Kevin Rudd has launched a petition to parliament calling for a Royal Commission into the media operations of Rupert Murdoch's New Corporation.

Petition Reason
Our democracy depends on diverse sources of reliable, accurate and independent news. But media ownership is becoming more concentrated alongside new business models that encourage deliberately polarising and politically manipulated news. We are especially concerned that Australia’s print media is overwhelmingly controlled by News Corporation, founded by Fox News billionaire Rupert Murdoch, with around two-thirds of daily newspaper readership. This power is routinely used to attack opponents in business and politics by blending editorial opinion with news reporting. Australians who hold contrary views have felt intimidated into silence. These facts chill free speech and undermine public debate. Powerful monopolies are also emerging online, including Facebook and Google. We are deeply concerned by: mass-sackings of news journalists; digital platforms impacting on media diversity and viability; Nine Entertainment's takeover of the Melbourne Age and Sydney Morning Herald; News Corp’s acquisition (and then closure) of more than 200 smaller newspapers, undermining regional and local news; attempts to replace AAP Newswire with News Corp’s alternative; and relentless attacks on the ABC’s independence and funding. Professional journalists further have legitimate concerns around unjust searches, potential prosecution, whistle-blower protection, official secrecy and dispute resolution that should be comprehensively addressed. Only a Royal Commission would have the powers and independence to investigate threats to media diversity, and recommend policies to ensure optimal diversity across all platforms to help guarantee our nation’s democratic future.

Petition Request
We therefore ask the House to support the establishment of such a Royal Commission to ensure the strength and diversity of Australian news media.

Hi Paul,

I watched the US Election Special on the "Insiders"
last night 8/11/2020. David Speers interviewed
Malcolm Turnbull, Kevin Rudd and Arthur Sinodinos.
The panel was made up of Lenore Taylor, Stan Grant,
and Peter Hartcher. Kevin'Rudd's Royal Commission
into the Murdoch media was discussed.

The petition is now closed and it's collected over half
a million signatures including Malcolm Turnbull's.

Of course we need an inquiry into Murdoch's dominance
in our media. We need media ownership diversity for the
future of our democratic system.

Unfortunately Australia has no threshold of signatures that
requires a petition to be debated in parliament. So as many
commentators indicate a Royal Commission any time soon is
highly unlikely. And without the support of either the
Liberal National Coalition or the Australian Labor Party - the
petition has no political force behind it.

Still it will be presented to parliament - and as Kevin Rudd
has made quite clear - what he wants is to start a national
conversation about the negative impact the Murdoch media
company has in Australia through its total domination
(especially in Queensland) and its overt support for one
side of politics.

It's a start. And one that is long overdue.

When Krudd was getting positive reviews from the Australian he could not suck up to them enough. After he went full feral and they called him out then he wants a royal commission.

What a loser, he makes Trump look balanced.

You need to be desperate for a topic to mention Kevin Rudd, who was a dud Prime Minister and is totally irrelevant since he left the political scene. If he wasn't such a nasty piece of work, he would be pitied. He and that other has been, Keating, must bribe media hacks to mention them.

Hi Paul,

Thanks for raising this topic.

Hopefully others will contribute to the
actual discussion. Media ownership in
Australia should concern us all no matter
what our political persuasions may be.

How ridiculous. Typical of that pompous tosser that is Rudd

For the Left, just get out there and win the debates and stop whinging.

People and organisations can argue what they like, as long as it accords with the law.

Paul1405,
You could try crowd-funding by selling T-shirts that say "Be a selfish grub & support Rudd".

Rudd and Keating are up themselves. Howard, Gillard, Abbott and even Turnbull manage to keep the traps shut, realising that they have had their go, and that they are no more relevant than any other citizen. Party politics is not a factor in knowing when to go away. It's all about obnoxious personalities, and Rudd and Keating always were, and will always be, obnoxious personalities.

This should not be about politics or personalities.
This should be about media ownership in Australia.
The rest is merely a diversion.

Nothing wrong with media.

If the left has a problem, start its own media

Dear Chris Lewis,

Stop being a shill for a billionaire who is an evil twat and an economic refugee to boot.

If you are happy with the absolute insidious nature of the Murdoch Press in this country then you do not care for it nor its democracy.

Saying people should go out and win the debate is fine as long as there is a half way balanced media to report on it. For the most part there isn't. That should worry any patriotic Australian. Apparently you aren't one of them.

Dear Paul1405,

Yes I signed it. It was the largest petition ever submitted from what I understand. Of course the Libs will not act on it because it is against their best interests.

This is what Fox News dishes up to the American people day in and out.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksb3KD6DfSI&ab_channel=ShootMeDead

Good on Rudd

The left cannot argue their ideas in the Market place, they can only attempt by law to silence and throw shut on their opponents, as SR has just dung. This is about politics not media ownership as Foxy tries to claim. There is plenty of left media as we have heard over the Trump period as President. No one reads papers today, it is on epages to read, and plenty of it. It is the fact left cannot accept a different point of view. Hence they must rule the opinion pages of politics. Rudd is a secret Communist who wants to control thought.

The rest is merely a diversion.
Foxy,
The media ownership is a topic to divert from the failings & corruption of the Left !

The highly censorious Hard Left overlooks the obvious - they have Big Tech on their side. Google, Twitter, Facebook and YouTube censor and block right-wingers over FACTUAL assertions.

Along with MSM, Big Tech has almost certainly kicked Trump out. In 2019 alone, YouTube removed 300 Trump advertisements.

Google removes the ability to search for files that it doesn't approve of. Its Lefty employees are always pressuring for conservative sites to be blacklisted.

There is no publisher more powerful than Wikipedia, which exists to offend the right.

Reddit, Facebook, YouTube, Twitter are all leftist-owned.

