³ÉÈËÂÛ̳

Jeremy Hunt's decision to allow Rupert Murdoch's takeover bid for BSkyB is picked up by many papers, many of which are in direct competition and make clear their opposition. They say that the culture secretary's decision will have a detrimental effect on the industry with wider implications on cost and competition.

the government's decision may not reflect well on David Cameron but could also harm the coalition:

"If Cameron has decided, like his predecessors in Downing Street, that Murdoch's support is the key to electoral success, however craven it might make him look, he may find that now the opposite is the case. Not only will the Sun's and the Times' approval be at least balanced by the disapproval of all the rest of the British press, but an electorate weary of political sleaze may feel badly let down by him."

In the that "Rupert Murdoch has got his way - again" and warns that the takeover has wider implications for British society:

"To allow News Corp further to entrench its position in the British media will only make government more beholden to the company's commercial and political agenda. It's not fair on rivals, advertisers or consumers. Worse still, it's a threat to democracy."

the decision and says it is as an opportunity for other media organisations to benefit and thrive:

"Other UK print publishers might be seen as losers, faced with a potential behemoth. But they can now seek out new mergers and commercial partnerships across different forms of media.
Ìý
"Newspapers are going through the same sunset traumas as steel and shipbuilding before them. The titles in the News International stable will be fortunate to be on a train pulled by such a powerful engine. Other UK media can argue for equally light regulatory touches. And we, as consumers, can expect neat stuff on our tablet computers."

about Mr Hunt's acceptance of News Corps plan to make Sky News a separate entity:

"[S]imilar promises of editorial independence were made after Rupert Murdoch was permitted to buy The Times newspaper group in 1981. They were soon ignored. This proposal is a fig leaf; its purpose is to give the impression of a serious response to concerns about plurality, while avoiding any substantive action.

it as a "smelly deal" and questions why Jeremy Hunt didn't refer the decision in the first place:

"The sadness is that Mr Hunt had no need to intercede. His safest and most straightforward option should have been to pass this takeover - which would not have been allowed in virtually any other country -- to the Competition Commission. It could then have conducted a comprehensive and transparent investigation."

Mr Hunt's role but is critical of the process itself:

"It is unfortunate that there has not been a full review of News Corp's bid. Its absence may confirm suspicions held in some quarters that Mr Murdoch's preponderance in the UK media market has put him beyond the control of British politicians. This is unfair, at least in the case of Mr Hunt's review. The problem is not with his application of the rules; but with the rules themselves."