Was News Corp privileged on IP policy?
- Author: Monica Horten
- Published: 02 May 2012
It's a sideshow to the main drama, but Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation, which owns the film company 20th Century Fox as well as televion stations and newspapers worldwide, tried to get privileged access to British policy-making on intellectual property.
According to a series of recently revealed internal emails. News Corporation's lobbyist lost no opportunity to tell the government how it should run its IP policy review (which became the Hargreaves review) dropping 'feedback' into the ears of advisors to both George Osborne and David Cameron. He even had the cheek to ask for an advance copy of Professor Hargreaves report.
For non-British iptegrity readers who may not know the story, internal emails from News Corporation were handed to the British government's Leveson enquiry into the role of the press and phone hacking by newspaper journalists. The emails primarily related to the proposed take-over by News Corporation of the television company BskyB, of which it already owns 39 per cent. But further analysis of the emails reveals some interesting snippets about how NewsCorporation tried to influence policy on intellectual property and the Internet.
In November 2010, NewsCorp's lobbyist, Frederic Michel , sent a briefing to James Murdoch on a meeting with the adviser to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, he wrote:
Gave strong feedback on David's comments praising Google and US fair use for the IP Review. Gave detailed feedback on the pitfalls to avoid in the IP review process.
In an email of December 2010, Mr Michel reported to James Murdoch about a meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron's adviser:
Very frank exchange on the recent speech which praised Google and fair use
Outline of the aims of the IP review to be led by Hargreaves an our intention to be very pro-active on it
In the same email, Mr Michel reports on a meeting with deputy prime minister and Liberal Democrat leader, Nick Clegg's adviser:
Need to support Nick when he makes announcement on copyright which goes against his election promise - timing end January - will be very tough for him with youth voters
As the Hargreaves review on IP policy, led by Professor Ian Hargreaves, got closer to publishing its report, we find a series of emails where News Corp's Frederic Michel appears to be discussing the review with Culture Minister, Jeremy Hunt:
In an email headed JH Confidential and dated 13 April 2011 :
Had meeting with JH and we discussed timing on the Sky deal and also his meeting with Hargreaves on the IP review yesterday.
On 10 May 2011 :
Just saw JH to finalise the IP review.
And on 16 May, at 9am Mr Michel emailed Adam Smith, who was Jeremy Hunt's special adviser at the Department of Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS):
We should catch up on IP review. Ian mentioned he would send it to me tomorrow evening. Is there a way for me only to see it today so I can plan all our positioning?
Adam Smith responded at 9.22 am with :
Not published until later/tomorrow sokeep it to yourself for now.
The attachment published is actually not the Hargreaves review but the launch of the communications law review. Either way, it would appear that News Corp was getting privileged access about IP and broadband policy which others were not getting. And somehow, I doubt that Professor Hargreaves would have approved of the pre-release of his report to News Corp.
In June 2011, the NewsCorp lobbyist complains to the Special Adviser that DCMS minister Ed Vaizey is refusing to meet with him. He again wants to discuss the IP review. Interestingly, this time he is told by the special adviser, Adam Smith, that the reason is 'the same reason Jeremy isn't coming to the summer party'.
I guess we should question why Jeremy or Ed would ever consider going to News Corp's summer party, under any circumstances.
You may re-publish my article under a Creative Commons licence, but you should cite my name and provide a link back to iptegrity.com. Media and Academics - please cite as Monica Horten, Was News Corp privileged on IP policy? www.iptegrity.com , 2 May 2012 . Commercial users - please contact me
- Article Views: 13472
IPtegrity politics
- EU at loggerheads over chat control
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Whatever happened to the AI Bill?
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- EU puts chat control on back burner
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Creation of deep fakes to be criminal offence under new law
- AI and tech: Asks for the new government
- How WhatsApp holds structural power
- Meta rolls out encryption as political headwinds ease
- EU law set for new course on child online safety
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- MEPs reach political agreement to protect children and privacy
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Not a blank cheque: European Parliament consents to EU-UK Agreement
- UK border safety alert - mind the capability gap
About Iptegrity
Iptegrity.com is the website of Dr Monica Horten, independent policy advisor: online safety, technology and human rights. Advocating to protect the rights of the majority of law abiding citizens online. Independent expert on the Council of Europe Committee of Experts on online safety and empowerment of content creators and users. Published author, and post-doctoral scholar, with a PhD from the University of Westminster, and a DipM from the Chartered Institute of Marketing. Former telecoms journalist, experienced panelist and Chair, cited in the media eg BBC, iNews, Times, Guardian and Politico.
Politics & copyright
A Copyright Masquerade: How Corporate Lobbying Threatens Online Freedoms
'timely and provocative' Entertainment Law Review
Online Safety
- Why the Online Safety Act is not fit for purpose
- Fixing the human rights failings in the Online Safety Act
- Hidden effects of the UK Online Safety Act
- Why did X lock my account for not providing my birthday?
- Online Safety Act: Ofcom’s 1700-pages of tech platform rules
- Online Safety - a non-consensual Act
- Online Safety Bill passes as US court blocks age-checks law
- Online Safety Bill: ray of hope for free speech
- National Crime Agency to run new small boats social media centre
- Online Safety Bill: does government want to snoop on your WhatsApps?
- What is content of democratic importance?
- Online Safety Bill: One rule for them and another for us
- Online Safety Bill - Freedom to interfere?
- Copyright-style website blocking orders slipped into Online Safety Bill
- 2 billion cost to British businesses for Online Safety Bill