View Single Post
Old February 28th, 2008 #12
Alex Linder
Administrator
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 45,756
Blog Entries: 34
Default


[Jews control media serving Britain]


A power greater than government?

"Today the film makers are the people who control the most powerful medium in the world, and art that can create ideals, change language or topple governments."

John Baxter in the Daily Mail (28th December 1995)

According to the theory of democracy, "the people" rule. They elect politicians by their own choice, and if and when those politicians fail to act according to their wishes they can be dismissed by the vote of the people. The pluralism of different political parties provides the people with "alternatives"; if one loses their confidence, they can support another. Thus is realised the democratic principle of: government of the people, by the people and for the people.

It would be nice if it were all so simple. But in a medium-to-large modern state things are not quite like that. How do "the people" acquire the information and knowledge necessary for them to use their votes other than by blind guesswork? They cannot possibly witness everything that is happening on the national scene, still less at the level of world events. Only a tiny few of them ever see their political leaders close up and are able to watch and assess their performance of their duties. The vast majority are not students of politics. They don't really know what is happening, and even if they did they would need guidance as to how to interpret what they knew.

"The people" are doctors, lawyers, engineers, clerks, shopkeepers, factory workers, farmworkers, small tradesmen, nurses, secretaries, schoolteachers and a thousand or more other things. They know, or ought to know, something about the occupations in which they are engaged. But only the minutest number can be expected to know the business of politics - one of the most complex of subjects, with its vast range of issues and the many points of view that will be brought to bear on each of these issues. To know what the issues are, and to examine and evaluate these points of view, the people need to have these issues presented to them and the points of view expounded in a form that they can understand.

This is where the "mass media" come in: newspapers; television; radio. And for those with a more studious and enquiring bent there are other media: books; magazines; the Internet. The list is growing as information technology advances.

But there is a problem here. "The people" cannot own, control and regulate the media. That can only be done by a small minority - a mere fraction of the population, in fact much fewer than one per cent. And it is this minority which is able to determine which facts the people will be allowed to know about, which events will be reported to them, which points of view they will be able to examine and evaluate, which political parties it is good to vote for and which not, which politicians are decent, upright, honourable and capable citizens and which are disreputable, incompetent, "dangerous" and "extreme".

This invests that minority who control the mass media with enormous power - perhaps even greater power than a prime minister or cabinet. It is this minority which determines the climate of "public opinion" in which politicians have to operate, the "public opinion" to which they have to defer and which they dare not offend if they are to get elected and stay elected.

Even when the mass media consisted mainly of newspapers, and only a small minority read those newspapers, this power was considerable. Today, when it embraces mass-circulation newspapers and television, it is colossal beyond imagination.

And we must not forget another fact about the media. Their political influence extends far beyond newspaper reports and articles, and television programmes, of a direct political nature - connected, that is, with current affairs that bear upon politics. In a much more subtle way, they can influence people's thought patterns by other means: newspaper stories, pages dealing with entertainment and popular culture, movies, TV "soaps", "educational" programmes: all these types of fare help form human values, concepts of good and evil, right and wrong, sense and nonsense and what is "fashionable" and "unfashionable". These human value systems, in turn, shape people's attitude to political issues, influence how they vote and therefore determine who holds political power.

Yet for some strange reason there is very little public discussion in Britain today, as an example, of who actually exercises media control. The people are encouraged to get tremendously excited about the outcome of a general election, even of local government elections, yet these contests probably have far less a bearing on the question of who wields power over us than the much more crucial one of who regulates "public opinion" and therefore determines the agenda both for the contesting of elections and for what is done in government by whoever wins.

Any study of what is happening on the national scene must therefore today include a study of the workings of the mass media: who the people are who own, control and operate those media, and to what purposes their immense power is being put.

The current affairs "discussion"

Discussion programmes on TV and radio dealing with current affairs and topical public issues are presented so as to convey the impression that they are conducted in accordance with the letter and spirit of "democracy", with various viewpoints given a hearing. However, where the discussion threatens to touch upon issues considered "sensitive" to the judaized establishment which controls TV and radio, it is carefully stage-managed so that "dangerous" viewpoints are excluded. This is particularly noticeable where discussion concerns matters of the Jewish State of Israel and its not so very glorious aspects, when relating to doubts concerning the alleged mass-slaughter of Jews during WW II and when some one tries to discuss the power wielded by the Jewish minority.

