I agree, it’s just substituting one set of narrow self interests over another, since in a mature capitalist state the tendency is for wealthy oligarchies to develop, or in our case, a wealthy corporate oligarchy. Not sure what can be done about it, however.
IIRC, and I’m pretty sure I do, the case in which Fox News was rejected was based in Canada, not the UK. Somebody said the claim that it had occurred was a fake, a lie, etc., but someone else came along with cites for it having occurred in Canada. So cites are in the thread already, for Canada. Don’t think there are any for the UK.
You know, you may be on to something. In some European countries there are laws which say you can’t own more than one newspaper in each city. I think it’s the same for broadcast news channels If I’m not mistaken, the regulation is also that major corporations can not own a news channel.
Please correct me if I’m wrong.
I can’t read that. Sorry.
I come from a country where there is an honest-to-God state-controlled TV and radio station. While the government is not supposed to use it as propaganda, the fact is that their news is biased in favor of whichever party is in government at the moment (at least it was when I last paid any attention almost 2 decades ago). It is not really overt propaganda, more like ignoring or glossing over uncomfortable issues. Nobody ever trust their news programming (other than that their programming is the same wholesome, educational programming you expect from an official channel, which means nobody ever watches it either).
Anyway, coming from a country where the government does control a TV channel and a radio station allows me to say unequivocally that what Fox does is well beyond your run of the mill biased party-friendly news. No way it is near anything I have seen anywhere else (I have never been to China or the Soviet Union though, but I have read Cuban “News”, and even them seem to be a little less overt).
Frankly, the people on Fox News seem a bit unstable to me.