Cast your mind back to the winter of 1980/81 – somewhere between the rise of Solidarity in Poland and the emergence of the SDP – and those with long memories of Fleet Street will recall a story of a cabinet minister, a Murdoch bid, and an interesting outcome. The story, of course, is well known to veteran journalists – but, well, in that plus ca change, plus c'est la meme chose sort of way, it's worth telling it all over again.
Rupert Murdoch had bid £12m for the Times and the Sunday Times, laid low after years of losses, and months of strikes – and was chosen by the embattled Thomson organisation (the then owners). Most other contenders had been easily dismissed – the Newhouse family were "too American"; Sir James Goldsmith was "not thought suitable", while the late Viscount Rothermere was believed to have a "strong and consistent bias towards Conservative party" that was "incompatible with the independent role of the Times" according to a note prepared at the time by the Times's chairman, Sir Denis Hamilton.
However, the deal had to be approved by the regulators, and Murdoch made it clear he was prepared to pull out if the Monopolies and Mergers Commission did not approve. But first the matter went to John Biffen, the trade and industry secretary, and Murdoch met Biffen to see if a referral could be avoided. After all there was a loophole – the cabinet minister had the power to wave the deal through if it could be shown that a business was at risk of going under if a takeover was impeded by a referral.
Even then, when the Mirror was more of a force, when the Times was a mess and nobody had heard of media plurality, there were concerns about the combination of the Sun owner with the Times titles. Undaunted, Murdoch met Biffen but thought the meeting had not gone well. However, he was perhaps more persuasive than he first thought.
It was Biffen who was to surprise everybody by deciding in January 1981 that he would rush through the takeover without referral. The minister argued that even the normally profitable Sunday Times was struggling – although he was challenged in the Commons that the investment bank Warburgs (which drew up the prospectus) had painted a rosier picture when it was trying to squeeze cash out of would-be buyers. A few conditions were imposed but these were trivial. The independent directors introduced in 1966 when Thomson took over continued – but they were a fig leaf for what any owner wanted to do.
You can see how decisive Biffen's verdict was. The politician is long gone, but Murdoch is still around, and he still owns the Sun and the Times and a lot more else besides. Cabinet ministers never last as long as newspaper magnates, which (to state the bleeding obvious) is why these moments when a change of ownership is in the balance are so important. And what is so curious is that Biffen's successor, Jeremy Hunt, seems to be making such heavy weather of an easy decision.
There seems little doubt that if Ofcom had decided there were no issues with the Sky buyout, we would not be seeing this flurry of activity from News Corporation now. After all, News Corp abruptly cancelled a meeting with MPs that had been due on Wednesday, shortly after receiving a summary of Ofcom's report, because executives suddenly found they had better things to do. But what is surprising is what Hunt is up to. He refuses to say whether he will meet with News Corp (an important point of disclosure surely), and he sits on his hands rather than taking the easy option of following Ofcom's advice which is expected to be to refer the deal to the Competition Commission.
Never mind, no doubt we will remember Hunt in 30 years, just as we all recall Biffen today.