One TV programme on British TV a short time ago was devoted to the subject of "anti-semitism", which was presented as being on the increase throughout Europe, including Britain. Various spokesmen, some Jewish and some non-Jewish, appeared on the programme to give their views. After the programme had proceded a little while, it became quite clear that the only differences between the participants lay in their attitudes as to how "anti-semitism" should be treated. Some maintained that it should be rigorously suppressed by the introduction of tighter laws against it; others said that this practice would play into the hands of the "anti-semites" by making them martyrs and that, however much "anti-semitism" was to be deplored, suppressing it by law was not the way to fight it. One member of the discussion panel launched into a lengthy analysis of the mental state of "anti-semites", implying them to be suffering from a certain kind of insanity.

What was entirely absent from the discussion was any contribution offering an explanation of the viewpoint of the so-called "antisemites". Of course, "anti-semitism" itself is a misleading term deliberately adopted by our media-controllers so as to suggest that those thus labelled want to ill-treat Jews, even kill them, for no reason than that they are Jews, whereas the vast majority of people described as "anti-semites" simply oppose what they see as excessive Jewish power. Whether or not they are correct in their assessment of this power is beside the point; if "democracy" is to be more than just an empty phrase, they should be allowed to state their case in public then have that case seriously examined and debated. This, however, is the very last thing our media-controllers want. Therefore, when any programme discussing anti-semitism (i.e. criticism of Jewish power) is broadcast on TV or radio, "anti-semites" (i.e. critics of Jewish power) are deliberately excluded, so that the "discussion" is not really a discussion at all, merely an imitation of one.



Who are the manipulators?

But who is behind it all? Who are the people who determine what is watched on television and printed in the newspapers? This is not so easy a study because a great many of the people concerned operate in the shadows. And even in the case of those whose names are known, what is known about their backgrounds and their connections? Very little.

For this reason, very few people in Britain are aware of the huge influence over the mass media exercised by a certain ethnic minority, namely the Jews.

Straightaway, we can expect that mention of this minority will put many readers on the defensive. Is this "anti-semitism"?, some will ask. That, you see, is the first example of the hypnotic effect of media power. The mass media in Britain today have managed to implant into many people's minds the idea that it is "anti-semitic" even to acknowledge that members of the Jewish community play a large part in controlling our news and opinion and to question whether this is a good thing for Britain. In the uncomfortable feeling provoked in a number of readers of this text by the very mention of the word "Jews", there is provided the first lesson in media indoctrination and brainwashing!

This text is simply a study of who controls public opinion in Great Britain.

We believe that in this study there should be no "no-go" areas, no forbidden avenues of enquiry. We are concerned here with facts. What deductions people make from those facts is their decision. Our intention is that they should be roused from their former ignorance and apathy and persuaded to join our political struggle to achieve, through peaceable and legal means a more just, non-racist society. A society not dominated by a racist minority believing to be "Gods Chosen People".

It is the contention of this study that members of the Jewish community (whether practising or not) exercise a power and influence in Britain's mass media that are out of all proportion to their numbers in the population. We believe that this is a fact that should not be hidden but should be known - and discussed. No great issue of concern can be properly examined unless all the facts pertaining it are known and are faced - fairly and squarely, with nothing swept under the carpet for fear that some noisy element may object.

Some people may accept the findings of this study as authentic and accurate but then say: "So what?" Isn't it quite common for certain groups to be found in profusion in certain occupations whether for reasons of natural talent and aptitude, accidents of history, or whatever? Are there not a lot of Irish building workers and writers, Scottish doctors and engineers, Welsh singers, Black sportsmen, French and Italian restauranteurs and Indian and Pakistani textile merchants? Given that Jews are to be found in large numbers in the mass media, is this to be regarded as particularly sinister or dangerous? In other words, what's the big deal?"

We hope that we have answered these questions in the foregoing part of this introduction. None of the other occupational fields mentioned have anything like the scope for the wielding of real power - political power, power over who governs us and to what purpose power to shape our society and its values, to determine our destiny and future.

We cannot therefore say of Jews in the media as some might say of other groups in their respective occupations and lines of business: "Oh well, they're good at it - let them get on doing it." What is at stake in respect of control of an institution with such massive power as the media places that institution in a special category of its own, which justifies a very high degree of concern over the matter.