Leftist politicians use Big Tech to bypass debate, public review, judicial review and other checks and balances that are there to ensure that politicians in a democracy cannot simply impose their policies.

Big corporations are in on the act, too. Politicians turn to them to do their bidding - in the same way the Chinese Communist Party uses its corporations.

As of February 2020, Google owns 92% of the search engine market, 63% of the internet browser market, and 75% of the smartphone operating system.

Don't listen to the Hard Left pontificating about a Murdoch monopoly.

I agree, there are plenty of left wing media sources out there.

I hardly support the Murdoch-owned press, but respect its right to exist.

It is indeed a dangerous path when some wish others did not exist, simply because they don't share their policy views.

If you support liberal democracy and liberalism, you have to take the good with the bad, depending on your perspective.

anything else is simply control, more in tune with an authoritarian society.

Dear Josephus,

And you mate are nicked in the head.

Secret communist? Where on the earth do you pull this kind of utter nonsense from? What echo chambers do you skip through with gay abandon?

How is Rudd a communist when all he is doing is seeking media diversity?

And it isn't a matter of a different point of view at all. It is about the lies and half truths which our unaccountable media gets away with now. It is a dog's breakfast of an NBN because Murdoch wanted to protect his cable business, it is his far right commentators sewing discontent and anti-intellectualism, it is the gullible minions like yourself who consume this garbage.

when all he is doing is seeking media diversity?
SteelerRedux,
Come off it kid, the Dud's never got over being ousted because of incompetence. On top of that his egotism is through the roof ! He's been educated beyond his ability to comprehend & what we saw & got is the proof of that !
At least Gillard has the sense to stay quiet.

This petition has bugger all to do with media ownership and 100% to do with silencing dissent.

Firstly, Newscorp owns a minority of the newspapers, and for every Newscorp paper in an area, there is at least one or more papers from left whinge mastheads, the problem is that readers prefer Newscorp paper to others by 2 to 1 or greater.

That the ABC has far greater reach, is dominated by the left and is paid for with taxes is far more of a travesty.

SR, Rudd is hurt that we have offended Communist China by asking for our Country Back, and sovereignty of our Nation back. He supports the rise of Communist take over of Australia, "We are part of Asia" he says, as Daniel Andrews also believes; because he believes it has more to offer Australia than America our long term contributor to security and independence.

Because the Right wing Media espouse Australia's sovereignty and right to National security that is threatened by Communist China, he wants this media silenced, because it offends his Communist Comrades.

Shadow Minister says: “This petition has bugger all to do with media ownership and 100% to do with silencing dissent”.

He is right. It is widely accepted than humans’ reasoning is motivated by a desire to justify their biases rather than to achieve an objective understanding of the world.

Of course the government will ignore this petition. Submitting to a mob shakedown doesn’t mean the mob will leave you alone; on the contrary, they will just come back looking for a bigger payout.

The Australian far-Left - the enemy within - is our greatest threat. They will not be satisfied until they have crushed all dissent and freedom of speech. No matter how loud and insistent they become, we must resist them with a big NO; call them out for what they are.

and where is the empirical proof that Murdoch dominates debate?

I don't see it, so please let me know if I am blind.

It is just more deplatforming action.
Many newspaper employees have been sacked because what they write does
not interest the reader. If what they wrote was more interesting and
not just global warming etc etc then maybe more papers would be read.

As far as TV is concerned why are the lefties worried ?
Sky is restrained to cable and as such has much smaller access to the
public TV watchers. To even things up, SBS should be closed and their
frequencies handed to News Limited.
Kevin Rudd should be careful, the judge appointed might see the
imbalance and recommend doing what I suggested with SBS.
Sky on cable is arraigned against the ABC's multiple channels covering
everywhere in the country.
Sky is truly the only place where a dissenting voice can be heard.
Yet they try to have Labour voices there every day and night yet
no one can suggest the ABC ever has conservative does.

Dear Chris Lewis,

913,000 facebook followers for Sky News Australia for a start.

SR, but how many watch the other channels?

I don't fear the right; its influence is overstated.

Australian policy generally operates in the middle of the spectrum on most issues.

Let the right have their say. they also have some good points to make.

Both Rudd and Turnbull are embittered losers who lost the support of their OWN COLLEAGUES. They both sucked up to Murdoch, and actually received help, unwise though it was. But, they couldn't crack it with their own party rooms.

Pure sour grapes is the reason for this petition, which Scott Morrison should get a paper copy of and wipe his bum on.

Lets try to do without the name calling.
And personal slurs.

The fact remains
that more than half a million Australians
have signed the online petition and they
obviously feel that good media is good
for democracy. That highly partisan media
operations should be kept in check.
That a diversity of views and opinions
should be presented.

And that media control in only one pair of
foreign hands is not a good idea.

Half a million. There are 25 million people in Australia, about 17 million of them registered voters. Half a million? Just a handful of hard Left malcontents and white ants.

Note the attempt by Madam Hard Left to weaponise everyday language - "Lets try to do without the name calling. And personal slurs". Turning 'and personal slurs' into a sentence is a further insult to English, on top of the obvious attempt to deplatform people with opinions different from her own.

And right on cue - it rears its ugly head
with more accusations and finger-pointing.

LOL!

typical pub-mentality!

gutter-crawler!

Foxy don't practise what you criticise.
What you miss is that the only place where firm conservative opinions
are expressed is on Sky and less so in the Australian.
Sky in most of their commentatory programs have left leaning
commentators. In fact from lefty Nick Reid I hear more left opinion
than I hear on the ABC. That is because the ABC spends most of its
time knocking rightish people & policies, leaving no time for "leftish"
policy opinion, except CO2 global warming where wall to wall coverage
is the norm. Other theories are not allowed.
The coverage of what is going on in Africa is ignored.
I listen late at night on the ABC/BBC programs and that was where the
BBC covered the beheading of 20 teenage boys at a village initiation
ceremony in Mozambique, by a raidng party.
As far as I can tell it was never mentioned on any Australian network.
I'll leave you to guess who did it.

