Ministers reopen hunt for Ofcom chair after Paul Dacre is rejected so he can apply for the job again

Look, the tech's are lobbying the govt over this, that's widely reported and Nick Clegg is Facebook's frontman in this country. If you can't accept that, fair do's, there's no more I can say. This is Bloombergs account:

Facebook, Google Lobby U.K. to Block Paul Dacre as Regulator - Bloomberg
Ah - yes - that does agree with the "widely reported"

"Facebook Inc. and Alphabet Inc.’s Google stepped up their lobbying of the U.K. government over concerns Paul Dacre might be installed as chairman of Ofcom, the technology and broadcasting watchdog, two people familiar with the matter said."


But then lobbying against him is the right thing to do, as Ofcom should be regulating in the public interest, not pursuing ideological goals and stoking culture wars.
 
Sponsored Links
But then lobbying against him is the right thing to do, as Ofcom should be regulating in the public interest, not pursuing ideological goals and stoking culture wars.

**** me you're not too bright are you?. No, Ofcom would be regulating in the interests of Facebook and Google, possibly the the BBC. How the **** is that in the public interest?
 
Yes, I read that. You should read it again, and this time try paying attention to the words Ive emphasised:

In an unusual twist, government sources tried to suggest to the Daily Telegraph that the real reason they abandoned the recruitment process was an intervention from Nick Clegg, the former Liberal Democrat deputy prime minister who now runs Facebook’s global lobbying campaigns. He and Dacre have a longstanding enmity, dating back to Clegg’s time in politics.

The newspaper quoted an unnamed individual as saying that “public lobbying undermined the process” and that the recruitment process worked against Dacre’s desire for a more radical shake-up of the regulator and stronger approach to the BBC.

Facebook strongly denied that Nick Clegg had lobbied ministers to block Dacre’s appointment, hinting that the government was looking to shift the blame for its own decision: “In a recent meeting with DCMS officials, held at their request, Nick simply asked questions about the timing and process and stressed that Facebook hopes to continue its positive working relationship with Ofcom. Any suggestion of a lobbying campaign for or against any individual is simply false.


I repeat, show where that article justifies this:
You have to bear in mind that fillyboy prefers to believe a possible suspicion, rather than actual fact.
The difference is easily recognised by the source of the suspicion:
I'd rather trust US intelligence.
More fools you!
The Senate Report on Iraqi WMD Intelligence
The report, which was released on July 9, 2004, identified numerous failures in the intelligence-gathering and -analysis process. The report found that these failures led to the creation of inaccurate materials that misled both government policy makers and the American public.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senate_Report_on_Pre-war_Intelligence_on_Iraq#:~:text=The Senate Report on Iraqi,U.S. intelligence community's assessments
And don't forget the British public.
US Intelligence is now misleading some DIYnot RWR, by suggesting they may have intelligence, that might show a possible link. :rolleyes:
There's more 'mays', 'mights' and 'possibles' than a Jehovah Witness trying to convert a Catholic.
 
Sponsored Links
No, Ofcom would be regulating in the interests of Facebook and Google, possibly the the BBC. How the **** is that in the public interest?
So a lying right-wing populist bigot who sees his role as making money by lying to and feeding the prejudices and fantasies of other right-wing bigots and wants to destroy any news organisation which doesnt share his belief in spreading right-wing bigoted lies is the only person who could regulate social media companies?


**** me you're not too bright are you?.
d827fe112256adc7cb4eee6e884754e0.gif
d827fe112256adc7cb4eee6e884754e0.gif
d827fe112256adc7cb4eee6e884754e0.gif


Dear god - youve said some spectacularly ridiculous things in the past, but that one has surpassed them all.
 
Paul Dacre could be our Trump. I suspect he has pulled out of being the BBC regulator because the BBC is too far gone and cannot be reformed. Were he to take the job the loony left would do a Trump on him. Who would want that?
 
"Boris Johnson gives peerages to string of Tory allies, but not Paul Dacre
Former PM creates 13 Conservative peers but widely expected honour for former Mail editor goes missing"

"Dacre had been widely tipped to be made a peer, but there had been calls for this to be delayed or suspended after legal action begun by a series of prominent people over alleged intrusion into privacy by the Mail’s publisher.

There were also reported doubts about the honour for Dacre within the House of Lords Appointments Commission (Holac), which vets nominations."

 
So why did he choose to distance himself JD? It was all there for the taking the knighthoods and all that entails. On a road to Damascus?
 
No smoke without fire eh JD bet Andrew wishes he was more on the ball.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top