Would we, for instance, feel happy and secure in the knowledge (should such be the case) that a particular interest-group exercised control over our armed forces? We might wonder, in that case, where the loyalty of such a group would lie in the event of a war.

And if we bear in mind that power over the mass media is today as potent in the possibilities it offers as command of a hundred armoured divisions on the battlefield, that mass media power should be a matter of tremendous concern, and we would be foolish to the point of insanity to dismiss as of little importance a situation in which it lays in the hands of people who themselves proclaim to be "Jewish" in the first hand and who themselves openly proclaim loyality to the Jewish state of Israel in the first hand.

And this is not all. As has been said, there is today a very broad consensus view, transcending parties and classes, that much of the influence of the mass media is malignant and socially destructive in its effects.

We simply take the question further: if so many believe the influence of the media to be malignant and destructive, we should be examining the nature of the media - not the least important question in which examination is: Who controls the media?

In a way, the study serves a purpose that is supposed to be served by the mass media in any democracy: The purpose of free and unfettered enquiry and of absolutely free expression of facts and opinion. Unfortunately, there is neither free enquiry nor free expression of either facts or opinion in the mass media in Britain today - and least of all on the subject of this study. Just when did you last see an article in a major newspaper examining, in proper depth, Jewish influence and control in Britain's news and information industry? Just when did you last see a programme on TV dealing with the same topic? The answer to this question proves our point.

One phrase beloved of those who exercise influence in the media is "investigative journalism". The "investigative journalist" is depicted as the crusading hero whose quest for the truth and whose dedication to the public interest leads him or her to take up the cudgels against all the forces of would-be suppression and censorship - even when, as is sometimes the case, this leads to a particularly loathsome form of intrusion into people's private lives. But one form of investigative journalism which the media are most certainly not anxious to encourage is that which enquires into the identity of their own controllers and the underlying agenda to which they operate. In these pages we hope to remedy this glaring omission.

Naturally, we do not expect the facts which we unearth here to be taken up by the media and examined in the light of day. If there is any comment in the mass media on this study - which we think doubtful - it will that of condemnation, of dismissal out of hand, vith liberal use of the term "anti-semitism". But it will not extend to any analysis of what we say or any attempt, by presentation of facts, to prove us wrong.

From this, dear reader, we leave you to draw your own conclusions.



Need for perspective

As we have prepared the material for this study it has been brought home to us that media influence and control in the modern world of communications is an immensely complex subject, in which the dangers of over-simplification are always present. The mere presence of members of a certain group working in a section of the media does not itself prove that that group has the ultimate "say" in the section in question. In addition to this, there is the fact that "control" of an institution like the mass media can operate in more than one way. Direct control through ownership is a relatively simple thing to understand, but this understanding does not provide for indirect forms by which the media can be, if not literally "controlled", then at least massively influenced. In this study we will be examining the power of particular lobbies to regulate the content of the press, TV, books and other means of communication by various pressures, such as the picketing of studios and bookshops (in which the implicit threat of violence is always present) and, perhaps more potent still, the method of advertising boycott (in which again the implicit threat of such an action can often suffice to achieve the lobby's objective without the threat necessarily having to be put into practice).

Another factor must be borne in mind when the source of media control is being assessed. The communists in the heyday of their power were known to say: "Give us just a third ot the places on any committee and we will guarantee to control that committee." This was simply a statement of the fact that a minority in any body, public or private, which knows exactly what it wants and acts together as a co-ordinated group, bound by a single loyalty and a single objective can quite easily get its way over a larger, but uncoordinated, mass of people with no such bonds, acting individually and in pursuit of no definite or conscious objective. It is not our claim in this booklet that Jews necessarily outnumber non-Jews in all sections of the media (though in certain important ones this is indeed the case) but only that the former's solidarity and oneness of loyalty, interest and purpose gives them an immense advantage over others in any bid for power and influence.

Students of Jewish influence in the mass media will notice a paradox: while that influence is used, in a hundred or more different ways, to weaken the national spirit and consiousness of the British people, Jews themselves, in their attitude to their Jewish state of Israel and to questions of Zionism generally, are to be found amongst the world's most militant nationalists!

