoying with its free morning newspaper Metro,
    Murdoch jumped at Hatfield's proposal for a free evening paper. The London Paper was a carefully market-researched product aimed at 18- to 35-year-olds.
    It aimed to be more inclusive than the Evening Standard, appealing to young professionals travelling home to north, south and east London rather than
     just well-heeled west London. It hired girl- and boy-about-town columnists and, more radically, gay equivalents; it reached out to Muslim readers,
    and made an effort to put black faces on the cover in stories not related to crime. Just days before the London Paper's launch in September 2006,
    Associated stole Murdoch's thunder with a spoiler, the London Lite. A bitter contest ensued. The London Paper is more costly to produce,
    with a large standalone team of journalists, while the Lite takes most of its copy from the Standard. The Murdoch title prints and distributes around 500,000
    copies a day, compared with Lite's 400,000, adding 25% in costs. When advertising became scarcer, the London Paper refused to drop its rates while Lite would compromise, according to advertising agencies. Industry analysts were quick to point out the similarity between the current battle and that waged between
    Associated and Robert Maxwell in 1987. Associated responded to the arrival of Maxwell's evening title, the London Daily News, by relaunching a cut-price
    version of the defunct Evening News. Maxwell's title lasted just a few months after selling for twice the Associated paper's 5p price. Yet executives at
     Associated appeared genuinely surprised by last week's announcement. It is worth noting that News International has not withdrawn from bidding for the
    London Underground morning distribution contract currently held by Metro, which is up for renewal early next year. NI declined to comment.
    There had even been rumours that Brooks would negotiate a deal with Rothermere, Associated's proprietor, to stem the heavy losses on both sides.
    The level of rivalry reportedly led to cheers in the Standard's newsroom when staff heard of their rival's demise last week. On a personal level, however,
     journalists there were concerned for former colleagues who had jumped ship, most recently the Lite reporter Bo Wilson, who left last week to join the
     London Paper as deputy news editor. The big question now is how long London Lite will keep going. A spokesman for Daily Mail & General Trust,
    which owns Associated Newspapers, said only that the group was "watching developments with interest". But Lucy Barrett, editor of Marketing, says:
     "If you lose your competitor, you no longer have a market. In theory, Lite should pick up more advertisers, but it depends whether or not the advertisers
    are there. I'm not sure they are."

    Free newspapers funded by advertising are a volatile business model in any downturn, let alone a recession. While freesheets are unlikely to
     disappear altogether, in closing the London Paper the Murdochs have underlined their belief that charging for news is the way forward.

     

     

    Why Ridding and Murdoch can't stop talking about pay walls

    paidContent: They are talking up pay walls because they think if more titles join them it will boost their own pay plans

    Rupert Murdoch and Financial Times CEO John Ridding sure like talking about why newspapersshould charge for content—
    but few papers have followed FT.com in charging and none are yet as squarely behind Murdoch. Ridding appears in yet another newspaper
    today (NYTimes.com), talking up the paid content paradigm. But what's in it for them if other titles follow their lead?

    FT.com MD Rob Grimshaw told me in an interview earlier this month: "We have been the black sheep of the industry for seven or eight years 
    but we believe very passionately that it was the right thing to do…. We would like other publishers to join up".
    He continues: "Our experience has been so positive—we can't understand why they have been so reluctant." But why does the FT want to stop feeling like
    an outsider as the sole UK national newspaper to charge online? Put simply - if other, general-interest titles start asking for money, FT.com's existing,
    high-end paid-for news might also seem worth handing over cash for. That would make it easier for FT.com to build on its current 117,000 paying subscribers.
    Likewise, the normally less open Murdoch is trying to soften up rivals to follow him in charging, fearing that, if he raised the wall alone, he might find readers
    knocking on other doors. I asked Grimshaw whether the forthcoming Sundaytimes.co.uk could make a success of charging for content. No comment on that one,
    but he added: "In general, we don't see any reason why paid content has to be confined to niche marketplaces." It's an uncomplicated plea to publishers to boost
    their revenues—and the FT's—by supporting a single paid model. But Ridding and Murdoch are well aware that if publishers clubbed together to so much
    as discuss an industry-wide willingness to charge—let alone a shared technology or cartel—the UK's Competition Commission might express displeasure. 
    So what better way to side-step that problem than by having the debate in public… ?

