Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Who is the most evil corporation?! Official thread watch

Announcements
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mellie220)
    Holy crap!
    I never knew so much news was controlled by one company :eek:
    The owner, Rupert Murdoch, was very close to Margaret Thatcher and supported her extensively during her reign, he switched to Labour just before Blair got elected and has had several secret meetings with the then prime minister, afterwards a spokeperson for Gordon Brown has said "there is nothing unusual in the prime minister talking to Rupert Murdoch". He has switched back to the tories before Cameron's election.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by lubus)
    goldman sachs
    This times 1,000,000 considering what they did to greece and the rest of the European countries just to line their own pockets with big bonuses. *******s the lot of them
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Installation)
    Wrong thread, brah.
    your sig made me chuckle!(The pic, not the quote)
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by soutioirsim)
    definitely BP
    Shell in the Niger delta is worse than the BP oil spill
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by In2deep)
    The owner, Rupert Murdoch, was very close to Margaret Thatcher and supported her extensively during her reign, he switched to Labour just before Blair got elected and has had several secret meetings with the then prime minister, afterwards a spokeperson for Gordon Brown has said "there is nothing unusual in the prime minister talking to Rupert Murdoch". He has switched back to the tories before Cameron's election.
    Very interesting - it does not surprise me that Thatcher and Blair had close connection with this man who can bascially control the way news is distributed - they seemed like the types who wanted news to be distributed in their kind of way (as you said, to keep the proletariats under control).

    Guess it shows one can not trust the news.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Amnesty International.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Im going with....
    Facebook
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fire2burn)
    Amnesty International.
    LOLexplain?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I have heard nasty things about Google.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    Starbucks..



    Oh and Scientology..
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Democracy)
    I think capitalism is inherently immoral. Picking out individual examples is a bit disingenuous, but my vote goes to BP.
    Suggest a better system that actually works?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by In2deep)
    The owner, Rupert Murdoch, was very close to Margaret Thatcher and supported her extensively during her reign, he switched to Labour just before Blair got elected and has had several secret meetings with the then prime minister, afterwards a spokeperson for Gordon Brown has said "there is nothing unusual in the prime minister talking to Rupert Murdoch". He has switched back to the tories before Cameron's election.
    What do you expect? He is running a business. A successful business that has reached millions of people. It's only necessary he has a relationship with the prime minster especially since this is a democracy.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Nike or Gap
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by mellie220)
    Very interesting - it does not surprise me that Thatcher and Blair had close connection with this man who can bascially control the way news is distributed - they seemed like the types who wanted news to be distributed in their kind of way (as you said, to keep the proletariats under control).

    Guess it shows one can not trust the news.
    You don't actually belive that Murdock picks the headlines of all his newspapers do you....

    Or that a few newspapers could actually control people considering the massive amount of other news sources we have that one comany could never hope to control?
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mellie220)
    Very interesting - it does not surprise me that Thatcher and Blair had close connection with this man who can bascially control the way news is distributed - they seemed like the types who wanted news to be distributed in their kind of way (as you said, to keep the proletariats under control).
    Who wouldn't want news controlled 'their kind of way'?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    Suggest a better system that actually works?
    Dictatorship with me as the Supreme Leader. Utopia in Britain, or your money back :rolleyes:
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    You don't actually belive that Murdock picks the headlines of all his newspapers do you....

    Or that a few newspapers could actually control people considering the massive amount of other news sources we have that one comany could never hope to control?
    Exactly. He just runs a business. Nothing more nothing less.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mellie220)
    Very interesting - it does not surprise me that Thatcher and Blair had close connection with this man who can bascially control the way news is distributed - they seemed like the types who wanted news to be distributed in their kind of way (as you said, to keep the proletariats under control).

    Guess it shows one can not trust the news.
    Doesn't quite work that way. Pluralism is what creates news articles. Print BS, start problems, cause moral panics then let who want to believe it believe it.

    Muslim extremists, immigrants, unemployed have all been done that way. Some of us see what it really is some don't. Noisy minority quiet majority sort of thing. If it worked the way you think, every prole would believe the same thing and that quite clearly isn't the case
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aj12)
    You don't actually belive that Murdock picks the headlines of all his newspapers do you....

    Or that a few newspapers could actually control people considering the massive amount of other news sources we have that one comany could never hope to control?
    Of course he can't pick headlines. He can surely control the way the news is expressed though - e.g. making people more angry, more compassionate towards something.

    Newspapers can control people, especially the less intelligent kind - my Grandad seemed to believe every word the Daily Mirror uttered which is absolutely mad.
    There are many people in this country who will believe anything they see/read - why wouldn't the government try and get in on this?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    newscorp

    gahhhhhhhh
 
 
 
Poll
Do you agree with the proposed ban on plastic straws and cotton buds?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.