There is one final consideration of which we ask you, the reader, to take account. Jewish power in the mass media is a phenomenon acknowledged in political quarters widely different from our own and sometimes even by Jews themselves - as we shall show in one or two examples. In other words, as the saying goes, "Don't just take our word for it!"

In the following text, we have highlighted individuals of Jewish origin by setting their names in bold type. Not all of the names in question will seem obviously Jewish; it has been the habit of Jews over the centuries to change their names, adopting those which best blend with the populations of the countries in which they have settled. Where persons with non-Jewish names are designated as Jewish, the reader can rest assured that extensive research has established them.





Who controls the broadcasting?

There can be little doubt that television is the most powerful force for the presentation of the news and the formation of attitudes. Go into any workplace, pub, school, shop, or other institution and the chances are that the conversation will get around to the previous night's "soap" or something of particular note on the evening's news. And what was shown - and not shown - on the TV screen will in all probability have affected the way in which the viewers see the world.

By using such techniques, the controllers of the TV stations have enormous power to shape popular opinion. And a glance through any TV guide will reveal that, by providing us with an endless diet of pro-Zionist pro-Jewish propaganda, the masters of the TV stations are not shy of using that power. So just who are these people? Just who is responsible for the poison peddled by "our" television networks?



***

BBC

BBC boss Alan Yentob.

The most powerful man at the "British" Broadcasting Corporation is Alan Yentob, Director of BBC programmes. According to Broadcast magazine (14.6.96) this "gives him control over all non-news BBC programmes including those for satellite channels and those in English for the World Service." Yentob is a close personal friend of the immensely powerful independent TV bosses Michael Grade and Michael Green. The three have shared holidays in the Caribbean and, together with Charles Saatchi, are referred to by coy insiders as the "St. John's Wood Mafia". The Saatchi and Yentob families have been closely connected since before they moved to Britain from Iraq.

Behind the scenes, Jews are well represented among the Governors of the BBC, who include former president of the merchant bank S.G. Warburg Sir David Scholey, Sir Kenneth Bloomfield and Janet Cohen. Holders of important BBC managerial posts include Sarah Frank, Chief Executive of BBC Worldwide Americas; Controller of Publicity and Public Relations, Keith Samuel, and David Aaronovitch, who is Managing Editor of the BBC's weekly programmes. Anne Sloman is Deputy Head of BBC News Programmes; Ruth Caleb is the Head of Drama, and Louis Marks has been Producer of Drama since 1976. Another key figure in terms of the BBC 's relationship with the rest of the world, Commercial Director at BBC Worldwide TV Tony Kay, is responsible for deals with American networks such as NBC. International Director of US cable operator TCI, Adam Singer - son of former BBC Director-General Aubrey Singer - has also been responsible for a number of recent big deals between the BBC and TCI's British subsidiary Flextech.

Head of BBC Comedy Entertainment is Jon Plowman. He is responsible for "alternative comedian" Ben Elton's Thin Blue Line, a person who likes being interviewed in th "respectable" Jewish Chronicle.

Jews in prominent positions in BBC regional TV include Rod Natkiel, Head of Network TV at BBC Midlands and East, and Roy Saatchi, Head of Local Programmes at BBC North.

The host of lower level functionaries who implement the wishes of the media masters in such stations also includes a vastly disproportionate number of Jews, such as Geoffrey Goodman, who broadcasts on BBC Current Affairs and LBC/IRN- BBC TV's legal correspondent Joshua Rosenberg. Naomi Goldman is not only a Producer on Newsnight, but is also a member of the Jewish Socialist Group. Another militant Zionist in BBC is writer and broadcaster Lisa Jardine.



***



Channel 4

Britain's "pornographer-in-chief", Channel 4 boss Michael Grade with his TV mogul uncle Lew.

The Chief Executive of Channel 4 is Michael Grade, who succeeded its creator Jeremy Isaacs. Grade previously controlled LWT and BBC l and 2. He has been a director of First Leisure Entertainment since 1991. This massive company was formerly headed by Grade's uncle, the late Lord Bernard Delfont and includes 300 cinemas, eight theatres, hotels, restaurants and record divisions. Grade's father, semi-retired TV magnate Lew Grade is still Chairman of The Grade Co. and a director of Euro-Disney.