Dear Chris Lewis,

Sorry mate but no. Look at this UN vote;

"Australia has aligned with the United States as one of only two countries to vote against an independent investigation into the recent killing of 60 Palestinians in Gaza."

Boy oh Boy; doesn't Madam get nasty when she when is exposed as just another Leftist bigot. As her OLO boyfriend would say, 'there is no second prize'.

As for pub crawling or whatever she vomited up, I'm a teetotaller. I don't frequent pubs. It is her I suspect of having a cask of wongo not far from her computer.

To have a pub mentality you
don't have to drink old chap.
And as for nastiness? I learnt that
from you since coming on to this forum.
You're a good teacher in that regard.
As I imagine your parents were for you.

You're a person who's always angry, always trying
to demean others. You continuously look for conflict
where doesn't need to be any. It's part of the culture
you've grown up in - part of your family values.
The sad thing is that the fight you're fighting is
within yourself - not with anyone else.

You are the problem! No one else! And you can thank your
upbringing for that.

The Senate has agreed to establish an inquiry into media diversity.

Well done Kevin Rudd.

Well, at least Madam admits that she is nasty, but it's my fault: she learnt it from me. What a weak character she is. I don't seem to have had the same deleterious effect on other posters - or if I have, they have chosen not to blab about their inability to stay true to themselves in the face of the meanness and nastiness I'm accused of by Madam of circulating. Nor have I noticed even the one or two old fashioned gentlemen here rushing to defend Madam against nasty old me. Nor has anyone else decided that I am "always angry" because I don't agree with what they think or say. Nor do I know what makes Madam think she knows about "the culture I've grown up in", or my "family values". I advise her that my family were, and still are, disciples of the same Leftist bigotry and judgmentalism that she is. Oops! She needs to have another suck on the wine bladder and see if she can come up with some other garbage.

I wonder if the Senate enquiry SR has advised of will be looking into the ABC, SBS and the yellow press. No, that wouldn't be in the spirit of truth and fairness, would it. Fortunately, the House of Reps still runs the joint.

ttbn,

You are the most effluent poster on this forum!

'Effluent' is such a nice touch!
Bingo!
And there goes another million kilowatt dam!
Life is just so full of surprises.

Chins up.
Left and Right are merely constructs, and so much Media is a whore to ratings - and controversy wins.
Could 'social media' be more 'reliable'? I don't think so.
Devil and the Deep.

Is it any surprise then that total confusion and variant mental instability are rapidly becoming the 'new normal'?

The Devil and the Deep Blue Sea.
Know what it means ?
The Devil board is the top plank on the hull planking of a ship.
So to be between the Devil and the Deep Blue Sea means you are in a
rather dangerous place.
Remember if you fell overboard you were lost because sailing ships
could not easily return to you. In heavt weather they just waved goodbye to you.
Sorry to be off track, but it all came back.

err, sorry I read the Devil & Deep Blue Sea somewhere else it appears.

And you, Madam, are the most egomaniacal poster - totally self-centred.

The Senate "inquisition" led by the brain dead SHY is a farce and the "findings" are probably already written. The attempted punishment for "bad news" or any news critical of the greens or Labor is yet another political posturing whose findings have zero impact and will be filed with all the other attempted witch-hunts.

What we are likely to see is SHY being shredded by Newscorp yet producing the expected outcome with zero evidence.

Foxy what twaddle.

The left whingers have the old Fairfax media, the guardian and the ABC which have far greater representation than Newscorp.

Shadow Minister,

Yes, but they at least do report evidence-based
facts not propaganda. Therein lies the difference.

Foxy,

At this point, it is unclear as to whether you are deliberately lying or just willfully ignorant.

Newscorp has an effective fact-checking mechanism with the result that there have been very few "facts" that they have published that have been successfully challenged which is certainly better than the ABC can claim.

That their editorials are slanted towards the conservative side of politics just as the ABC, Age, guardian are all slanted to the left side of politics is not in dispute.

I really don't get it.

The left already has the ABC, public funded, to promote the messages that leftist supporters tend to favour, through tv, radio and internet press.

The rest should be up to the private sector with all having an opportunity to form their own media options.

There are a whole lot of new players now, leaning most to the left.

In this world, there are doers and whingers.

Shadow Minister and Chris Lewis,

Get a grip on the issues involved and read the
following link:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/09/for-30-years-i-worked-for-news-corp-papers-now-all-i-see-shameful-bias

Stop defending the undefensible - what used to be is no longer
what is now.

Get a grip yourself.

we disagree with you, get over it

Ooops. Here's the link again:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/09/for-30-years-i-worked-for-news-corp-papers-now-all-i-see-is-shameful-bias

And, what does that story tell me that I don't already know.

Chris Lewis,

You ask - and what does the story tell you
that you don't already know?

Obviously absolutely nothing.

It went right over your head.

One can only assume that you, like Shadow Minister
don't approve of media diversity.

This absurd petition, described as 'Murdoch madness' by one commentator, is gaslighting by the extreme Left. Rudd, Turnbull and other Left wing cranks are really pissed off that most Australians are not interested in signing up to their Marxist ideology. It's nothing whatever to do with democracy and balance; if it was, they would be calling for an investigation of the ABC.

Without the Murdoch press, we would not have known anything about the depth of the Andrews' governments corruption, anti-democatic bullying, and China-like activity against Victorian citizens; not to mention the complete incompetence. The extent of the cover-ups that would have occurred if we relied on the ABC would have been horrendous. And, we all have to pay for the ABC whereas the Murdoch press has to operate in the market.

there is media diversity.

