kipp, you can't force people to buy newspapers they don't want to .. News Ltd is successful because their papers reflect what people want.

Fairfax is dying because they don't have a demographic, they pander to people who are in a minority, and thus the paper has become unprofitable - of course, like the ALP and others, it's the customers fault, not their product's fault.

How will reviewing the media produce "balanced" news, if they all look and sound like the ABC and Age/SMH, will that be ok for you?

Not for me and many others, the ABC and Fairfax preach, hold particular environmental and political views which I just don't want or need, they do not report news, they attempt to fashion views.

No thanks ..

You have to stop blaming the media for the poor policies of the government, the poor job of selling the carbon tax and the poor job of trying to move everyone to the far left.

If you got rid of News Ltd, that would not make Fairfax or the ABC suddenly balanced, whatever you mean by balanced - I suspect you mean no criticism of things you agree with.

If you want other information, then there is the internet of course .. you seem capable of using it. Do you buy newspapers? I don't. If News Ltd and other shut down online news, I'll subscribe and probably to News Ltd, at least I can stomach their reporting style and they DO NOT hide stuff from me.

This government's big ego is their great weakness, they cannot understand it is their policies that stink, that they are out of touch and people dislike them, so they blame the media as if it is their fault .. like some tinpot African despots, Juliar and Bobby Brown, blame the messenger, and their minions, good little soldiers, follow suite.

So Ho Hum and Morgonzola obviously think they are morally superior to Mr Rowswell?

Ho Hum draws attention to some indiscretions he committed 5 years ago when he was a university student, as though that has some bearing on the arguments that he raises in his article.

I deleted Ho Hum's first comment because a reference to that indiscretion was all it contained. He's now made it in the same post where he raises some substantive issues about the article, and it has become part of the conversation. Does this get him around the original moderation? I don't think so. He can spend some time out. If he wants to make discussion threads nasty he can find other forums to exercise his rights.

Morgonzola claims that Rowswell has altered his biography and infers something sinister from that. In fact authors have no power to alter their biographies as the editor puts them into the system. So if Morgonzola wants to complain about anyone it is me.

But there is nothing to complain about. If you look at Rowswell's biography you will find that it is both the shortened biography that Morgonzola cites, which is his tagline on the article, and the longer one, which is what appears on his author page.

If I don't get a retraction and apology from Morgonzola before tomorrow I'll look at applying a penalty to him. Ad hominem attacks are not acceptable on the forum.

GrahamY is quite correct. I was wrong to suggest that Mr Rowswell had edited his author bio to conceal the fact that he is a long-term Liberal adviser, and therefore retract any statement or inference in my comment that refers to Mr Rowswell.. My sincere apologies for any offence or embarrassment that may have been caused by my error.

My mistake arose because the piece was so obviously Liberal spin and the tagline so short that I googled him, and the longer bio was one of the first entries returned, so I made an incorrect inference that would reflect poorly on Mr Towswell if it were true. I intentionally avoided mention of any of the salacious references to him that abound on the Internet, but I genuinely think that the author's long-term involvement with the Liberal Party is relevant to the position he's taken in the article.

Anyway, my mistake. I certainly didn't set out to mislead or offend anybody, but I offer my sincere apology if I have.

Oops. I made a typo with Mr Rowswell's name.

My apology for that too :)

Morganzola,

It would be a pleasant change if you debated the issue, not the author.

This sudden new interest in a media enquiry is simply a thinly veiled opportunistic attack on the press.

Phone hacking in British Isles is not defensible.
I believe it is like a crate dropped in transport a crack opened that uncovered much more.
Now with America and all of the British Isles looking past the bubble wrap, we stand on the brink of a scandal
Not getting involved with two posts but Shadow Minister I am baffled by your intervention.
Do you too think much more is to come, or did you just want to intervene in something that is not mine or your business?