The endless diet of filth and perversion which Channel 4 feeds to the public has earned Michael Grade the sobriquet Britain's "pornographer-in-chief". In March, 1996, he was also widely criticised after his brainchild The Girlie Show ran an episode which clearly encouraged shoplifting. "Why do we allow this millionaire to incite theft?" asked veteran columnist Paul Johnson.

Managing Director of Channel Four International Ltd and Director of Acquisitions at C 4 is Colin Leventhal. This busy man's acquisitions for the channel have included such American shows as Roseanne and The Cosby Show which are produced by Caryn Mandabach's Carsey Werner company. Leventhal has also developed a close relationship with Nickelodeon, the subsidiary of Sumner Redstone's Viacom Inc.

The next time you have the misfortune to see the disgusting pieces of decadence which so often pass as "plays" on Channel 4, you should direct your complaint to the channel's Head of Drama, David Aukin, or the Senior Commissioning Editor for Drama, Peter Ansorge, although the latter spoke out strongly in favour of the sympathetic depiction of incest on the soap Brookside at peak family viewing time. Ansorge said that he expected to be attacked for the storyline and condemned the "right-wing lobbies" which express widespread public disquiet about the way in which all the soaps in British broadcasting - with the exception as we go to press of Coronation Street - have been turned into promotional vehicles for sexual deviancy.

If, on the other hand, you are offended by the extreme "liberal" tone and content of Channel Four News, reflect on the fact that the News Editor since March 1996 has been Sara Nathan, supported by Elinar Goodman. While Jon Snow, the extremist liberal Channel Four newscaster is not Jewish, he has made his sympathies clear by joining Jewish journalists in addressing a Jewish Chronicle sponsored meeting on ethics in journalism.

Channel 4's youth programme production company, Planet 24, has, according to the Jewish Chronicle "an uncanny knack of fronting its popular Channel 4 programmes with blondish Jewish women." These include Dani Behr playing a leading role on The Word and Surf Polatoes and Gabi Roslin of the Big Breakfast and the Gabi Roslin Show.

Among the many lesser players involved in the never-ending stream of productions from Channel 4 are Michael and Martin Myers, the distributors who run the First Independent company; Stephanie Calman, who is the scriptwriter for the sitcom Dressing for Breakfast; the viciously anti-British comedian Mark Thomas, and Alexi Sayle, who says that since he is Jewish, so are all his characters .

A number of Channel 4 programmes are produced by Philip Clarke's Diverse Production company. These include Diverse Reports, The Hello Girls and Dual Balls, a "comedy" by Dan Zeff.

Clarke has now received funding from the BBC for a new talent project and is currently scouring the UK's universities for new pundits who could appear in a planned BBC 2 heavyweight discussion programme.


***

ITV

The Independent Television Commission is the regulatory body which overseas the whole of the ITV network. Its Director is Jude Goffee and its senior sponsorship and advertising officer is Eve Salomon. The Network Director of ITV is Marcus Plantin, who was instrumental in appointing Claudia Rosencrantz as ITV ' s Controller of Entertainment.

Lord Hollick - plays a big role in ITV.

Media group MAI owns two ITV franchises (Anglia and Meridian); a 5 per cent stake in ITN and a 29 per cent stake in Channel Five. A driving force in the newly formed MAI/ United News and Media giant is Lord Hollick, a Labour peer with close links with Hambros Bank, of which he is a long-standing Director. Hollick has orchestrated MAI ' s rapid growth in media interests since 1990. He is a great admirer of Michael Eisner's Disney empire and wants to be one of the new breed of "lifestyle suppliers" - an all-encompassing media brand which gives you your TV, radio, newspapers, house, books, music, holidays, theme park thrills and films (and, as a consequence, shapes your political opinions).

To this end, MAI has established close links with the second largest "American" megamedia corporation, Time Warner Inc., whose Chairman is Gerald Levin, and its subsidiary HBO, whose Vice President is Charles Schreger. One of the first deals on the agenda is a plan to build a movie theme park on the outskirts of London. A senior director of MAI's Anglia TV subsidiary is film executive David Puttnam, best known for his Chariots of Fire, which dwelt at length on the "anti-Semitism" encountered by a Cambridge athlete early this century. Such problems certainly do not seem to have held back Mr. Puttnam, whose many interests include being a director of the Australian feature producer Village Roadshow Pictures, which is partly owned by MAI. Anglia's Director of Programmes is Graham Creelman. MAI's United News section is headed by Chief Executive Stephen Grabiner.

