jambos are go! Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Why did Salmond meet the Murdochs and News International so often. Did they do a deal that would upset Tommy Sheridan? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Possibly something to do with them being a large employer in Scotland. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Crane Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 And also media support for the election given Trinity Mirror's (ie the Record and Mail) blanket backing for Labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 And also media support for the election given Trinity Mirror's (ie the Record and Mail) blanket backing for Labour. So you think they did a deal of some sort? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 Possibly something to do with them being a large employer in Scotland. doubt they employ that many. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Radge21 Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Alex Salmond - Rupert Murdoch. Two horrible smarmy people. Cant trust any of them, not nice or trustworthy people to put it nicely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SUTOL Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 doubt they employ that many. Several thousand I believe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 Several thousand I believe. [/quota maybe if you include BSkyB iin which NI has a minority stake. But no newspaper employs thousands. What do think Murdochs main priority in Scotland was for the last few years:- Get Iain Gray Get Charles Kennedy Get Megrahi Get Tommy Sheridan Get the Ugly Sisters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Crane Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 So you think they did a deal of some sort? Probably. Likely that they did one on the same lines that Scottish Labour did with Trinity Mirror - a number of prominent Labour figures were seen at the editorial offices of Central Quay. I notice Ian Gray trying to score political points on this issue. He should shut up given the same mud can easily be flung back at him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 5, 2011 Author Share Posted August 5, 2011 Probably. Likely that they did one on the same lines that Scottish Labour did with Trinity Mirror - a number of prominent Labour figures were seen at the editorial offices of Central Quay. I notice Ian Gray trying to score political points on this issue. He should shut up given the same mud can easily be flung back at him. So what did you think the Record wanted out of Scottish Labour that went beyond their shared political views. I can't think of something but happy to be proved wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitster Posted August 5, 2011 Share Posted August 5, 2011 Why did David Cameron and the labour party pander to them then? Give your anti-SNP agenda a rest it's really boring with no added value whatsoever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Crane Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 So what did you think the Record wanted out of Scottish Labour that went beyond their shared political views. I can't think of something but happy to be proved wrong. Post war the Labour party in Scotland has enjoyed the bulk of the electorate's support (last two Holyrood elections excepted). It would not have served the Record well to alienate the potential readership (which ironically it helped to do in the last Holyrood poll such was its blinkered support for Labour that it didn't notice the change in tide) that it could sell its product to. Imagine if they had - many moons ago when newspaper sales were booming - declared themselves as pro-Tory? Plus, be they in opposition or in power at Westminster (the latter scenario especially) scoops and exclusives aplenty in their news/political pages would no doubt be a major boost for the Record over its other print rivals. Labour in return would gain a useful propaganda tool to boost their own campaign machine. The same would go for whichever party the Sun would back for a Westminster election and no doubt in this particular instance regarding the SNP and the recent Holyrood election. Sales and exclusive stories is what newspapers gain out of such deals with political parties of all persuasions and if the chance to bend the ear of your new political bedfellow regarding an issue/policy of the day presents itself, the opportunity is sometimes taken to exploit it. How many times over the years have the Sun or Mirror (or any other paper for that matter) proclaimed victory in campaigning to get a certain piece of legislation passed through parliament and onto the statute books. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 Why did David Cameron and the labour party pander to them then? Give your anti-SNP agenda a rest it's really boring with no added value whatsoever. What is added value then. Salmond appears as culpable as any politician so why should he not be derided as well. The question is what would the Murdochs have wanted in Scotland. A foolish, unprecedented and vastly expensive perjury case ? Why did the Sun switch within 12 monte from supporting the Union to supporting the SNP ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juan Rom?n Riquelme Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 To get a gammy of Rupert Murdoch's wife. