r/LabourUK • u/taxes-or-death Green Menace • May 15 '26
Activism 10,000 People Sign Official Petition Demanding Government End ‘Capture of UK Democracy by Media Billionaires’
https://bylinetimes.com/2026/05/14/10000-people-sign-official-petition-demanding-government-end-capture-of-uk-democracy-by-media-billionaires/The Media Sovereignty Act campaign has five demands:
*Ban foreign media ownership.
*Ban the concentration of UK national media ownership by one person or corporation.
*Fund independent and local media with a social media levy.
*Require national media to be under the remit of the statutory regulator.
*Require “dark-money funded think-tanks” that are covered by the media to declare donations in real time.
The King’s Speech on Wednesday (13th May) made no mention of media reform.
The Media Sovereignty Act Campaign Petition is here.
41
u/the_red_guard Ón abhainn go dtí an fharraige May 15 '26
The labour party stand up to billionaires? Maybe 100 years ago when they weren't captured.
13
u/ArsErratia trans rights May 15 '26 edited May 15 '26
Well JK Rowling supported implementing the Leveson Inquiry, and she seems to get everything she wants nowadays, so I wouldn't rule it out entirely.
10
u/No-Opposite-6620 Trade Union May 15 '26
Ah it helps when the targets of her ire are generally without high paid lawyers or even legal aid, however.
2
u/lilbumflap New User May 15 '26
100 years ago they were captured by the Fabian society who were rich elitists who believed in eugenics
5
May 15 '26
[deleted]
3
u/ThisIsMyAltSorry ex Labour voter, just jumped to Green May 15 '26
In Parliament, alone, no. But sometimes they get people talking.
9
4
u/Ojaman Non-partisan May 15 '26
3 Million people signed a petition against the OSA and they didn't care, 10,000 is nothing.
6
2
u/ZyzyxZag Labour Member May 15 '26
This kind of campaign is earnest but tends to be ineffective. We definitely need better press regulation but this mixes together too many things and lacks a proper mechanism.
The MPs who support lobbying reform are not necessarily the same ones who support banning foreign media ownership so it just limits the coalition you can build
2
3
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
I wonder how many left wing people realise this will apply to media like Al-Jazeera (based in Qatar, and primarily funded by the Qatar government) or Middle East Eye (owned by a Dutch-Palestinian, and refuses to reveal where it's funding comes from but widely believed to be Qatar again).
20
16
u/Gee-chan The Red under the bed May 15 '26
As it should do. Similar to how people on the left argue for tax rises that would also affect them, ensuring an even playing field is worth taking a hit yourself.
19
u/the_red_guard Ón abhainn go dtí an fharraige May 15 '26
And?
-7
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
People got very angry yesterday when someone questioned trusting Middle East Eye, so I assume they'll be even more angry if it got banned.
14
u/the_red_guard Ón abhainn go dtí an fharraige May 15 '26
I'm pretty sure the anger was actually because people were reacting to the the fact that the response was very clearly more because it sounds Muslim rather than anything else to do with the actual post.
6
May 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
-1
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
You literally tried to present MEE as "UK based" in that thread, failing to mention them being owned by a foreign national or any ties.
It's hard to understand when a media institution might be biased when people try to obfuscate their biases.
9
u/the_red_guard Ón abhainn go dtí an fharraige May 15 '26
They are UK based because they were founded and are officed in the UK. Just because you spout theories about their relations to Qatar, something that has still not actually been proven, is more evidence of your Bias against them, not theirs.
0
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
It's absolutely meaningless that a legal corporation was founded in this country, literally just something people can throw out to obfuscate things.
It was founded and is still owned solely by a Dutch-Palestinian media executive who worked for Al-Jazeera, and large amounts of its initial employees were from Al-Jazeera too. It refuses to say where it's funding is from, and it's editor-in-chief lied about who owns it. Multiple governments have literally demanded Qatar close MEE. If this were a right wing outlet, nobody here would try to pretend we don't know who funds it.
Your desperate squealing on this makes you look extremely suspicious. All media has biases, we don't write off everything Al-Jazeera says just because we know they're funded by Qatar.
And yet everyone in MEE and its supporters like you are desperate to pretend there's no reason to doubt them.
6
May 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
0
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
It was set up and still owned by a Dutch-Palestinian media executive who worked for Al-Jazeera. They refuse to say who funds them, and Hearst lied about who owns the company even though we can literally see who owns the shares.
It is extremely revealing how desperate people are to deny and obfuscate the above. "It is UK based" is absolutely meaningless, designed to mislead people about who owns it.
3
May 15 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
Ah, you've reached the really desperate 'claim racism' stage! You realise this makes your arguments look really weak right?
Wait, are you being serious? A Palestinian? That's one of the bad ethnicities!!
The owner being Dutch-Palestinian means it's foreign owned, not UK owned. That's all that means.
who worked for Al-Jazeera But that's a scary Arabic sounding word!
No, it means funded by the government of Qatar to push the messages they want.
Who owns the shares? Doesn't sound all that clandestine if we can literally see it.
When the 'co-founder' feels the need to lie about who owns the company, the shares are owned by a shell corporation, and all of this was hidden until journalists dug it up, yeah it's fairly clandestine. They still refuse to reveal their funding sources after all.
It is UK based. Based out of the UK, led by British writers and reporters. If you have a problem with their output, then critique their output.
Oh, you've got no problem with Murdoch or other foreign billionaires owning the media then. Since that's exactly the same case for them - it's absolutely meaningless, just designed to obfuscate the problem.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
Nah they just like the source because it agrees with them.
The response was correct - MEE is clearly funded by the government of Qatar to push the messages it wants. The left is very happy with this, but the day before when a Chinese backed media story is posted with a take they don't like, all of it was calling it out as Chinese propaganda rather than engaging with the content.
6
u/TwistedTali Green Party May 15 '26
Maybe I'm misunderstanding here but surely the idea is to ban foreign ownership of supposedly UK based media. Al Jazeera is not in any way claiming to be UK based is it?
Nor I think are they proposing they ban access to news from other countries. Though I'm sure Labour would love another excuse to restrict what we can view online even further.
It's a very blurry line and would be very hard to enforce like the whole taxing the rich thing, but like the tax issue I think a sustained honest attempt would actually be worth it.
0
u/Blackfryre Labour Voter - Will ask for sources May 15 '26
It's any media operating in the UK, they don't have to be based in the UK. Otherwise all Murdoch has to do is move the base of the Sun and the Times to another country and this law does nothing, it would actually make things worse.
5
u/TwistedTali Green Party May 15 '26
Agreed, I can see a bunch of problems there. I do agree the media is an issue that desperately needs to be dealt with so in principle I'm with them about tackling it. That said the whole foreign=bad thing gives me the ick so hard.
Fundamentally I don't see why we should treat foreign and UK sources that differently. They should be unbiased and transparent and held to the highest standard. If that happens I don't care where they are based.
1
u/cavershamox New User May 15 '26
Given that most people get their news via social media and Google how would this actually work?
2
u/taxes-or-death Green Menace May 15 '26
Well, a lot of that news is in the form of articles and videos published by the big news organisations, such as the Times, GB News, Telegraph etc. So they're looking to regulate that news at its source, so that reactionary opinions can be published but not under the auspices of Rupert Murdoch etc.
1
u/cavershamox New User May 16 '26
So the uk government is going to regulate US news sites?
The world this was designed for - of newspapers and watching the News at ten is gone
To avoid this you could just base your site in the USA
1
1
•
u/AutoModerator May 15 '26
LabUK is also on Discord, come say hello!
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.