I guess those who dislike Murdoch can follow the model deployed by “Get-Up”, in their reaction to those who dare not follow Getups views on Carbon tax…

They can refuse to support or buy the product

That is the democratic way

However they do not get to say who is allowed or not allowed to participate in commerce, be that commerce the production of anything from foods to newspapers.

And if you think a leftard belief in the skewed view of the Gruaniad or BBC is justification to demand repression of the business who runs the London Times, Wall Street Journal and the Fox TV network, then I guess leftard hypocrisy has just eaten too deep into the basic reasoning skills.

Democracy is happy to let the market and all the individuals who purchase newspapers and subscribe to Pay TV, to decide for themselves (observing, subscriptions to BBC were and I assume still are a licenced tax imposed without reference to the BBC’s political impartiality)

Alan Austin is “free” not to buy News Corp publications but not authorized to demand anything else

Footnote… I exercise my democratic right and ignore the spam emails I get regularly from Get-Up… I think they are idiots but under the political values I support they are they are free to be idiots

Thanks for the observations, Col Rouge.
Since this piece was written, even more instances of criminal activity by senior employees of News International have been admitted. And we know that those who committed these crimes were not dismissed or demoted by Rupert Murdoch but given pay rises and promotions.
We are also seeing in Australia this week a continuation of the blatant use of news pages to denigrate the governing parties and independents, notably in The Australian.
So I'm not sure why you claim is it leftard hypocrisy to want to distance ourselves from this organisation or to see it closed. Wouldn't any reasonable person committed to integrity, decency and free information want to see this company wound up?

Hi Alan,

You are welcome to my observations, they are shared by many others.

I suggest, if you dislike the way Murdoch runs his newspapers, why not set up to ruin them with fair competition, obviously if you view is so honourable it will instantly gain public following and everyone will boycott News Ltd media offerings.

I find that a far more democratic process than simply expecting a busniess to be closed because you disagree with its editorial and some of its practices.

To the illegal activities... we have laws to deal with those offences and -

"any reasonable person committed to integrity, decency" -

would support the notion that innocent office and printing personnel do not have to be disrupted and dismissed because of the criminal acts of others.

My "Libertarian" values are so much more tolerant than the values espoused by the people, because they disagree with a view and demand that view should be denied expression... it flies in the face of what you referred to as "free information"

Col, why are you so defensive of Rupert Murdoch? Do these offences not bother you at all?
Do you work for News Corporation?
Can't you see how much healthier our community would be without this insidious criminal influence?

Thanks, Col. Thanks, Sunflower.
Just to clarify the application of the world 'free'.
As the original piece emphasised, every media organisation is absolutely free to express whatever opinion they choose, however offensive this may be to others. No question about this.
But news organisations in a free enterprise, open democracy have a sacred duty to ensure facts and figures in news reports are free of deliberate distortion or fabrication.
So, in the instance of the hot water units reported by the Herald Sun, that newspaper is perfectly free to say in its editorials or opinion pieces that it believes the government is incompetent, disgraceful and whatever else.
But the Herald Sun is not free to report in a front page news story that the government provided "almost one [hot water unit] for every player in the team" when it actually provided 17 units for several hundred players and umpires.
Hence boycotting the Herald Sun and other abusers of the privilege of news reporting is appropriate for all people who value freedom of access to information, especially Libertarians.

Alan Austin “But the Herald Sun is not free to report in a front page news story that the government provided "almost one [hot water unit] for every player in the team" when it actually provided 17 units for several hundred players and umpires.
Hence boycotting the Herald Sun and other abusers of the privilege of news reporting is appropriate for all people who value freedom of access to information, especially Libertarians.”

I do not make the decisions what the herald sun write

One thing I am sure of, government should not decide either (that is the top of the slippery slope)

Indeed I agree with you whole heartedly that freedom to information should be valued –
But not “especially libertarians”
but by everyone, regardless of their politics –
unless you feel enlightened by the puerile pap of Pravda and how non-existent factories produced non-existent tractors for the non-existent farmers who did not produce sufficient food, so that USSR had to rely on imports from Western Europe .

Like I said before, boycott all you want but no one has the right to decide that someone else should engage in a legal pursuit,

It is what I like about market economies… they function efficiently without the spastic hand of government wrenching them from side to side

Sunflower
I do not work for News Corp… I don’t even buy their newspapers, although I do prefer the Sun-Herald to the Age (which I find a pretentious rag full of winery visits and news of the newest barista moments in Melbourne)

My preferred newspaper is UK Daily Telegraph

“insidious criminal influence”…. Because you don’t like something does not mean it is wholly criminal

And the last person I want deciding what is “news” and what is not is government

“Healthy communities” are where people are free to pursue their own choices and responsible for their own actions.

That is why I am a “libertarian” in the first place.

And the difference between libertarianism and anarchy is accepting responsibility

Like Alan Austin said, Let a free market for news decide