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beverley Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 What is added value then. Salmond appears as culpable as any politician so why should he not be derided as well. The question is what would the Murdochs have wanted in Scotland. A foolish, unprecedented and vastly expensive perjury case ? Why did the Sun switch within 12 monte from supporting the Union to supporting the SNP ? like anyone dallying with NI or the murdochs... we ought to know why what do the murdochs want in scotland? no idea why did they switch from labour to SNP? they have ALWAYS looked to back the obvious winner i think what kits means is we are BORED with the anti SNP moaning. they won a majority government under a system that was designed to avoid that ever happening thats right, a majority. if you don't like it, then be sure to go and campaign for the party you believe in, in the next election thats democracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smack Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Salmond has published his correspondence with Murdoch. He is hiding nothing. Is it likely Cameron will follow suit? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabbie754 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 like anyone dallying with NI or the murdochs... we ought to know why what do the murdochs want in scotland? no idea why did they switch from labour to SNP? they have ALWAYS looked to back the obvious winner i think what kits means is we are BORED with the anti SNP moaning. they won a majority government under a system that was designed to avoid that ever happening thats right, a majority. if you don't like it, then be sure to go and campaign for the party you believe in, in the next election thats democracy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabbie754 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Salmond has published his correspondence with Murdoch. He is hiding nothing. Is it likely Cameron will follow suit? Another non post by some anti SNP jambo. Still it's good fun as the unionists still can't get it how the SNP managed to not just win but gain an outright majority in a system that was meant to always have coalitions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kitster Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Great post Bev! All I want to add is the Labour party nailed their own coffin at the election by the campaign. Don't vote SNP!! Where were the policies or the positives? I didn't see them. Ian Gray arguing about the trams (the SNP were dead against the project being continued, they were voted against) The Lockerbie bomber? Spot on if you read Scots Law and understand its ethics. The country decided Labour were not the answer to our problems. Salmond is an eloquent politician. He publishes everything and has nothing to hide. Many would do well to do the same. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Comedian Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 What is added value then. Salmond appears as culpable as any politician so why should he not be derided as well. The question is what would the Murdochs have wanted in Scotland. A foolish, unprecedented and vastly expensive perjury case ? Why did the Sun switch within 12 monte from supporting the Union to supporting the SNP ? To be fair, The Suns backing didn't include independence. They still support the union and did throughout the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 like anyone dallying with NI or the murdochs... we ought to know why what do the murdochs want in scotland? no idea why did they switch from labour to SNP? they have ALWAYS looked to back the obvious winner i think what kits means is we are BORED with the anti SNP moaning. they won a majority government under a system that was designed to avoid that ever happening thats right, a majority. if you don't like it, then be sure to go and campaign for the party you believe in, in the next election thats democracy Could you point in the direction of the anti SNP moaning starting with on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
leginten Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 For comparative purposes, did Murdoch/News International ever have meetings with failed and/or disgraced numpties those political giants Henry McLeish, Wendy Alexander (the great white hope of British politics, wasn't she?) and, er, the one whose name no-one can remember who was whipped at the last election? I think we should be told. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.J Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 I like political debates on JKB. I've often changed my mind regarding my political allegiances after reading the semi-coherent rantings of some daftie on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Could you point in the direction of the anti SNP moaning starting with on here. Your entire posting history on here would be a good start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Crane Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 What is added value then. Salmond appears as culpable as any politician so why should he not be derided as well. The question is what would the Murdochs have wanted in Scotland. A foolish, unprecedented and vastly expensive perjury case ? Why did the Sun switch within 12 monte from supporting the Union to supporting the SNP ? The Sun down south had switched from Labour to Conservative by then and went back to the tactic of backing the SNP in order to split the Labour vote and weaken the latter (the result was a blow for Labour). This will not doubt be reinforced (assuming they still back the Tories by then) come the next Westminster election. Given that a significant chunk of Labour MPs come from Scotland, if the Sun feel they can aid the Tories by splitting the Labour vote and getting some of their supporters to drift to the SNP then it could weaken Labour's chances of overhauling the Tories at Westminster. This tactic had a minor degree of success in the 1992 election where the Tories made a couple of gains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 Your entire posting history on here would be a good start. I've stated my admiration for Salmond political skills a few times and congratulated the SNP on their victory. Dont think I've said much if anything on the SNP since the election. Strange that no one else has talked about Sheridan at all bar me on this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 I've stated my admiration for Salmond political skills a few times and congratulated the SNP on their victory. Dont think I've said much if anything on the SNP since the election. Strange that no one else has talked about Sheridan at all bar me on this thread. I doubt anyone cares about Sheridan. