Tuesday, July 12, 2011

Who should control the press? or The Madness of Green George

As a man who, for a few brief articles, looked like he might not be a total moron, one might have hoped that George Monbiot might not have been an utter arsehole about the current travails of the press—but no...
So what can be done?

I don't know, George—why don't you tell us...? Oh, wait, you're going to aren't you? This had better be good...
Because of the peculiar threat they present to democracy...

Um... I think that there are rather bigger threats to democracy, George. The European Union springs to mind, as does our own derisory system of "representative democracy".

But, OK, I'll humour you. What's your solution...?
... there’s a case to be made for breaking up all majority interests in media companies, and for a board of governors, appointed perhaps by Commons committee, to act as a counterweight to the shareholders’ business interests.

Aaaaaaaaaahahahahahahaha! Aaaahaha!

You fucking what? This is a joke, right?

You think that the press should be—indeed, most definitely is (so much so that the shareholders' property should be appropriated)—a brake on the excesses of our lords and masters, and the people that you think should control the press are the fucking politicians?

Are you completely fucking INSANE...?

I would like to state this plainly, George: you seriously think that the people who should control what is published about our politicians should be our politicians?

I thought that you were on your way to some kind of Damascene conversion: it seems, instead, that all your recent articles were actually a slow-burning descent into raving lunacy.

So sad...


Mark Wadsworth said...

Like you say, for a few articles he had been heading vaguely in the right direction, but the thought of government-controlled-media is probably even worse than media-controlled-government.

Or we could go for worst of all worlds and do like in Italy and just make Rupert Murdoch Prime Minister For Life.

Suboptimal Planet said...

For this grim situation, nobody can say it better than you, DK.

Though I do recommend Tom Paine's latest desperate post.

And for that matter this from James Delingpole and this from Mark Steyn.

Anonymous said...

its great fun to see all the dots being connected. kick back and ava larf.

Richard Allan said...

This is why one of my favourite Max Stirner quotations is

"The clamor of the Liberals for freedom of the press runs counter to their own principle... they fall away so easily when once so-called freedom of the press appears; then they would like censorship."

One of his more prophetic pronouncements. All the time I see so-called liberals/progressives crying about the need for some government body of enlightened philosopher-kings to ensure that only "the truth" gets reported.

Vladimir said...

Heard a lot of this lately. Think of it as the BBC solution to the Murdoch problem. Some regulatory committee will decide what is fair, what is balanced, what is impartial. Good idea, except the regulator will be the government, and the fairness, balance and impartiality will all favour the establishment. As they already do at the BBC. Incredible as it may seem, Murdoch may actually be the lesser of two evils.

Grumpy Old Man said...

George is merely restating a mantra of Left-wing induhlectualism. The masses are incapable of understanding what is good for them. Therefore people who understand what is good for society, (people like him), must grasp the reins of control. People like George are particularly suited to controlling Society for it's own good. Hence what the Country needs is a QUANGO, of people like George to sort things out. People like George are the greatest threat to Democracy and are, in their own peculiar way, every bit as repulsive as Rupert, who, lest we forget, only became Evil in November 2009, 7 years after Millie.

Anonymous said...

Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard lied about carbon taxes to get elected in Australia and is confronted by an angry constituent. Gillard and her aides then try to pacify the lady by being patronising and continuing to lie: