Rupert Murdoch: Media v Politics

Rupert Murdoch, an Empire in Dire State

In light of recent events concerning the Leveson Enquiry into media ethics, journalism has scoped a mass surmount of negative publicity, and the relationship between hierarchical structures at the most elite levels have come under scrutiny.

Rupert Murdoch has recently evidenced his version of events concerning a mass of matters involving his company and business; News Corporation and its branches, one of which, the recently deceased tabloid News of The World.

His account of the events  alleged to have taken place, such as phone hacking, email hacking, and a general lack of ethical and in some cases lawful practise as a journalist, have invariably enlightened many of the public’s otherwise opaque eyes.

But, at what expense does this ostentatious episode have on the image of a journalist, and the right to exercise their licence to be instinctive, intuitive, and inquisitive?

An unforeseen amount of pressure is now placed onto the precarious media sector as it attempts to uncover the true meanings of unprofessional journalism conduct, and preserve the dwindling faith of the public; a strained relationship that has always been held in contempt.

A certain consequence of these events is to assume without doubt that in future times, the sector of media and journalism will be unequivocally glowered upon by the figures of discontented audiences. These who want nothing more than a truthful account of interesting news that momentarily affects their inhospitable shield surrounding their existence, which inherently fades away in wait of the subsequent piece of information which can be disregarded with similar insignificant effect.

Journalism is indeed infected, affected, and susceptible to accept blame and responsibility for the envious figures of chauvinistic characters that esteem for domination of the political, and all aspects of civilized notions of belief, to globally inflict consumerism on the naïvely accepted audiences.

Political responsibility will inexorably avoid the too familiar concern of ingenious ambiguity of accepting credibility, or to indeed have any involvement other than to proclaim absence in the proceedings of any unethical or unlawful accounts of action.

Corrupted stature in the whole pontifical nature of politics to acquire an image of unassailable interpretation precedes the appearance of the unimpressionable media. This is solidified through a volatile succession of publicly accounting the vocation of the informant, into being an inconceivable practise that defies all honesty.

This enlightening affair begs the questions that, if ethics within media is so fragmented that there needs to be an enquiry, then assuredly the same fate must be presented to investigate the ethics within Politics?

Journalism it seems is again forced to concede to the hierarchical elites that will inevitably continue to fracas in unobtrusive fashion, until once again, a surreptitious snake is placed into the public sphere, where irrefutably the politicians and chauvinists alike, will donate acceptance to the destitute industry of the media.