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beverley Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 I doubt anyone cares about Sheridan. i certain;y don't think the man is a plum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big D Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Iain Gray is not an idiot. His Party's advisers and supporters would seem to be though. If Alex says nothing he's guilty. If he tells the truth he's guilty. Top drawer london advice. Won't the Scots notice that the Party slating the First Minister were criminally close to the same organisation? No worries, says london. The Scots are too wee and stupid to notice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 i certain;y don't think the man is a plum That is irrelevant. The issue is about Salmond & the Murdochs and possible pawns in their games Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southside1874 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Why did Salmond meet the Murdochs and News International so often. Did they do a deal that would upset Tommy Sheridan? politicians meet with media to tell them what they can and cant publish. They meet or contact each other as and when required, often daily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cabbie754 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 The Sun down south had switched from Labour to Conservative by then and went back to the tactic of backing the SNP in order to split the Labour vote and weaken the latter (the result was a blow for Labour). This will not doubt be reinforced (assuming they still back the Tories by then) come the next Westminster election. Given that a significant chunk of Labour MPs come from Scotland, if the Sun feel they can aid the Tories by splitting the Labour vote and getting some of their supporters to drift to the SNP then it could weaken Labour's chances of overhauling the Tories at Westminster. This tactic had a minor degree of success in the 1992 election where the Tories made a couple of gains. The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't matter how the Scots vote as it makes no difference in a UK General Election. The last General Election was another classic example of the English voting Tory and the Scots voting non Tory. That's why Labour want to remain in the Union as they would have no chance of winning in England if Scotland gained it's independence, which proves Labour only care about Scotland for it's own UK ambitions and why they don't have anyone with any quality in Holyrood to match the SNP. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Denny Crane Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 The problem with your analysis is that it doesn't matter how the Scots vote as it makes no difference in a UK General Election. The last General Election was another classic example of the English voting Tory and the Scots voting non Tory. That's why Labour want to remain in the Union as they would have no chance of winning in England if Scotland gained it's independence, which proves Labour only care about Scotland for it's own UK ambitions and why they don't have anyone with any quality in Holyrood to match the SNP. It would make a huge difference to Labour at a Westminster election if the tactic to split their vote with the SNP came off with more effect. Middle England is where it is usually won and lost but that is going on the basis that both Labour and Conservative hang on to their traditional heartlands. If one area of the aforementioned split its vote to a third party, (ie. Labour losing seats to the SNP at a Westminster election) then one party (in this instance the Conservatives) would benefit immensely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 Lets get the thread back on track. What did Salmond and the Murdochs talk about and could Tommy Sheridan have been discussed? BTW its bizarre for Salmond to have invited the Billionaire Rupert Murdoch to a freebie at the Ryder Cup at our expense. Or is that not true. Even more bizarre is the prospect of Rubert leading the Gathering down the Royal Mile if you take Salmonds invitation literally. Hand in hand with Donald Trump maybe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Bateman Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Lets get the thread back on track. What did Salmond and the Murdochs talk about and could Tommy Sheridan have been discussed? BTW its bizarre for Salmond to have invited the Billionaire Rupert Murdoch to a freebie at the Ryder Cup at our expense. Or is that not true. Even more bizarre is the prospect of Rubert leading the Gathering down the Royal Mile if you take Salmonds invitation literally. Hand in hand with Donald Trump maybe. It's incredibly rich for a Labour supporter to start whinging about a politician being close to Murdoch; Labour had their hands down his pants for over a decade. As for Trump? Well, imagine Scotland's First Minister trying to get a bit of foreign investment? Rather that than trying to rely on another bloated defence contract which has little in the way of a cost/benefit ratio. That's the Labour preserve. As for the Sheridan stuff; what are you getting at? Why don't you just be up front with your accusations? Why not throw in Megrahi too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 It's incredibly