The pivotal position in ITN's influential news coverage is held by Robert Elias, Programme Editor of News at Ten, while the power to decide what gets airtime at LBC rests with its Controller of Programmes, Charles Golding.



***



Carlton Communications

Carlton TV´s Michael Green.

Carlton is a major force in the ITN network with assets including Carlton TV and Central TV; a 20 per cent stake in ITN; Meridian TV and GMTV, and a 50 per cent stake in London News Network. It has a £ 1.6 billion turnover, recording pre-tax profits of almost £ 250 million in 1995, and has significant assets in the Asian sub-continent.

Carlton's Chairman is Michael Green, who is also Director of Independent Television News, Central Independent Television and GMTV. It was Green who, with the Saatchi brothers, masterminded the fierce lobbying campaign which persuaded the Government to sacrifice the independence of ITV's 14 regional stations in 1993. Green, who is related by marriage to Lords Wolfson and Young, was quoted in the Jewish Chronicle of 17.11.95 as declaring that: "I am very aware of being Jewish."

Although his current affairs programmes enjoy prying into the lives of others, Green himself is very publicity-shy; when a girlfriend left him, his reported warning was: "If you ever write a word about me, 1'11 break every bone in your body." During Green's negotiations to buy Technicolor (UK), he was helped by Jarvis Astaire, who lives with Green's ex-mother-in-law, Lady Wolfson. Astaire himself is a former associate of Ladbroke pools magnate Cyril Stein.

Carlton's head of sponsorship is David Prosser, who is the co-ordinator of the ITV lobby pressing for the abolition of laws which effectively outlaw sponsors which are closely related to the editorial content of programmes. Richard Simons is the company's Head of Features, while the Managing Director of Carlton Select, the former Selec cable TV channel recently bought up by Carlton, is Janet Goldsmith. The political agenda of Carlton was summed up by the company´s decision to send its documentary on one of Oskar Schindler's 'survivors' to 1,000 London secondary schools. The pro-Zionist bias of children's and youth programmes at Carlton is the responsibility of this sector's Controller Michael Forte.

The latest acquisition in Carlton's drive for ever-greater influence is Westcountry Television, one of the last privately owned ITV franchises. Another strong bidder for the company was David Asper's CanWest broadcasting group, so it seems the vendors, which included South West Water and Brittany Ferries, had a choice of "any new owner you like, as long as he's one of us."



***



Granada Group

Carlton's power in "independent" television is rivalled only by the Granada Group, which is worth around £ 6.2 billion and owns two ITV franchises: Granada TV and London Weekend Television. It also has a 20 per cent stake in ITN and Yorkshire Tyne Tees TV (with Lazards merchantbank); a half-share in London News Network, and an 11 per cent stake in BSkyB, in partnership with which it has set up Granada Sky Broadcasting (GSkyB), a joint cable and satellite venture which launched seven new channels on 1st October 1996. BSkyB in turn has stakes in the "adults-only" Playboy Channel. Among Granada's satellite channels is Granada Talk TV, which includes an afternoon teen show, F2F, which is presented by Sacha Baron Cohen.

Granada was founded by Sidney and Cecil Bernstein. Alexander Bernstein was the long-standing Chairman until he went into semi-retirement in March 1996 while retaining his interest and influence. The newly created Granada Media Group (GMG) is controlled by three men. The Chairman, Granada's Chief Executive, Charles Allen, is not thought to be a Jew, but his two colleagues at the top most definitely are.



Chief Executive of the Granada Group, Duncan Lewis.

Duncan Lewis is the Chief Executive of the Granada Media Group; Chief Executive of Granada TV, and Chief Executive of London Weekend Television. Lewis was formerly marketing director at BT, where he initiated the nauseating Jewish grandmother adverts starring actress and sponsor of the Zionist-controlled front organisation, the Anti-Nazi League, Maureen Lipman. Until April 1996 Lewis was head of Mercury Communications and, according to the Evening Standard of 22.5.96, he is now heading a group of finance houses seeking to take over Mercury. He is backed by Warburg Pincus, the "American" firm which is already a key investor in the British cable and television industry (including Channel Five). City sources say that Granada's keeness to link up with Mercury is based on the conviction that the communications and entertainment businesses are set for further convergence.

