NewspapersWell it looks like the press (Murdoch) is worried that the Lib Dems are gaining more support than the press (Murdoch) likes. Judging by yesterday’s newspaper headlines Nick Clegg is a Nazi paedophilic ex-priest with sadomasochistic tendencies who would bring naught but ruin.

Interestingly, last night’s leadership debate took place on….Murdoch TV. Sorry. I mean Sky.

Mr Murdoch believes, I have been taught, that he has the power to sway elections and tip the balance to his favour. This, it seems has been the case in previous elections in the UK. His support for Thatcher during her incumbency and Major during his 1992 election seemed to show that what his newspapers said was how the voting public voted. Indeed, in 1997 when The Sun switched sides to support the Labour party it is believed that Murdoch’s media empire’s influence saw to Blair winning that election. Indeed, it has been suggested that his support for Obama in his American owned press helped win Obama his election.

Murdoch Murdoch’s power does not stop at newspapers, FOX and SKY TV. Far from it. Murdoch controls ageing and failing social media giant MySpace something which he paid $580million for. Unfortunately, Murdoch is trapped in this mindset that as long as people consume something unquestioningly and uncritically, they desire something and it will never get tired . This belief, it seems, is why Murdoch was demanding to know why people weren’t using Myspace anymore without being aware of the transient nature of social networking and the and fickleness of internet users. Today’s Facebook could be tomorrows Myspace

[see Johnson, Bobbie (2010) “Turmoil at MySpace blamed on News Corporation” [On-line]

Available at: <>]

Watching TV-2 So use caution when you consume media. Especially in during the current circus that is the lead up to the election. Don’t take one viewpoint, indeed even my viewpoint for that matter, as concrete. Look around. See what the other media outlets are saying and consider who controls those outlets. Notice the tricks they play like using surveys to back up what they say – were you questioned? Did you take part? Are you in the minority? Notice how they build people up then discredit them somehow when opinion doesn’t go the way they would prefer.

I know some will say “Oh I don’t pay any attention to media” but I’ll argue that you do. Maybe not directly but the people you interact with may have. I know some will say “I don’t get involved in stuff like elections or media because no matter what I believe it won’t make a jot of difference. Well maybe. But think about how like shoals of fish all move in one direction but soon as the predator appears they scatter causing chaos and disturbance in their formation.
The other danger is that Murdoch strongly believes that users should pay for the content on the internet. Now while I like the idea of charging you lot 50p to view my diatribe I am an advocate of freedom of media. But then I am also an advocate of philanthropy, something which Mr Murdoch doesn’t seem to believe in either.

The gallery where producers live

One thing I noticed, as a Television and Media graduate was how those in the production and direction department used dirty tricks to try and smother the Clegg message. Frequent cut-aways from Clegg when he spoke; the positioning of Clegg in the middle; etc. All pointing to the wrinkled digit of Murdoch. A dangerous man in fear of his public not following his lead.

Pot Noodle

When one man controls the media, the media becomes his voice. When only one voice is heard; there may as well be nought silence. Indeed, when I posted this yesterday on my LJ a number of commenters drew parallels with Murdoch and Italy’s Berlesconi. Both control the media to their own end but I fear the greatest danger is not a man who controls the media and sits as the head of state but a man who pulls the strings from the sidelines. Unseen. Unelected. With dangerous ideals and a belief that the public are there to be shepherded.

Media Growl


At time of going to…press…post…no one has convincingly coughed up to the bombings on Thursday but all the newspapers are hinting at Al-Queda. There are pictures of Muslims saying “Not in my name”, pictures of Bin Laden and more speculation. The IRA, those lovely people who blew up shopping centres, pubs and Conservative conferences, had they been about today would have got less press and soon as a bomb went off fingers would point to our chums in Afganistan.


There’s no evidence, as yet, to prove or disprove it was Al-queda, the IRA, the Neo-Nazi’s or Uncle Tom and his failed gardening experiments. Well..not quite….there’s a bloke on a bus saying he saw an “olive skinned gentleman” repeatedly dipping into his carrier bag. I’m sure if you asked 1000 people there that day at least one would say they saw a suspicious looking seagull or someone dressed in a black cowl carrying a scythe. So why so quick to blame Al-queda? Why so quick to point fingers at a group of people? When it could have been a lone nutter with a hobby in remote control electronics.

As a Fortean, I like to keep an open mind to all possibilities in a situation. angelhands says I am pessimistic or negative. I don’t think I am. OK when people think positive things I have to bite my tongue so that I don’t put a pisser on their plans or ideas, by pointing out possible worse case risks and scenarios. (I’d be good in a risk assessment job methinks) Where as when people come bawling their eyes out wailing about how their life has come to an end because their girlfriend/boyfriend has left them for Barry Mcguigan or their house has burnt down and left them with thripence ha’penny and a box of socks…its always me that points out the positive side of things.

This curse of mine sometimes leaks over to world events. I am constantly thinking “Who benefits?”, “What are they not telling us?”, “Which bits are misinformation?”, “Why have they done that?”, “Is there a movie in it?” or “What else has happened that they’ve buried under this news?” when newsworthy things happen. Even more so with the discreditation of the BBC by the powers that be. Then people say “uh stegzy stop being an alarmist/conspiracy nut/wanker”. Well fine. So I over analyse the news. I over analyse events and normally my over analysis pays off. Events I predict will happen, happen.
Examples. When Piers Morgan, editor of the Daily Mirror, started publishing the pictures of abuse of Iraqi POW’s I immediately thought “Woh! Piers. This is a blinder for discreditation! You’ll lose your job mate”. Lo! and behold! He did!