Not my problem that you choose to focus on the few biased newspapers, which few read anyway.

Anyway, keep whinging.

Chris Lewis,

Keep enjoying doing nothing.

Dear Chris Lewis,

You write:

"The left already has the ABC, public funded, to promote the messages that leftist supporters tend to favour, through tv, radio and internet press."

Rubbish. The ABC has had numerous inquiries into bias and they have pretty well given it the thumbs up every time. It has a charter stipulating balance which it rarely falls foul of, yet you are somehow equating to the equivalence of the Murdoch press as representative of the other side?

What a crock.

Tell me where is the inquiry into Murdoch bias and lack of balance?

Hey Foxy, I do contribute to politics/policy.

It is on the public record.

U r really strange.

take a chill pill.

SR, the ABC is ok, but it is still biased.

But, I respect your opinion.

Dear Chris Lewis,

There is absolutely no need to respect my opinion because I didn't give one.

My response was relaying facts. There have been inquiries into the ABC and there is a charter around fairness.

You haven't pointed to any equivalent things constraining the Murdoch press.

I respect your opinion but that is all it is.

SR, the only constraint is producing a good enough paper that people will want to buy.

I hope that helps.

Dear Steele,

News Corp has posted enormous losses in its revenue
not only in the US, Australia, and UK newspapers as
a result of its businesses suffering a sharp decline.
But its Foxtel pay TV business in Australia bleeding
subscribers new financial results for 2019-2020 show.

Dear Chris Lewis,

Of course it doesn't help. Define good? Good quality journalism? Good in terms of balance? Good in terms of lack of bias? Well the Murdoch papers do not reflect that kind of good at all.

What they have typically engaged in is tabloid even gutter press which has by its nature attracted readers, then they engaged in predatory pricing to force competitors out of markets like Brisbane, then if that failed they simply bought out their competitors to create monopolies.

How has our democracy been served by the above?

Our democracy is served by many media players (old and new).

For the minority of Australians that are truly interested in current affairs, there are many media sources without the need to ever take notice of the Murdoch influence.

That is my opinion, but others may disagree.

SBS is biased in their News reporting as they tell only part of a story that suits their "Doing things a little different", to appeal to those opposed to Western values. I have watched full eye witness accounts showing the footage of a news item, but SBS only show clips of an incident that skews the conclusion the commentator wants. They play the race card or the gender card in reporting, check the emotive trigger words.

There are some programmes on ABC that should be scrapped, especially commentary interviews. ABC 24 is more reliable news, as is Fox 84 for news.

So it is the fact that Rudd and Turnbull want to stop some media questioning Human caused Climate Change is their real agenda. They only want their views presented as fact, and cannot accept the science is not absolutely settled as fact. Many leading Climate scientists question the opinions of other Climate scientists. But this in Rudd and Turnbull's opinion must be silenced.

I really don't know anymore as to who is more dumb, the likes of Rudd or their supporters ?
All I can say, the indoctrination facilities are beginning to feed on themselves !

Foxy,

Clearly, you are the one trying to reduce media diversity by shutting down contrary opinions.

Shadow Minister,

A democracy requires its citizens to make informed
choices. If citizens or their representatives are
denied access to the information they need to make
these choices, or if they are given false or
misleading information, the democratic process may
become a sham.

It is therefore important that the media not be in
the hands of just one monopoly, that it not be
censored, that citizens have the access to various
viewpoints , that they have the right of free speech,
and that public officials tell the truth.

I hope that clears things up for you Sir on where I
stand.

solid effort Foxy.

However, a democracy also requires individuals to think for themselves and never to rely on a supposed elite to promote ideas about how the world is, and what policy should be.

The idea that any liberal democracy can legislate to guarantee that all journalism is balanced on many complex issues is indeed the stuff of fantasy.

I am sorry you, and others feel you are being brainwashed by the Murdoch media.

Chris Lewis,

A democracy can thrive only when most of several
basic conditions have been met and one of these
conditions is access to information - so that
people can think for themselves and use their rights
in a meaningful way by making informed choices.

Yes Foxy, that is what we have.

Liberal democracy allows various players to advocate their message.

Chris Lewis,

No. actually democracy become a sham when
misinformation is given and the truth is not
told.

So, Australia's liberal democracy is a sham.

Where is your evidence?

Chris Lewis,

Murdoch media. It Speaks for itself.

Read the link given earlier by someone who
worked for them for over 30 years.

Foxy,

The citizens need to make informed choices. You are proposing that the information they get is limited.

There is nowhere where one cannot access a left whinge rag presently. The problem you have is that people prefer to buy Newscorp papers because they are better written with more diverse opinion.

Shadow Minister,

News Corp pushes only one side of politics.
Therein lies the problem. And their revenue
and the number of subscribers are in decline
for precisely that reason. Great financial
losses have been recorded not only here but
in the US and the Uk as well. You need to keep
up Sir.

Thanks Chris Lewis for your comments. Kudos.

Regarding ABC bias- the following links are interesting...

http://newmatilda.com/2017/09/13/for-dicks-sake-lets-call-out-the-abcs-right-wing-bias/

http://billmuehlenberg.com/2017/07/24/blatant-bias-abc-easy-prove/

http://www.smh.com.au/business/companies/abc-cleared-of-antibusiness-bias-in-independent-review-20160722-gqbp68.html

The nature of ABC's bias is perhaps not so much against business but against representation and in favour of intersectionalism against Tradition and for Socialism.

Here we go again!

No worries, Foxy only want's one voice heard and one opinion disseminated, and that is her voice and opinion. She has been brainwashed by the New World Order of communist China's view of the Universe meaning submission to the State. No diversity of opinion allowed! No other cultural views in open forum.

