At a conference in London, Arthur Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, was asked for his opinion on the rumors that his paper will stop issuing the print version in 2015. His response was that it is pointless to speculate, and that all what he wants to say is that the New York Times will stop issuing the print version at a time to be determined in the future. This was the first time that the publisher of the newspaper known as “the most important newspaper in the world” admits that stopping to print the newspaper is something being considered. In the aftermath of these comments, experts and media professionals wondered what the chances of survival of any printed newspaper are, if the New York Times will stop printing. For years now, the press itself has become the focus of the news, as it waits for someone to officially “pronounce it dead”. The summer had begun with the search for a savior for the newspaper Le Monde, one of the most important French newspapers, and concluded with a battle among the major newspapers on both sides of the Atlantic, a battle that cannot be considered in isolation from the ongoing financial crisis, and from the feeling among the less resourceful newspapers that the Rupert Murdoch group is trying to destroy them. The problem is not just some nerves that are damaged or strained under the pressure. Murdoch's bad reputation is well deserved. When he went to war with the Telegraph group in Britain, he slashed the price of an issue of the Times and the Sunday Times, forcing the Daily Telegraph and the Sunday Telegraph to do the same. As a result, their publisher, Conrad Black, embezzled the group's investors' money, only for his wife, the old Zionist Barbara Amiel, to continue in her indulgence, and in the end, he was convicted by a court in the United States and was imprisoned. This time, Murdoch bought the Wall Street Journal, a major financial newspaper. However, he decided to make it compete with the New York Times because he knows the latter is in a difficult financial situation and does not have many ways to respond. He chose to add a special section on New York to the Wall Street Journal, to attract the liberal readers of the newspaper, and reduced the cost of advertisements in his newspaper to attract advertisers. In response, the New York Times chose to respond by publishing a lengthy report on an old case that has since returned to haunt Murdoch, something that needs further elaboration. In 2007, Clive Goodman, a reporter working for the News of the World, one of the most widely circulated newspapers, was accused of illegally hacking into the phones of some members of the royal family, and was prosecuted, convicted and sentenced to prison. At the time, the newspaper editor in chief Rebekah Brooks admitted that her newspaper bribed policemen to get information. Murdoch reacted by promoting her to head the News International group. Under the protection of their parliamentary immunity, British MPs decided to launch an inquiry into the Murdoch group, which is an enormous media conglomerate that has arms all around the world, and controls hundreds of newspapers, magazines and major television networks such as Fox and Sky. The liberal newspaper The Guardian entered into an undeclared alliance with the equally liberal New York Times. One of the writers in the Guardian wants to limit the malignant power of Murdoch (the term is usually used to describe a cancer), and said that all the parties that won in the British elections in the past thirty years were supported by Murdoch's publications. The newspaper reminded its readers that Murdoch endorsed George W. Bush's war on Iraq, as he himself admits, and that he encouraged then-Prime Minister Tony Blair to support the United States, and talked to him three times in nine days before the war. Today, Murdoch's publications are being accused of eavesdropping on politicians, artists, football managers and players, in addition to members of the royal family. Murdoch's enemies believe they can curb his influence within Britain. Some of those affected by phone tapping are preparing to file lawsuits demanding compensation for intrusion into their private calls. However, behind all of this are the stifling financial crisis and the onslaught of new media and technology. The Murdoch group is so wealthy that Sky Network spends more on sports coverage than the entire news budget of the BBC. Also, the London-based The Times loses annually more money that the New York Times, however, [its owner] can bear loss more than the American newspaper can do. The Arab newspapers are going down the same road. However, I would like to draw attention here that the main difference between us and them is that in the West, the journalists eavesdrop on the government, while in our countries, it is the government that eavesdrops on journalists. [email protected]
