But is it?

As of today, Richard Branson's pubilcity machine swung into action in order to exert pressure on Ofcom, the Government, BSkyB and anyone else who just happens to be listening that BSkyB is the big bad wolf that will run off with the whole of commercial television. And your children.

Although it now appears fairly certain that BSkyB doesn't intend to directly influence ITV plc in the short term, there still ought to be a general and unbiased inquiry into its wide-ranging business tactics past and present, especially as a few of its previous business dealings may still be tainted with suspicion as to their very nature.

But was today's rejection of NTL's takeover bid by the ITV board influenced in any way by BSkyB's share purchase last Friday? It's perfectly possible, but bear in mind that this is the same board that had hung on to Charles Allen for far longer than many thought was tenable and the same board which had brushed off previous takeover attempts with equal disdain.

There are still plenty of people on ITV's board that want ITV plc to remain independent and are of the opinion that the company is worth much more than what others (NTL, Greg Dyke's consortium...) say it's worth, even if your name is Richard Branson. And they may ultimately be right, even though ITV plc is currently underperforming by a fair margin.

Despite the high profile share grab, BSkyB is now keeping a relatively low profile which does strongly suggest that BSkyB is well aware of the problems it would encounter relating to the issue of 'material influence'. But BSkyB seems well versed in the psychological aspects of share dealing, as was proven with its audacious bid to control Manchester United.

So we can conclude that BSkyB's ITV stake isn't about direct control nor is it really about making money unless BSkyB are really going to sit tight with their bundle of shares through rain or shine. If BSkyB was really serious about wanting to make money it would have spread assets across several companies unless it was sure of making a quick killing with ITV.

A few people have even suggested that Rupert and James Murdoch could do the previously unthinkable and sell all of their UK newspapers in exchange for a complete takeover of ITV. It seems plausible on paper - especially given the recent decline of newspaper sales - but the resultant commercial television monopoly would be deeply unacceptable to most people.

Especially - and crucially - for the advertisers, who would most likely switch their loyality away from television (which nowadays is a very easy thing to do) in order to protest at such a devastating market dominance if BSkyB were able to wield such power.

Therefore it's possible to tentatively conclude that BSkyB was pretty certain that a simple NTL deal was a nonstarter but wanted to conclusively sink that 'easy' bid using psychological tactics as well as being onhand for any payoff that may result from a successful takeover bid regardless of suitor, which could even include acquiring Channel Five from RTL.

Part of me wants ITV to remain independent - after all that's what the 'I' in ITV stands for - but practically speaking, ITV has been mismanaged to such a degree that it has effectively become 'damaged goods', essentially requiring the sort of drastic corrective action that is well beyond the scope of its current business practice.

However if nobody at ITV is prepared to take such drastic action (as clearly appears to be the case) then ITV will almost inevitably have to face the consequences of a hostile takeover; the end result of which will be anyone's guess.