I sat for two hours in the hospital waiting room today while my wife was pre-admissioned for surgery and watched the TV which was ABC, one programme was about aboriginal aspiration to become PM. If a child aspires to become PM it should have nought to do with skin colour, but they were promoting skin colour as the aspiring goal. Instead of dealing with the background of disadvantage in and society, they were promoting only one goal - become PM of Australia. A totally racist view of aboriginality and limited goal, very few will ever become.

The ABC is not being inclusive but divisive by making race itself the criteria

"News Corp pushes only one side of politics.
Therein lies the problem." (Her Ladyship)

What a ripper! That would be as opposed to the ever so even-handed ABC, The Guardian and the other Left media, I suppose.

What a cheek! How could anyone make such an absurd statement!

Kudos!

How indeed could anyone make such absurd statements?
Yet, here they both are, and they persist in continuing
to do it. Just like Trump. It's embarrassing!

The mind boggles.

But, we shouldn't expect much as - how on earth can these
rejects, these irrelevants, these malcontents,
be expected to see
the big picture when they've got such small screens.

I read several independent news sources: here is one that publishes to an increasing readership recently interviewed by the NY Post:

"information, for authenticity, and for truth.
We The People will no longer submit to any “authority” when it comes to information and news: be it from celebrities, media personalities, Big Tech companies, or corporate media journalists. A radical transition akin to the industrial revolution but for media is underway. This revolution in media is not just against mainstream and traditional media outlets that lean left, but rather against the entire corrupt system of liars and dishonest frauds as a whole.
We are only now witnessing the start of this revolution unfold with the recent backlash against Fox News by their core audience and the exodus from Big Tech platforms to alt tech platforms in wake of mass censorship and election interference from Silicon Valley."

Dear Josephus,

This is from their site:

“It’s not Gab’s job to “fact check” political opinions, news, history, math problems, memes, or anything else.”

“Gab was founded in 2016 by Andrew Torba, a Christian technology entrepreneur who left Silicon Valley to start Gab after he saw the rise in censorship from Big Tech platforms during the 2016 election.”

And this:

“Persuasion campaign and infowar to flip grassroots public opinion in Trump’s favor. Convince the People it was stolen, but that we are going to fight and win it.”

Lol.

No wonder you brain is so addled my friend. This is forced fed hard right wing propaganda at its finest. It is in no way shape or form a news site.

Embarrassed? Anyone who is a known lefty bigot and and slave to the ABC should indeed be embarrassed to accuse another media organisation of 'pushing one side of politics'. Then there is Foxy.

Foxy, while you seem to struggle with OLO participants disagreeing with you, I think you need to look at the issue in another way.

Try this: Ask yourself what is the agenda of the Murdoch media empire in Australia, and what are the policy outcomes in Australia.

I think you would find that there is an immense difference between what the right wants and what the right gets.

For example, take the anti-global warming sentiment, how do you explain that most Australians believe there is a link between human activity and global warming.

The truth is that many Australians agree and disagree with the Murdoch media on a wide range of issues.

Why? because many Australians listen to a variety of media players and make their own mind up.

That is the way the media continues to work and have influence in Australia.

If there is a concern, then the whingers should avoid the Murdoch media altogether and take up the many other choices.

Chris Lewis,

I don't struggle with people disagreeing with me.
On the contrary, I welcome disagreement. What
I don't welcome is misinformation, lies and
propaganda. As for people using many and varied
sources? Of course that's what rational people do
hence the decline in revenue for the Murdoch media
and the necessity of the petition. Having such a
large percentage of Australian media by the one
ownership needs to be debated.

If you have a problem with that - fair enough.
That's your right. As is mine to question it.

that is the key point: if people hear a message they strongly disagree with, they will turn to other alternatives.

But in a free society, the market should decide just which media sources flourish and/or decline.

That is my opinion.

Dear Chris Lewis,

The Murdoch press own over half of the newspaper share in this country and in some capital cities they are the sole provider. This means there isn't the so called choice you have banged on about.

They are also the largest in terms of online news reach.

Yet they are the purveyors of mistruth, outright lies, and toxic, inciting propaganda.

They do erode our democracy in many other ways including running ads like "Labor's death taxes" from Palmer.

The fact that each and every recent PM in Australia has at one time or another gone grovelling to Murdoch's door shows just how much power he exerts on or democracy. Your flippant disregard is not in keeping with the situation, one which has seen Murdoch's own son wash his hands of the company.

Dear SR,

So what is knew.

I wish you well as you wipe away your tears.

It is a tough gig living in oppressive Australia where are supposedly brainwashed by a rampant Murdoch media.

But, let us if there is a an alternative nirvana out there.

I am sure you will find some joke of a country that can impose the supposed truth on all of its citizens.

Dear Chris Lewis,

Oppression comes in many forms. Chomsky's Manufacturing Consent outlined this many years ago. I'm just pushing back on one of those incarnations.

As a reader put quite aptly in the comment section of the SMH:

"An someone from a science background, I had to stop buying the Australian years ago. Bias is one thing, but the publication of misinformation is a different thing altogether. Regardless of anyone's opinions of Mr Rudd and Mr Turnbull, there is a real problem. Democracy does not function well in an ignorant society and if we want a healthy democracy then we have to maintain a healthy, scientifically educated media. There might be differences of opinion on policy but facts are real."

I want the media in this country to be held to a standard. It doesn't have to be onerous just reflect half way decent journalistic ethics. The Murdoch press are so faraway from that standard but with such a concentration of our media that it should concern any thinking Australian.

SR you are obviously talking about their ABC. Just what Murdoch has to do with your complaints I really can't imagine.

James Murdoch told the New York Times that
the company was "disguising facts and endorsing
misinformation". Hence even he wants nothing to do
with his father's network.