    Trinity Mirror (LSE: TNI) CEO Sly Bailey and Guardian Media Group CEO Carolyn McCall told the Culture and Media Select Committee in June that competition
    laws banned them from meeting to talk about how to tackle "superdominant Google (NSDQ: GOOG) News". Publishers in the US had to meet in private
    to escape the attention of anti-trust authorities. By making public statements, rather than agreeing private strategies, they escape risk of antitrust action


      Holiday like a media mogul on Rupert Murdoch's superyacht

    Rosehearty, his 180-foot 'masterpiece', is yours for a mere€210,000 … a week

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2009/aug/13/rupert-murdoch-yacht-hire-offer

    The Australian tycoon may head a $33bn (£20bn) global newspaper and television empire, but even billionaires can do with a little extra pocket money now
    and then. It has emerged that the News Corporationchairman has made his yacht, Rosehearty, a 183ft (56-metre) "aluminium masterpiece", available for
    holiday rents – although of course only those with quite a few million of their own need apply. The charter company CharterWorld.com is listing the three-year-old
     yacht for hire in the Mediterranean or Caribbean, boasting "magnificent" performance and "a stunning interior by famous French designer Christian Liaigre" that
    includes "full beam owner's suite with king bed and sitting area". The yacht's two tenders, reportedly named Grace and Chloe after Murdoch's young twin daughters,
     are included, along with two dinghies complete with instructor, six sets of dive gear, and nine plasma TVs. Photographs on the company's site of the interior
    reveal the 78-year-old to have a minimalist taste in interior design that one might suggest (though not in any outlet owned by NewsCorp) borders on the bland.
    The spacious main salon features a large sofa in beige, the same colour as featured in the internal reception rooms, and, for the sake of consistency,
    the bedrooms. A similar approach to colour characterises its exterior – hull and masts are a brilliant, uninterrupted white. Hugo Andreae, editor-in-chief
    of the magazine Superyacht World, said at 56 metres the Rosehearty was certainly "up there" in terms of luxury and scale, but was by no means among
     the flashiest of vessels favoured by the super-rich. "A few years ago that would have been a pretty sizeable yacht, but these days you regularly build up to
    100 metres." With even Murdoch's relative tiddler costing an estimated €30m, however, Andreae said it was not unusual for the super-wealthy to offer their
     yachts for charter "to offset the enormous costs. There are certainly bigger and more luxurious boats available." He added that those hiring a boat would
    not be made aware of its owner's identity. "It's a very discreet world, for obvious reasons." According to enthusiasts who have posted sightings on the web,
     the Rosehearty has recently sailed around Alaska, where Murdoch has reportedly been holidaying with the actor Mel Gibson, according to Gawker.com.
    One spotter on the site yachts.monacoeye.com reported that she arrived two days ago in British Columbia, Canada, commenting: "What a beauty!"
    Others who have first-hand experience of the Rosehearty are the Conservative leader, David Cameron, who in October took a private jet to the Greek island
     of Santorini where the yacht was moored in order have drinks on board with the NewsCorp chairman. Singer Billy Joel, a sailing enthusiast, has also reportedly
    spent time on board with Murdoch and his wife, Wendi Deng. The billionaire has been a yachting fan for some time, marrying Deng on board the Morning Glory
     in New York harbour in 1999. At 48 metres, however, that boat was evidently not large enough for his growing second family; happily, Murdoch found another
    media tycoon on whom to offload it – the Italian prime minister, Silvio Berlusconi.

