News Corp Reaction To England Losing World Cup Bid Takes Swipe at BBC: Surprise!
Michael Regan/Getty Images
In case you were living under a rock, and avoided Twitter like you would a Sarah Palin geography lesson, yesterday Russia and Qatar won the next available FIFA World Cup bids, trumping England amongst other nations. And everyone had an opinion.
Ian Wright's 185 goals for Arsenal was one of the major components in bringing silverware to the red and white faction of north London, in the 1990s. On and off the pitch he was a brilliant character, someone I would consider massively underrated when people look at the standout performers to have graced the Premier League.
But he's a horrible journalist, a puppet and the sooner he puts down the pen the better. Not that he'll take that personally, I'm sure he has nothing to do with the articles that appear under his name. Of course I'm not attacking the legend that is Ian Wright, I'm attacking the "journalistic" organisation that he unfortunately works for, News Corp, owners of The Sun, The Times, Sky, FOX and many more seemingly unabashedly bias news channels who use his name to print some horrendously bad journalism.
Today "Ian Wright" has accused the BBC of derailing the England World Cup bid with their panorama investigation, and being happy about it. This is absolutely not true. If he did have any part in the writing process of the article he has been spoon-fed what to say by some twerp at The Sun.
The BBC consistently produce excellent journalism, the benchmark for the rest of the world. And what makes the BBC so strong are the TV licenses, they're the reason they don’t need advertising, and the reason they don’t charge for their content. As part of the BBC doctrine, they must be fair to all the political parties, and if you study news coverage you will notice the BBC is consistently the most objective of all the major news producers.
In comparison, Rupert Murdoch and his News Corporation could not be more different. Aside from producing journalism head and shoulders below that of the BBC (just watch Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch’s War on Journalism) they are constantly attacking the BBC because with the BBC still in existence and not charging for content, News Corporation can’t have much success if it charges for theirs. Since The Times introduced a paywall on its product, “the online traffic had fallen from 21m a month to a combined 2.7m a month.”
England’s chances of winning the World Cup bid were slim even before the Panorama bid which "derailed" it so badly. Russia, who won the bid, are a country who have never had the World Cup and represent another stepping stone in FIFA’s current position of giving the World Cup to the most surprising countries possible. Perhaps they are doing something for world relations, by opening up the Iron Curtain even more. I for one, even though I hoped and wished, did not expect England to win the World Cup bid. Saying that, I didn’t expect Qatar to win either, which leads me beautifully onto my next point.
FIFA have shown they may be corrupt. I’m not going to shoot out any allegations, but Russia and Qatar have several things in common, none of which have anything to do with football. They are both oil rich countries, with one or two billionaires perhaps not averse to bending the rules to do the best for their nation. Whether FIFA played along, and that’s why the world’s best players will be playing in Qatar, a country who has never qualified for the World Cup, is for you to decide. But even Wrighty noticed the connection:
“What a coincidence it is that both Russia and Qatar are two of the most cash-rich countries on this planet - and they succeeded in winning over FIFA's executive committee.”
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?