It appears that Kathryn Hufschmid Murdoch/ James' Wife works for the Clinton Climate Initiative and former model/ marketing executive.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Murdoch

There has been a little jockeying for position within the Murdoch family- I'm not quite up with the gossip. Though James has been one of the more successful. Good on him for forming his own opinion on things. I hope that it isn't only based on immediate survival.

Dame Elisabeth Murdoch was a nice woman that has done much for Foxy's adopted home city.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elisabeth_Murdoch_(philanthropist)

http://www.theage.com.au/national/medieval-honour-for-melbournes-generous-dame-20060623-ge2kr2.html

Rupert, James and Elisabeth are all Traditional British Australians

Dear Canem Malum,

"Rupert, James and Elisabeth are all Traditional British Australians"

Good god man you come across as one hell of a deluded fool.

Rupert is for all intents and purposes an economic refugee. I think you will find he renounced his Australian citizenship in 1985 to become a citizen of the United States of American in order to improve his circumstances.

Yet here you are saying he is a British Australian. How do these people get folks like you to repeatedly spout mistruths in their defense? I assume you don't get paid to do it. It really does baffle me.

Dear Steele,

Just a bit more information on Murdoch family's
background which includes more of a mix in its
Scottish, Irish, ancestry.

Anna Murdoch Mann - who was married to Rupert Murdoch
from 1967 to 1999 and had 3 children with him -
Elisabeth, Lachlan, and James - was born in Glasgow
Scotland in 1944 to Jacob Torv, an Estonian merchant
seaman and Sylvia Braida a Scots woman. The family
emigrated to Australia. Anna worked for one of
Murdoch's newspapers. Anna was raised
a Catholic and attended Our Lady of Mercy College in
Parramatta, NSW.

So you see, the Murdoch family also has a varied ethnic mix in
their ancestry - just like most Australians do
in this country.

cont'd ...

Dear Steele,

If you look into several generations of the Murdoch
family's ancestry - the ethnic mix varies even
further and includes ancestry from Ghana, China,
and Germany through inter-marriage. Making it
even more interesting.

Forget Murdoch. Google has the power to sway elections around the world. There is no law or regulation that can stop the company from using that power.

After the 2016 US election, Google executives were saying that the result was "offensive", and pledged to make the "populism movement" nothing more than a hiccup in history. Eric Schmidt, executive chairman until 2017 of the Google parent company, declared that "the project for the next decade" would be "how people get information, what they believe and what they don't".

Polls/pollsters are also seen as having skin in the game of influencing how people vote. They have been described as “voter suppressors”. Voters reading the polls might decide that it it’s not worth voting if the polls show that their favoured candidate or party is lagging in popularity. They might decide not to support fund raising, or help people get to the polling booths. This could well be the reason for the US election result. But it could also apply even where voting is compulsory, particularly with voters who often vote for someone they don’t really want as a ‘lesson’ to the sitting member.

I note that Senator Hanson-Young is going to chair the Senate enquiry into the media. Nothing to do with the Murdoch press’s having caught here rorting public money for personal use several times, of course.

Foxy,

Clearly, you don't read the Australian.

In the Australian, there are several ALP diehards as contributors whose opinions deviate significantly from the LNP positions, plus many contributors that strongly criticise the LNP. While the majority are conservative, the claim that they only publish conservative views is complete rubbish.

Contrary to that, The Guardian and the ABC very seldom deviate from the left agenda, and similarly, the left-leaning Fairfax media empire has essentially collapsed and been taken over.

Most papers and media are opinion based reporting. To make it law that opinion not be expressed is violating freedom of expression. The only way news can be shown is by eye witness accounts or video of the event or statement of the political opinion behind the report.
Eg. It is a human right to put to death a healthy newborn baby. Democrat Yes Republican No
Eg. It is a legal right to put to death a political or religious opponent.

Shadow Minister,

I used to read Murdoch's flagship newspaper - The
Australian regularly. Not any more. And I'm not
the only one who's stopped reading it. As Fact-Check
for Media bias confirms - Murdoch newspapers are not
just Right wing - but they distort and manufacture
news - campaigning for favoured political parties and
candidates.

Even News Corp insiders are speaking against their
organisations bias - particularly at The Australian
as evidenced on Q & A the other night.

We should all be concerned about the impact the company
has on democratic debate in this country - when it owns
over 70% of the country's newspaper circulation and does
so poorly on factual reporting with failed facts,
questionable reporting - the use of loaded words that
appeal to emotion or stereotypes to favour their
causes.

Foxy, Q&A is an opinion discussion and not worthy of the term factual news reporting. I read all sources of reports and from that can tell you Q&A is merely left wing opinion, and reflects the politics of the persons interviewed. Politics is based upon opinion and is a diverse range of ideas. Q&A suits your opinions, but not mine as I have a different paradigm, from which I form law and action.

Josephus,

My experience with Q&A is obviously totally different
from yours. There's always a wide mix of people on
the panel representing diverse and various viewpoints
which they express freely, as well as audience members
who are
free to ask the questions. Nothing is censored.

The episode that I was referring to in my previous post
had two insiders from The Australian on the panel and
they gave their opinions quite openly.

I don't like putting labels on people. Labels belong
on jars. Besides, many of our opinions are not set in
concrete and do tend to change with different circumstances.

Foxy,

This time you are talking complete rubbish.

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/the-australian/

Their comment was--- "These sources are generally trustworthy for information"

"These media sources are slight to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favour conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation."

So either you didn't read the assessment or you are lying.

Secondly their assessment of the Guardian is:

"Overall, we rate The Guardian Left-Center biased based on story selection that moderately favours the left and Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks over the last 5 years."

So the Australian is far more trustworthy than the guardian.

