• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

Media diversity in Australia Submission 27 The proposed Senate Inquiry into media diversity, independence and reliability in Australia and the impact that this has on public interest journalism and democracy is absolutely vital for this country - and for many other countries. I will start by saying that the ‘Rupert Murdoch influence’ on journalism, on public debate, on the profession of journalism and on the underpinning of democracy has just been tragic and subversive. Having said that, I recognise this inquiry is broader than just Murdoch and his Empire, but believe that his organisation is a central cause for concern. First, my own background. I am credited with founding the Australian Press Council in 1976, ran The Age newspaper as Managing Director of the company for nearly 20 years, being Editor-in-Chief for seven, was the first (and to date only) Australian to be world Chairman of the International Press Institute – the prime body in the 60’s to 80’s fighting for journalistic freedoms around the world, Vice President of the Press Foundation of Asia, taught journalism at RMIT in Melbourne and at Boston University, where I was a University Professor and was appointed Chairman of the School of Journalism. I should also say I have been a prominent defender of the ABC for many years, having spent nearly six years as morning presenter on 774 3LO in Melbourne. A central purpose in my life for some 60 years has been to fight for journalistic freedom and to raise the credibility and performance of journalists. While Managing Director of David Syme and Co. Limited, I caused the Hamer Government in Victoria in 1981 to hold the Norris Inquiry into the ownership and control of newspapers in Victoria. Ironically, I used the Trade Practices Act and ‘market domination’ as levers to challenge the Fairfax organisation (which was in partnership with the Syme family in controlling the Age and had three of our six directors). Without consultation, Fairfax made a huge investment in the Herald & Weekly Times designed to thwart Rupert Murdoch from taking our competitors over. That extensive inquiry is now history and subject of a book. Now to a statement I will support with evidence. 1 Media diversity in Australia Submission 27 The insidious influence of the Murdoch Empire here in Australia through News Limited, through Fox and Sky news and with its many other voices has massively skewed public debate and any semblance of rational discussion. Further, many may not know that the Murdoch code of journalistic standards for News Limited, and elsewhere in his organisation, is a far cry from that accepted by serious media around the world. I have written that News, Fox and Sky, plus the line up of most of their conflicted commentators, should all be on the Canberra registry of lobbyists with so many being paid activists. Murdoch does not practice journalism in the accepted model; his organisation is about making money, about weilding power and influence – and his employees know what they ‘should’ be pushing, promoting or what to cover and not to cover. Public interest journalism is rarely to be found in his newspapers, his broadcasting outlets nor in what his ‘name’ employees put out through the avenues open to them through the ABC (both television and radio), the Macquarie radio network and anywhere else who gives them air time. Sadly, with the heavy influence of the Institute of Public Affairs and of the self-interested propaganda war against the ABC, Murdoch’s people are being afforded the ‘oxygen of publicity’ through many ABC programs as the Corporation tries to counter its critics. Now News Ltd. is out of Australian Associated Press, I gather it plans to set up its own journalistic news service so that news outlets which it does not own can carry its particular brand of news. Depending on how you measure it, some say that Murdoch owns nearly 70% of Australia’s newspapers. My contention is that if you put into the equation its ‘voices’ elsewhere, the organisation could be providing over 80 % of what Australians see, hear and read each day. This leaves out the impact of the social media, though much of what is communicated there is influenced by the Murdoch outlets. Of course, we can clearly see what Murdoch’s group has promoted and one-sidedly presented in the United States of America through Fox news with its (and Mr. Murdoch’s) backing of Trumpism. Also his tabloid newspaper in New York – the NY Post – is one of the worst examples of brutal editorialising and reporting. While Murdoch does publish the prestigious Wall Street Journal, most observers would say that paper has lost considerable editorial credibility since he took it over. In the UK, Murdoch had a view about Brexit that was exploited unashamedly through his tabloid Sun newspaper. Again the formerly 2 Media diversity in Australia Submission 27 highly thought of British newspapers – The