rich for a Labour supporter to start whinging about a politician being close to Murdoch; Labour had their hands down his pants for over a decade. As for Trump? Well, imagine Scotland's First Minister trying to get a bit of foreign investment? Rather that than trying to rely on another bloated defence contract which has little in the way of a cost/benefit ratio. That's the Labour preserve. As for the Sheridan stuff; what are you getting at? Why don't you just be up front with your accusations? Why not throw in Megrahi too? I've previously berated both the Tories and the Labour for political cowardice in the face of Murdoch on another thread. I agree with the Megrahi decision and have said so. People have speculated that BSkyB figured prominently down south in these meetings and that what Murdoch wanted. I put Sheridan up front in my opening post for discussion free from accusation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big D Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Lets get the thread back on track. What did Salmond and the Murdochs talk about and could Tommy Sheridan have been discussed? BTW its bizarre for Salmond to have invited the Billionaire Rupert Murdoch to a freebie at the Ryder Cup at our expense. Or is that not true. Even more bizarre is the prospect of Rubert leading the Gathering down the Royal Mile if you take Salmonds invitation literally. Hand in hand with Donald Trump maybe. JAG. God loves a trier, and you are trying. If you know something tell us. If you are fishing for juicy information to rub on the nethers of your london masters, you will be disappointed. In so many ways. How much did it cost to give a free ticket to the Gathering and the Ryder Cup? Free tickets are standard. The only people that pay (through slight increases in the cost of public tickets) are those that pay for one. Everyone at Tynie pays for the freebies too. It is not difficult to quantify the freebies from the Liab mess in their 8 years. Is it better to give freebies to people that contribute to the Scottish economy, or to people that just contribute to unionist parties with no benefit to their fellow Scots? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 he offered to pay for his accomodation as well IIRC. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 he offered to pay for his accomodation as well IIRC. All politicians try to cosy up to the press. It's hardly surprising that Alex did it as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stirlo Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 All politicians try to cosy up to the press. It's hardly surprising that Alex did it as well. Spot on. Labour, Tories and the SNP were all at it with Murdoch. For any of them to point the finger at each other on this matter is hypocrisy of the highest order. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 All politicians try to cosy up to the press. It's hardly surprising that Alex did it as well. Did Tommy Sheridan who was a politician. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 Spot on. Labour, Tories and the SNP were all at it with Murdoch. For any of them to point the finger at each other on this matter is hypocrisy of the highest order. yes it up to us citizens and voters to expose there failings and to ask questions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toggie88 Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 ? Over 4 years SNP Cabinet Ministers met News Corp 36 times out of 262 media meetings: 13.7% ? Over 1 year Labour?s UK Shadow Cabinet met News Corp 80 times out of 319 media meetings 25.1% ? Over 1 year the Con/Lib UK Cabinet met News Corp 124 times out of 414 media meetings 30% ? In four years the SNP Cabinet met with News Corp less than half the times that the UK Labour Shadow Cabinet did in one year. ? In four years the SNP Cabinet met with News Corp a quarter of the times that the UK Con/ Lib Cabinet did in one year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 The SnP figures have to be judged in the light of NewsCorps usual interest in Scotland. But I repeat we need full disclosure and discussion regardless of party and geography. Murdoch wanted BSkB from Westminster. What did he want in Scotland? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 Did Tommy Sheridan who was a politician. I don't doubt he did. Tommy loved the attention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted August 6, 2011 Share Posted August 6, 2011 The SnP figures have to be judged in the light of NewsCorps usual interest in Scotland. But I repeat we need full disclosure and discussion regardless of party and geography. Murdoch wanted BSkB from Westminster. What did he want in Scotland? What do you think he wanted? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jambos are go! Posted August 6, 2011 Author Share Posted August 6, 2011 What do you think he wanted? Im certain Sheridan was Murdochs number one target in Scotland. Do you agree? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
davemclaren Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Im certain Sheridan was Murdochs number one target in Scotland. Do you agree? Possibly, but are you inferring some conection between Salmond and Murdoch in regard to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I.J Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Im certain Sheridan was Murdochs number one target in Scotland. Do you agree? Go and do us a favour and just spit it out, eh? You're a big, brave laddie, and I'm no much of a fan of staying up all night hanging on your every word. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Das Root Posted August 7, 2011 Share Posted August 7, 2011 Did Tommy Sheridan who was a politician. Probably invited them all out to a party down his local strip club. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.