ETC

Shadow Minister,

You failed to mention that The Australian is
Right wing biased based on its story selection and
editorial positions. That they received a "mixed"
rating for factual reporting due to their failed
facts as well as their questionable reporting on
climate change, et cetera.

I have no further wish to argue with you Sir.
You think you are right. I think you are wrong.
Any further discussion with you is pointless.
You won't change your mind. I won't change mine.
Going around in circles is not productive.

Here's another link that may be of interest:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/whats-happening-with-insiders.13837

Dear shadowminister,

You really are utterly shameless aren't you.

You post the first part of the review section of The Australian then the second part of that of The Guardian.

The first sections are actually identical between the two:

The Guardian: ”These media sources have a slight to moderate liberal bias.  They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor liberal causes.  These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation."

The Australian: “These media sources are slightly to moderately conservative in bias. They often publish factual information that utilizes loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes) to favor conservative causes. These sources are generally trustworthy for information, but may require further investigation.”

It is in the second section where the distinction is made.

"Overall, we rate The Guardian Left-Center biased based on story selection that moderately favors the left and Mixed for factual reporting due to numerous failed fact checks over the last 5 years."

"Overall, we rate The Australian Right-Center biased based on story selection and editorial positions that favor the right. We also rate them Mixed for factual reporting due to two failed facts as well as questionable reporting on climate change."

Note the words “story selection that moderately favors the left ” for the Guardian while for The Australian it is a definitive “story selection and editorial positions that favor the right”. So no moderately about it.

In your own scurrilous fashion you have shown up one of the Murdoch media's trade mark distortions. You have learnt well from your masters.

Therefore your comment “So the Australian is far more trustworthy than the guardian.” is utterly without basis and a gross distortion of your source material. The opposite is in fact the truth. Shame on you.

SR,

It looks like the left whingers here are the scurrilous liars, as firstly Krudd's petition is fake news as > 1000 signatures are falsely generated by bots and more were paid for overseas.

Secondly, SR you are incompetent, as my point to Foxy was that she misrepresented the fact check that she was supposedly referring to." does so poorly on factual reporting with failed facts."

All major media sites, the guardian, Fairfax, Newscorp all lean one way or another and use loaded words, The Australian has over nearly a decade made only 2 factual errors compared to the numerous errors made by the Guardian. Which makes my point.

The claim that the Aus's reporting on climate change was "dubious" without any factual error is a personal opinion by the website which reflects more on the website than the Aus.

Foxy,

I assume linking to the IndependentAustralian is a joke. Its articles are left whinge polemics by "authors" that are not fact-checked and very frequently factually incorrect.

Shadow Minister,

Shame on you indeed!

You should actually read the articles presented in links
not pass judgement ahead of time. That's the difference
between us. You're a rusted on bigot who can only sing from
the only and only song-book. You're becoming a total bore.
Not worth the effort!

cont'd ...

How about an actual read:

http://www.independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/whats-happening-with-insiders,13837

Dear Foxy,

It really is pernicious and insidious isn't it. I really do not enjoy either Insiders nor Q&A the way I use to. The patent lies and distortions of the truth that constantly go unchallenged is getting depressing.

Tony Jones and Barry Cassidy were fairly resolute about not letting politicians get away with glib or crap answers. Speers makes a showing of pressing on certain questions but often they are not of significance.

Just imagine what Cassidy would have done with Nolan after this.
http://youtu.be/GAAB93cTEQo?t=224

The audience certainly had Nolan's measure but McDonald just lets him get away with spouting the rubbish he was.

Frank and fearless seems to have been lost.

Dear Steelie,

I'm actually not a big fan of Speers and The Insiders.
I rarely watch it. However Hamish is another story.
I like Q&A - and thanks for the link. I liked the
way Hamish kept after Molan until he got answers.
The audience saw right through him.

I watched Q&A on Monday night where Barnaby Joyce
was on the panel. His Trump-like behaviour
towards the women was disgusting. How come this turd
is still in politics - No don't answer that!

Dear Foxy,

No. The real question is why Nolan and Joyce are given legitimacy by having them on the program in the first place. I want to hear a contest between liberal and conservative ideas without outliers like those two getting a platform because of some false notions about balance.

Hamish McDonald treats the show like a news program. It isn't. It is entertainment and being politically balanced should not prevent you from treating idiotic opinions or arguments with skepticism and even derision if needed. McDonald rarely does. Tony Jones did.

Dear Steelie,

The program that you're referring to was the year's
first episode of the current affairs panel show which
introduced new host Hamish Macdonald. Mr Molan was
heckled by the audience and even his parliamentary
peers and other commentators took to social media
to condemn the senator on his climate change views.

People like retired Labor Senator - Doug Cameron, and
Jacqui Lambie, were especially critical on social media.
As was the Australian Academy of Science.

I certainly miss Barry Cassidy from The Insiders, and
Tony Jones from Q&A. But I think that Hamish is not
doing a bad job - and given time will undoubtedly
improve.

Foxy,

You are a rusted-on bigot especially when you try and present the crap from Alan Austin for whom facts are an inconvenience. His sole journalistic experience was running a church magazine.

You have the temerity to criticise Newscorp while posting links to this drivel.

Shadow Minister,

LOL!

Foxy,

You have yet to justify why Newscorp needs to be treated in any way differently from the other media organisations.

This simply looks like an attempt to silence dissent.

Shadow Minister,

I'm aware that's what you believe.

Over which I have no control.

Foxy,

Thanks for admitting that you have no way to justify treating Newscorp differently

Shadow Minister,

What you choose to believe or accept has nothing
to do with me. You're on your own here. News
Corp media speaks for itself - loudly and clearly -
and it seems to be obvious
to everyone - even to James Murdoch, except of course
to you.

