RIP 1964-2017
Yeah they mentioned News would let Bruce Gordon take over Ten while they go after Nine.
Yep, although I personally wouldâve thought that Nine has more of an interest in Fairfax than News Corp!
Not sure if this benefits the Government nor Ten (or the industry), but I actually hope the laws/regulations stay put, at least for a while.
God forbid those media mogul billionaires owing Ten!
They already do?
Fully!
Whatâs your alternative?
Media Watch claims an ex-Ten executive, the so called âinsiderâ, said âWhy would news buy the worst house on the street? Thatâs not their styleâ. Paul Barry took this as a suggestion that âNews would like channel Nine insteadâ because they have the NRL rights. Thereâs no evidence that News Corp is interested in Nine. Perhaps they see News handing over control of Ten in exchange for Bruce Gordonâs shares in Nine?
Hughâs photo looks eerily similar to the âDDQ Retrenchment Dayâ video found on Youtube. Boss at the podium.
Honestly, Nine would probably be a good news partner. I couldnât see them turning down the offer of $$$ for an hour of news on their lowly rated rival.
Thoughts of a bucket of shit and a whisk come to mind
I think is there was ever a News corp takeover of Nine, ACCC might have a few objection regarding lessening competition in a number of areas.
While we donât have proof, there is logic to the suggestion/speculation; for example Fox Sports & Nine both want the cricket & NRL rights, and who at News Corp wouldnât want the higher rating Nine instead of Ten?
This is why the 2-out-of-3 rule needs to stay.
If that rule goes, I wouldnât be surprised if right then Murdoch sells Gordon his Ten shares and Gordon sells his stake in Nine, pushing each to the 15% limit where they have to make a takeover bid.
I hope the government accepts the reasonable compromise of keeping the 2-out-of-3-rule & passes the rest of the media reforms, but timeâs running out (last week of Parliament sitting before the winter recess isnât it?).
It seems like most politicians are against changing the 2-out-of-3 rule so it unlikely to pass but some of the other media reforms are likely to pass.
But the govt wonât split the bill.
then it wonât pass. The LIbsNats donât know the meaning of compromise.
I guess weâll have to get used to more grovelling segments from Studio 10 then⌠bleh
Some of the bill is better than none. But honestly why canât they pass what everyone agrees on. Then they can deal with 2 out of 3 later.
Stubbornness and blackmail because theyâre worried about having trouble passing it later.
Itâs obvious that everyone agrees on abolishing the â75% reachâ rule, hopefully the Coalition will have the smarts split the bill to keep the â2-out-of-3â rule in place to revisit at a later date (but I doubt it).
However, what are peopleâs thoughts on replacing the â2-out-of-3â rule with One Nationâs proposed compromise of a â3-out-of-4â rule that would allow control of three out of FTA TV, radio, newspapers, and subscription TV. This would keep the networks out of the hands of the Murdochs, but still allow other principal media companies to merge or expand.