世界上的理想家都集合起来了！一个自称为“让我们掌控新闻（Let’s Own The News）”的组织最近推出了一项众筹活动，想要收购《泰晤士报》和《星期日泰晤士报》。
“我们支持这项活动，因为我们要应对那些造成永久不平等的，强大的机构和团体。” “巨大的权力握在少数人手中，他们可以用自己的影响力制造最适合自身的公众舆论，这根本不是民主。” 他和Fitzjohn坚信这个想法会引起公众的兴趣，从而带来如潮水般的资金。
Idealists of the world unite! An organisation calling itself Let's Own The News has launched a crowdfunding campaign with the aim of acquiringthe Times and Sunday Times.
It believes ￡100m would do the job - ￡50m to buy the loss-making titles and a further ￡50m to make them profitable.
"With the fall in the value of newspapers and the rise in crowdfunding", it says, "we can collectively acquire the papers from the most powerful press baron, Rupert Murdoch."
And why should Murdoch sell? Evidently, because he would like to take a step forward for our democracy and to rejuvenate his public image after the phone hacking scandal.
He would also wish to retain goodwill in the face of public pressure should the organisers raise the necessary ￡100m.
People, who cannot own more than 1% of the total amount, are being asked to make a pledge of money and will only be expected to pay should the bid prove successful.
The campaign's founder, Laurie Fitzjohn, sees it as a radical solution to the power of the press barons. In an email, he writes:
"Currently, five families control 80% of the national newspapers we read. This isn't a free press and it undermines our democracy. Our politicians are in fear of the press barons... A crowd acquisition of the Times and The Sunday Times would be an important and achievable step in reducing the power of the press barons."
One of the initiative's backers is The Young Foundation. Its chief executive, Simon Willis, said: "We're backing this campaign because we want to tackle powerful incumbent institutions and groups that perpetuate inequality.
"It's fundamentally undemocratic that such immense power lies with such a small group who can use their influence to shape public opinion in a way that suits them."
He and Fitzjohn clearly believe the idea will pique public interest and thereby promote a debate that could, conceivably, lead to a flood of pledges.