The third key figure at Granada is Steve Morrison. He is the chief Operating Officer of GMG; Deputy Chief Executive of Granada TV, Managing Director of LWT and head of Granada's sales operation Laser. On his way to the top, according to the Jewish Chronicle of 1.9.95, Morrison was Director of Programmes and Managing Director of Granada TV. His replacements in these last two jobs are Peter Salmon and Andrea Wonfor respectively. Commercial Director at LWT and GMTV is Kate Stross, and Controller of regional programmes at LWT is Simon Shaps.

In October 1995 Granada launched British Independent Television Enterprises (BRITE), which involved the merger of the sales arms of Granada TV, LWT and Yorkshire Tyne Tees TV. The Managing Director of this sales giant is Nadine Nohr.

One of Granada's leading functionaries is the scriptwriter and producer Kay Mellor, a self-confessed feminist responsbile for the "acclaimed" ITV series Band of Gold. Another Granada regular is Paul Marcus, owner of Marlow Films and producer of Granada's Prime Suspect.

Controller of Arts at LWT is Melvyn Bragg.

Although he describes himself as a "Christian", Bragg is extremely pro-Jewish and told the Jewish Chronicle of 5.4.96 that he views Israel as his "spiritual home". Since this interview came after extensive coverage of the brutal Israeli supression of the Palestinian Intifada, with soldiers dynamiting Arab homes if one member of the family is caught throwing stones, shooting dead unarmed schoolchildren and burying teenagers alive with bulldozers, this comment tells us a great deal about the mentality of this sickening "liberal" and the chattering classes who regard him as their arbiter of artistic good taste.



***



Pearson TV

Pearson TV is another significant part of the ITV network, owning as it does Thames Television. Pearson TV Chairman Greg Dyke is a Gentile, but he is another TV mogul who looks to Disney Chairman Michael Eisner as a role model. Pearson TV is partly-owned by Lazards Bank and has a long-term production relationship with the third largest "American" megamedia group, Sumner Redstone's Viacom Inc.

In any case, the day-to-day running of Pearson Broadcasting is more the preserve of its Managing Director, Tony Cohen, who has been tipped as a future successor to Dyke as Chairman. His fellow directors include Sir Paul Fox, a past controller of BBC 1 and Chairman of ITN from 1986 to 1988, who is also a director of Satellite Information Services. With Scimitar Films Ltd.´s Chairman, Michael Winner, and Jeremy Isaacs, Fox was part of the 1988 Committee which was formed to fight proposals included in the Obscene Publications Bill in response to public concern over the ever-declining standards on display in the mass media. Other directors at Thames include Harold Mourgue and Sir Claus Moser, who is also a former Vice Chairman of N. M. Rothschild merchant bank.

Pearson TV has a quarter-share in Channel Five and a 15 per cent stake in UK Gold, whose Chief Executive is Bruce Steinberg. The global reach of the Pearson operation extends as far as TV India, in which the company has a joint share in partnership with its superficial rivals Carlton Communications and the investment bank Schroders.

It is only fair to point out that the parent Pearson conglomerate is owned mainly by the aristocratic Cowdray family. Chairman Lord Blakenham is seen in the City as having a board dominated by Old Etonians, although Reuben Mark is not a member of that particular minority group. Since their interest in broadcasting is in the money rather than the message, Pearson has recently sold off stakes in BSSkyB and Yorkshire Tyne Tees.

Financial journalists are speculating that the company may sell off its TV division altogether, in which case it wouldn't require a crystal ball to predict the kind of people who would be favourites to take it over!



***



Channel Five

The winning syndicate for the licence for this new channel includes several of the supposed "rivals" whose Jewish links have already been noted. These include MAI, Pearson and the US-based Warburg Pincus. Their successful application promised "presenters whose faces, voices, ages and regional and ethnic backgrounds reflect the diversity of Britain in 1996." We won't be able to say we weren't warned! Former BBC 1 Scheduler David Berg is now Controller of Planning and Organisation at C 5, while the Controller of news, current affairs and documentaries is Tim Gardam.

David Elstein, Chief Executive of Channel 5.

