We cannot allow Rupert Murdoch to buy Sky. But he will almost certainly will, adding The British Sky Broadcasting Group to News Corporation, his vast media empire encompassing Film, TV, Newspapers and Internet ventures spanning the globe.

Our concern for the potential acquisition of BSkyB should not be borne out of an unease with the level of economic power that News Corp might wield as a result. Much of the criticism leveled at the deal has been haunted by the spectre of Monopoly – that the annexation of BSkyB to Murdoch’s kingdom will give News Corp an ‘unfair’ advantage in promoting its presence in cross-media platforms, allowing it to respond faster and better to further developments in the market.

But the deal is not ‘unfair’ – it is just the result of a market-based system. If we are going to accept the primacy of the market in ordering our economic structures – as the global economy has done – then we cannot penalise those firms that are successful, for it defeats the whole point of the system. Unfairness would lie in protecting the businesses of those who have not already diversified and who deserve their fate in liquidation. Unfairness is punishing a successful business – Sky – that has seen profits rise by 26 per cent, and feels that its interests are best served by a union with another, larger business that will support its global ambitions.

In any case, we must remember we are speaking of a market that already has monopolistic traits: the BBC, love them or hate them, is responsible for 44 per cent of news provision in the UK. Allowing News Corp to consolidate their position at no.2, in a deal that will raise their market share from 14 percent to 24 per cent, seems paltry in comparison. Those who cry ‘Monopoly!’ and let slip the dogs of war might do well to ponder over the distorting effect that the BBC already has on the economics of the media market.

But the market is not our only concern. Our concern is with the media, especially with regard to the provision of news. Allowing News Corp to buy Sky would give Murdoch control of its news provision – which means the news supplied to every private radio station in the UK, as well as to Channel 5 and to Sky itself would emanate from a single editorial source. And we should not kid ourselves that Murdoch will not exercise that control.

This is a man who publicly stated: "News Corp is a reflection of my thinking, my character, my values." It is therefore no surprise that the News of the World phone-hacking scandal has gone mostly unreported in its sister paper, and ostensible rival, The Sun, both of which are owned by Murdoch. Despite initial assurances of autonomy, and the appointment of an ‘independent’ editorial board to The Times, ex-editor Andrew Neil wrote, "I do not think I ever got an instruction to do something, but I was never left in any doubt [as to] what he wanted".

Murdoch is already a bully. He uses his media clout to force political concessions from governments desperate for his goodwill – and this when controlling only 14 per cent of news provision.

The current Government has bent over backwards to accommodate his demand to purchase Sky. Jeremy Hunt, despite a strong recommendation from Ofcom that "the proposed acquisition may be expected to operate against the public interest", has now entered into several rounds of talks with Murdoch himself, in the hope of crafting a deal that will keep the baron happy and back the Coalition.

Giving a bully your lunch money staves him off today, but he’ll be back tomorrow – stronger, meaner and more certain that you’ll give him what he wants.

Giving Murdoch Sky bolsters his power, and will make him harder to resist in the future. Governments will have to pander more to his values and business interests than ever before. What happens when, in two years, he wants The Independent, and has one quarter of the UK’s news outlets touting his case, whilst privately threatening any politician who stands in his way with public denunciation?

Jeremy Hunt is a young, ambitious politician with a chance to make good with one of the most influential men in British politics. Who wouldn’t want to please the man who has arguably ‘made’ the last two elected Prime Ministers? And the Coalition needs all the supporters it can get.

So Murdoch will probably get his prize. A possible referral to the Competition Commission seems increasingly unlikely as Murdoch offers a fig-leaf independence guarantee. The real issue of the plurality and impartiality of news reporting will be quietly swept under the carpet in Hunt’s "careful consideration of Ofcom’s report". He detailed it in a short 500-word statement last week, a government’s fig-leaf to the idea they were ever going to say ‘no’ to a bully.

Game over? Not quite: one ray of hope remains.

Ofcom have suggested a regulatory review, creating a watchdog to monitor continuously media plurality over time with the power to break up any company deemed to have reduced it. More credence should be given to this proposal – it might give David (Cameron) a weapon against Goliath for future encounters, whilst still maintaining a fair attitude towards the market system. Murdoch may have won this battle. But he need not win the war.

Sponsored Links

Partner Links