When Diana started seeing Al Fayed, banging on about banning land mines and being generally against the grain, alarm bells rang. “Hang on a minute. You’ll make too many enemies there. Watch your back girl!”

and 9/11. Well there’s too many inconsistencies in 9/11 for my likes. Like almost immediately fingers started pointing at Al-queda. The knee jerk reaction to bumble into Afganistan and bomb the fuck out of everyone. All a bit to quick and reactionary. In my eye it kind of went like this

Bomb the shit out of them
Here is your evidence.

Likewise when people (especially children) get murdered and like people go “Oh hang on it must have been that dodgy bloke that dresses in black and looks funny! Burn him!!”. Then later on we find out it was actually the kids uncle or cousin that’s done the horrid deed. Its almost as if people forget; in this country (the UK) the general ethos is People are innocent until proven guilty.

Yet it seems the media lead the way in the witch hunt. This is scary. I see really bad things that can come out of this system.

So instead of.

Point finger
Point finger more
Publish in papers
They must be guilty
point finger again
evidence gathering
media black out
Court case
It must have been him the papers said so!

We should have

Point finger
Shhh don’t talk about it now
Evidence gathering
Court case
Ah it was him/wasn’t him

If you can remember the Jamie Bulger incident where little Jamie got carted off killed horribly by two young shit bags . At the time the media was filled with speculation of Jamie being seen with a older man. As it turned out he wasn’t and in fact he was being towed off by two 10 year olds. I remember the local media was alight with accusations directed a local paedophile and when the truth was found out everyone stopped pointing and moved away.

Even later on lessons were not absorbed. There was a little girl in the south of the UK, think her name was Sarah something, went missing from parents back garden and immediately the press was alive with accusations of this bloke, that bloke, the other bloke and with the frenzy, a witch hunt for paedophiles got under way. Of course this got out of hand when in Southampton a paediatrician had his house and office burnt down because some thick bunch of chavs couldn’t spell. Appeals then went out for calm.

All led on….by the popular press.

So now we have bombings. The IRA? Well they’re nobody now chief, decommissioned. Ah so it must be Al-queda!

Before you start saying “hang on stegzy this German group of Islamic extremists posted something on a website admitting to it. Yes. I know. But there would have been hundreds of other groups also claiming responsibility, Sons of Glendower, Far Right extremists pissed off at the G8, anti capitalists pissed off at the G8, the French pissed off at missing out on the olympics, or Barry Smith of 2a Frog Street, Milton Keynes pissed off at the price of fish in Tesco. We do not know. Basically what I’m saying is it could easily have been a complete loon working out on his own with no religious or financial motive, just pissed off with something.

I think that is more scary than a group of people plotting the downfall of an empire.

My initial reaction to 9/11 was what if these guys, and they could well have been, were American citizens? My initial reaction to the Madrid bombings was, Basque separatists. All led by my distrust of the media, what we are told and how things seem to be heading. But then there is part of me that says “well, yes there may be a bogey man with a beard in Afganistan, who wants me to pray to Allah.”. When the government owns or controls the media, or the media owns or controls the government, you no longer live in a free world. Everything you are told may well have a seasoning of misinformation or a few drops of underlying spin. What’s better than the feeding of incomplete details is the complete lack of coverage on a subject. Like page one might be something like “Charlotte Church in Machete Blood Bath Massacre – “My dress was so ruined I had to get my tits out” says busty Charlotte, 19″ followed by 20 pages of why getting her tits out would aid her defence, a 2 page exclusive of someone that once served her fish and chips, the new “Charlotte Church slice your way to a new you” diet, why red is this years black and some old hack scribbling about the effect of tits on the young today and how all breasts or mammaries should be banned. Yet tucked away on the bottom of page 12 will be a little column “Man finds cure for cancer up his bottom”.

Visual media is not much better. Sophie Raworth and Huw Edwards oozed with concern on Thursday. If their faces had got any sterner they would have bled. Unless its ground breaking and effects people directly it doesn’t get a look in. So like ok my example of “Cancer cure up arse” would probably get a look in. But Turkmenbashi making a deal with Norway on the slaughter of whales in exchange for David Hasslehoff records probably wouldn’t. Yet we all know that if Norway started exporting Hasslehoff records the world would know no peace and war would erupt again in Europe.

So my theory, for what its worth and the record, is a lone bloke with a grudge. My reasoning? Well that’s simple. The risks are high, especially in this climate, for people of the same determination to get together and plot bad things. It is far more easier for a lone person to keep something like that to himself. Thus minimise the risk of the person you are telling running off to tell mummy. Psychopaths work better as either husband and wife, brother and sister or best of all, on their own. He would probably have few friends. Be committed to something, maybe on the verge of obsession, it could be Hornby model railways, LINUX, FreeBSD. He would have had a knowledge of remote controls or electronics. It could be that he was either very depressed or very pissed off about something. But because of his psychological and psychopathic tendencies got carried away or more and more determined to cause harm. He might even have left a note. (“No Milk Today” or “Two Pints please”).

But if I am right and it is a lone man, there will be the need for something to blame. Maybe he played Doom 3 too often, maybe he watched Blown Away or Die Hard: With Avengence one too many times and all this will come to light when the police find out who they are. The press will go wild. Ban computer games, ban violent films, ban single males with psychopathic tendencies. There will be calls for the monitoring of users of LINUX. Physics geeks will be ostracised. Maplin will be sued for supplying capacitors. Remote controls for TV’s will be illegal in case someone uses the insides for making a bomb or something. That’s my speculation on the matter, and most probably 102% pure bollocks with real hair and there are many other possibilities I can see which I won’t go into. Indeed, such an act could well have been committed by a group of nutters hell bent on some misguided cause and the media may well be right. But restraint is in order and speculation should be held too.

For until the police complete their investigations we can never be 100% certain and until then, hopefully you will disregard this entry as me being over thoughtful. So please, no one take offence 😉