    Other top lets

    Richard Branson's private island, Necker, is available for private hire for $51,000 (£30,000) a night, with a minimum stay of five nights. The 74-acre island,
    part of the British Virgin Islands, can accommodate up to 28 people. The £80m Maltese Falcon yacht of Tom Perkins, a Silicon Valley billionaire, can be hired
    for £300,000 a week, and comes with four dinghies, two windsurfers and a jet ski. It can accommodate 16 guests, with 18 crew. Musha Cay, a group of 11
     islands in the Bahamas owned by David Copper–field can be rented from $37,500 for 12 people to $46,500 for 24 people. The islands have five guest houses,
    40 beaches, a gym, and other facilities. Mick Jagger lets out his oceanfront villa, Stargroves, in Mustique. The six-bedroom Japanese-style villa comes with
     a large koi pond, a freshwater swimming pool and croquet court. There is also a cook, butler and gardener. It is available for £6,500 a week between May
    and December. Goldeneye, an 18-acre estate in Jamaica, was originally owned by Ian Fleming, creator of James Bond, and is where he wrote 17 of his novels.
    It is now owned by Chris Blackwell, founder of Island Records. The estate and its three villas can be rented, with the main villa costing from $2,500 a night.

    Help Rupert - rent his yacht  Fancy chartering a yacht?  Then why not enjoy a week aboard Rupert Murdoch's 184ft (56m) Rosehearty, described
     as an "aluminium masterpiece" with a "stunning interior by famous French designer Christian Liangre". It isn't exactly cheap. Gir just one ween the rental charge
    is $310,00 (£200,000). Still, a media mogul running a loss-making corporation has to make ends meet somehow. Sources (plus pictures
    :
    Cityfile/monacoey 


    Why Ridding and Murdoch can't stop talking about pay walls
    paidContent: They are talking up pay walls because they think if more titles join them it will boost their own pay plans

    Rupert Murdoch and Financial Times CEO John Ridding sure like talking about why newspapersshould charge for content—but few papers have followed
     FT.com in charging and none are yet as squarely behind Murdoch. Ridding appears in yet another newspaper today (NYTimes.com), talking up the paid
    content paradigm. But what's in it for them if other titles follow their lead?

    FT.com MD Rob Grimshaw told me in an interview earlier this month: "We have been the black sheep of the industry for seven or eight years but
    we believe very passionately that it was the right thing to do…. We would like other publishers to join up". He continues: "Our experience has been so
    positive—we can't understand why they have been so reluctant." But why does the FT want to stop feeling like an outsider as the sole UK national newspaper to charge online? Put simply - if other, general-interest titles start asking for money, FT.com's existing, high-end paid-for news might also seem worth handing over cash for. That would make it easier for FT.com to build on its current 117,000 paying subscribers. Likewise, the normally less open Murdoch is trying to soften up rivals to follow him in charging, fearing that, if he raised the wall alone, he might find readers knocking on other doors. I asked Grimshaw whether the forthcoming Sundaytimes.co.uk could make a success of charging for content. No comment on that one, but he added: "In general, we don't see any reason why paid content has to be confined to niche marketplaces." It's an uncomplicated plea to publishers to boost their revenues—and the FT's—by supporting a single paid model. But Ridding and Murdoch are well aware that if publishers clubbed together to so much as discuss an industry-wide willingness to charge—let alone a shared technology or cartel—the UK's Competition Commission might express displeasure. 

    So what better way to side-step that problem than by having the debate in public… ?

    Trinity Mirror (LSE: TNI) CEO Sly Bailey and Guardian Media Group CEO Carolyn McCall told the Culture and Media Select Committee in June that competition laws banned them from meeting to talk about how to tackle "superdominant Google (NSDQ: GOOG) News". Publishers in the US had to meet in private to escape the attention of anti-trust authorities. By making public statements, rather than agreeing private strategies, they escape risk of antitrust action

     

     

     
     
     

    72 Point achieves more national news coverage than any other PR agency in the UK72 Point is the PR division of SWNS - the UK's largest independent press agency.We have a unique and direct link to the UK press due to:  A 40 year relationship with national news editors  An EXCLUSIVE, in-house newswire service which every media organisation in the country subscribes to  An in-house team of over 100 trained journalists, feature writers and photographers  Journalists from the Telegraph, Sun and women's magazines working in the same office.  Access to global market research site www.onepoll.com which can sample thousands of respondents No matter who you are or what you do - We can achieve positive exposure for you. An interesting, quirky news story is powerful. We know what will "make" in the newspapers and will aim to build a story which satisfies two key requirements:a)