Sunday Times and The Times – have become lessened in respect since he took them over. And of course, in the UK, we should mention phone hacking (with the closure of the News of the World), Sky news and his various editorial political forays, which almost always seem to be self-serving. Many people know of the threats and the actual bullying of the Murdoch Media, though it is hard to pin down written instructions. The messages are usually conveyed by suggestion or through his henchmen and henchwomen. Perhaps in Australia there were three classic examples – the anti Julia Gillard campaign with supporting tweets from Murdoch and also him suggesting to his editorial team that Peta Credlin should resign from the PM’s office (though she has since reinvented herself as an opinionated voice on SKY television and through his print outlets) . Few in Australia will forget the brutal company-wide campaign against former Human Rights Commissioner Gillian Triggs (with The Australian carrying articles attacking her integrity and standing - I think for 17 days running on page one, two or three). In putting in this submission on behalf of myself and also the Friends of the ABC Nationally, I would point to the legislated standards for journalism set out in the ABC Act of 1983. It requires ABC journalists to be impartial and accurate. The requirement for News Limited journalists is very different. As you will see from my attached paper which follows and was written in October, last year, I have expanded on the points made in this submission and feel they remains relevant to this current Senate Inquiry. I would like to expand on certain aspects of this submission as a witness to the Senate inquiry and am available to appear in Canberra if invited. Some positive suggestions on how to improve – and perhaps even resolve – the current unsatisfactory situation over the performance of the media, new and old, and over the public’s right to know could be put forward and discussed. Yours respectfully, Ranald Macdonald Relevant article written by me last October. “The time has come,” the walrus said, “to speak of many things.” (Lewis Carroll quote). It has, and let us be blunt about it. The Australian Coalition Government and the Rupert Murdoch Empire and the ‘shocking’ jocks and the right-wing ideologists are limiting any chance of informed public debate in this country. 3 Media diversity in Australia Submission 27 We in Australia, sadly, are moving towards the news access of those who live in the “Democratic Republics” of Korea and of the Congo. Public interest journalism is in limited supply for Australians – and it is of real concern. Under Article 19 of the UN Charter for Human rights, to which we are a signatory, there is clearly stated the requirement for a free flow of information – not propaganda. So. What can be believed? Which amongst all the messages bombarding us each day are factual? And, who are actually journalists? I have four areas of real apprehension concerning the current media situation, with some suggestions for improvement. First Concern. Led by the Federal Government and often using the weapon of ‘national security’, there have been increasing limitations imposed on what can be reported. Journalism should be about telling the community what is happening and with factual support, what perhaps is likely to happen. Journalistic freedom is certainly a great catch-cry, but it also can allow for unnamed or even fictional sources introduced to flesh out a good ‘tabloid’ sensational story without sources or facts. Minister for Home Affairs Peter Dutton – in whom so many have to trust – is actually right when he says that no one, not even journalists, are above the law. But, there are cases, such as where corruption is involved, secret and unlawful decisions being made by Government or others, where airing of the issues is justified ‘in the public interest’. In those cases – provided we do not have protection specified in a Bill of Rights – the justification of genuine public interest must be strengthened in law. We cannot allow our politicians to determine when sanctions are imposed or news is restricted. The defense of publication ‘in the public interest’, must be robustly and clearly incorporated into our legal system. The simple push for total ‘press freedom’ or open slather without sources or proper research is naïve in that it would allow even worse examples of made up or mischievous stories to appear through the mouths and words of those who claim to be journalists, but who are simply attempting to boost sales or ratings, or their public profile. 4 Media diversity in Australia Submission 27 Second Concern The Federal Government’s decision in effect to pursue the death of the ABC ‘by a thousand cuts’ as supported by many in the Coalition and boosted by the Murdoch Mafia, the Institute of Public Affairs and other short term thinking critics with political or other agendas.

Load more

  8

Copy Link