Posted on 09/25/2005 8:40:00 AM PDT by Dallas59
(IsraelNN.com) Saudi Prince Al-Waleed bin Talal has purchased 5.46 percent of the Fox corporation, according to Gulf Daily News, raising concern that the conservative Fox News may soften its anti-terror stance due to the views of the new shareholder.
Al-Waleed, the nephew of the late Saudi King Fahd, was in the news when he visited the World Trade Center's remains just after the September 11th attacks and offered then-New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani a $10 million check for relief efforts. Al-Waleed then released a statement blaming US foreign policy and support for Israel for the attacks.
Giuliani returned the prince's check with a statement that, "There is no moral equivalent for this attack. The people who did it lost any right to ask for justification when they slaughtered . . . innocent people ... Not only are those statements wrong, they're part of the problem."
Did search...nothing.
wfc?
From Little Green Footballs
I thought he already owned shares in FOX. I thought we discovered that back in September of 01.
Don't know.
No big deal. Fox News, aka the Missing White Girl Network, went downhill a long time ago. Anyone watching it for any worthwhile news anymore is certainly wasting his/her time.
This is not good news.
Since when is 5% considered a large share of anything?
FOX needs to be reminded that all their licenses are in jeopardy if they allow this clown any voice in their coverage.
So9
Well put. Fox's sensational coverage of kidnapped wealthy white girls and the trials of wealthy white girls (Michael Jackson) has jumped the shark.
There goes "24"
5% is a large share in stocks especially when there are multiple stock holders.
Fox sux. I cant take the 3 idiots in the morning. Col. Hunt, Hume and Cavuto are the only guys worth watching. Besides, with Free Republic who needs another news source?
Probably only Saudis could afford to pay Price Bill O'Reilly's salary. It ain't cheap to have Lord Bill "lookin' out for the folks" and we poor dumb slobs should be grateful. Yeah, sure.
What is "The Fox corporation"? There is no "Fox corporation".
Whether this will have any actual impact or not, the perception is there that it might compromise their coverage. Not good.
5% is the point at which ownership has to be reported in publicly held corporations.
In many corporations it will make someone the largest shareholder and can give him effective control of the board of directors.
It shouldn't give any such leverage i the case of FOX because teh Murdochs own such a large share.
So9
I think he owns a "large share" in the The Times, Netscape, The Sun, Motorola and Sky News.
Duh...this would be "news" if the Saudi's didn't already own about 5% of every profitable big company in the USA.
I think you are right, Murdoch's conglomerate is officially called News Corporation or something like that.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.