The real power at Channel 5, in any case, is its Chief Executive, David Elstein. According to the Jewish Chronicle of January 3rd, 1997, Elstein has a "vast executive and programme-making background with most of Britain's major networks."

Discussing the kind of programmes which the new channel would carry, Elstein told the Jewish Chronicle that:

"There are a lot of very vocal Jewish thinkers and writers around, not necessarily representing Jewish religious belief.

"You don't expect an awful lot of Yom Kippur services to turn up in the work of people like Howard Jacobson and Harold Pinter. But you are aware that they are coming from a background which is influenced by Jewish life."



***



Cable and Satellite Channels

In addition to the Jewish presence in the rapidly expanding fields of cable and satellite TV already notead, James Ackerman works as the newly appointed Director of multichannel covetures. As well as his already noted position as head of Britain's second biggest satellite channel UK Gold, former MTV high-flier Bruce Steinberg is also Chief Executive of the women's channel UK Living, with an audience fast approaching three million every week.

Julian Aston is Managing Director of Channel One, which at present supplies cable TV to around 300,000 homes in London. He is assisted by his friend Michael Rosenblum, who has been described by the Jewish Chronicle as "the American video journalism guru".

The General Manager of Flextech TV's The Children's Channel (TCC) cable/satellite operation is Franklin Getchell. TCC's Chief Executive is Richard Wolfe and its Senior Series Producer is leading US teenshow producer Mitchell Kriegman, whose work includes the programme Sesame Street. Flextech owns the satellite channel Bravo, whose General Manager Yonni Cohen moved to Polygram last year, with Broadcast magazine suggesting that his temporarily vacant post would be filled by Getchell. The new Head of Programming at Bravo is Mark Deitch, formerly BBC 1's Editor of Acquired Output. Flextech TV also owns the Family Channel and manages TLC and the Discovery Channel .

Of all the new channels aimed at children and young people, the most subversive has to be MTV Europe. This is a subsidiary of Sumner Redstone's Viacom UK, as are VH-I; the Paramount Channel; the Sci-Fi Channel; the Blockbuster video chain and, as we have already seen, Nickleodeon TV. Paramount Pictures UK is headed by Danton Rissner, while the Managing Director of the Sci-Fi Channel is David Woodman. The President and Business Director of MTV Europe is Peter Einstein, backed up by Senior Vice Presidents Gil Aronow and Boris Katz. Through his MTV empire, Redstone and his Chief Operating Officer Mark Rosenthal offer Beavis and Butthead as teenage role models and pump their narrow views and music-clad propaganda into 210 million homes in 71 countries. MTV has been accurately described as the dominant cultural (sic!) influence on teenagers around the world.

In September 1995 MTV Europe was fined a total of £ 60,000 for two programmes dealing with under-age sex which even the ITC described as "smutty". Einstein protested that he had not seen any difference in the levels of taste and decency in the eight years that the channel had been on the air. Indeed!

Another satellite and cable channel aimed at youngsters is The Box-Music TV, whose Programme Director is Liz Laskowski. The UK satellite Warner Channel is the work of Jeffrey Schlesinger, President of Warner Bros International Television. Raymond Jaffe is the Director of Publicity and Promotion at Sky TV.

The satellite news services are also firmly in the usual hands. Reuters TV Executive Editor is David Feingold and its Managing Director is David Kogan (who also oversees London Radio), while head of its newsgathering operation at Sky News is Malcolm Switzer. Meanwhile David Feingold is chief of the London bureau of Cable News International (CNN)-now part of Gerald Levin's Time Warner Corporation-and as such is answerable only to the Managing Director of CNN International, Randy Freedman.

UKTV was one of the companies which submitted unsuccessful bids for Channel 5. In spite of this rebuff its owner, Canadian Jewish media mogul David Asper is still very keen to increase his control within the British media. His stated aim is to see the UK move towards Canada and the US in terms of an increase in commercial TV stations and cable TV penetration. UKTV is at present just a small part of the Asper family's Can West Global Communications, which also has interests in Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Chile. While his father sits on the governing board of Jerusalem's Hebrew University, Asper describes himself as a "cultural rather than religious Jew".

Another big company seeking to extend its grip to this side of the Atlantic is Polygram Filmed Entertainment. Yoni Cohen was appointed Vice President of Television and Broadcasting at PFI in July 1996 to oversee the launch of Polygram's new international TV network.



***