Enjoy your day.

Actually foxy,

You are more alone on this. For the 70% of newspaper readers that prefer to read Newscorp papers this Quixotic campaign by ex PMs suffering from relevancy deficiency is a joke.

Does Morrison "sound out" Rupert Murdoch before important cabinet decisions are made? it is claimed Tony Abbott liked to have the ear of Murdoch in that regard, and get the old mans feelings on important matters. Malcolm Turnbull claims that was one of his sins, he didn't consult with Murdoch enough before making announcements.

Shadow Minister,

News Corp is not laughing. Over 100 of News Corp
regional and community titles will no longer
produce print editions. 14 titles have ceased to exist.
Over 500 jog losses. Consumers are leaving in droves.
Their revenue has fallen in this country as well as
the US, Uk, et cetera.

Kevin Rudd's Murdoch Media Petition has been tabled in
Parliament - things are taking their course. Murdoch
may own 70% of the media in Australia but that does not
mean that 70% of people continue to support it. And thinking
that they do is not only a joke but delusional.

Foxy,

With the advent of the internet, all print media is suffering. If you bothered to look at the link I provided earlier, the Newscorp papers as a % are suffering far less than the rest.

Notably, Fairfax went bust and was bought out.

Shadow Minister,

Cut the BS. News Corp had posted a $11 billion
loss for the March quarter, dragged down in Australia
by the cable TV business Foxtel which has seen the plug
pulled on its once wealthy sports broadcasting model.
Regional and community papers have been pulled. Job
losses are enormous.

News Corp in Australia is totally challenged. And its
another critical moment for journalism and for ensuring
that politicians, businesses and local government
bodies are properly scrutinised in a COVID-19 world
where the rules are changing by the day.

There is currently a World wide agenda to silence dissenting voices to that of the State. They thought they could do it through reeducation and social programming but it failed because of influence of freedom of expression espoused by the Western society. This attempt is led by China on their population and as a world wide movement for One World Government is blinding the world by offering material prosperity and equality. However it is at the expense of the death of personal freedom and administered by physical assault from the State control [e.g. Hong Kong]. The West will move to bring in laws administered by the Elite to silence dissenting voices and reeducate the population, with the agenda to destroy the norms of family and control wealth distribution. That is why this Bill is being proposed and handled by the Left. This is part of the Great Reset of Nations begun by Covid-19, which began from China.

Foxy,

You should check the facts first. The losses were 1.1bn, not 11bn.

Secondly, check the losses from every other media source. Not one other privately owned news organisation has faired better.

Josephus,

In Australia we still have dissenting voices that
speak out at the attempts by the Right-wing to
silence different views from their own. Like cuts
to our national broadcaster - the ABC, like the
overt bias and lies of News Corp media. We still have
voices standing up to these kind of attempts. And this
is not about to end any time soon - not while rational
thinking people exist here.

Not so sure about the mess that the US has been placed in
due to the obnoxious jerk they have as President. Hopefully
things will be able to get back to normal under the new
President elect.

And who knows - when Murdoch dies (he's getting on in years)
maybe his tentacle hold on our media will be lessened also.

Foxy, the ABC was once a reliable source of news and current affairs but is has now become a political opinion discussion forum. It is a public broadcaster paid for by public money and has a responsibility to be politically unbiased.

It has become unbalanced and political which appears to be a deliberate agenda to influence opinion rather than relate facts. It was acting the same way as commercial broadcasters with political agendas. The fact is the Great Reset agenda is happening in the Western education Departments and Universities.

ABC does not need so much public funding to survive.

Only the whinging left have no faith in the power of ideas to generate a paying audience.

Like the humanities academics, they prefer to rely on govt handouts for their actual existence.

From:
Sophie York
·
"Kevin Rudd is likely to be urged by federal officials to register as an agent of foreign influence because of his vast overseas connections and ongoing involvement in international relations.
The former prime minister has asked the Attorney-General’s Department whether he needs to join the foreign influence transparency scheme’s public register because he leads a host of inter­national bodies and forums, most of them based in the US and one backed by a Chinese company.
A spokesman for Mr Rudd told The Australian he did not believe he currently had to register because he did not work directly for a foreign government, but Mr Rudd was willing to sign up if he was ­advised to do so by Canberra."

Kevin Rudd or Donald Trump, who is worse?

Foxy,

The attempts to silence dissent comes overwhelmingly from the left as this thread amply demonstrates. There is more left whinge leaning media outlets than conservative. That the left-leaning media outlets are no more bias-free or factually correct than NewsCorp has been verified.

Finally, your admission that the ABC is left whinge in spite of its charter to be politically neutral is all the more reason to either overhaul it, defund it or privatise it.

Shadow Minister,

Why are we still arguing about something that we
both know we're so far apart in our views on. It's
pointless. We have covered this territory so many
times. Nothing has changed. Your views to me are
totally irrelevant. I have lived with your bigoted
viewpoints from my own family members most of my life.
They no longer impress.

Simply put - curly hair - I don't care!

Go talk to your kindred spirits on this
forum. Leave me out of your obsessive narrow-minded,
corrosive viewpoints. I don't adhere to your rigid,
sterotyped point of view on anything.

Foxy, please do not take your family conflicts out on posters here.
"I have lived with your bigoted viewpoints from my own family members most of my life. They no longer impress."

Josephus,

You're right. I should not express my frustrations
on you guys. I apologise.

But hey, I'm only human -and when I get the same s-t
repeated over and over again - I get sick of having
to put up with the crap - especially when the
evidence and the facts is there for all to see.

But hey - I admit when I say or do something wrong.
Do any of you guys do that?

Hmmmm? Thought not.

Such suck it up and put up or shut up!

There are times I find Foxy an angry shrew- it's probably just me.

Canem Malum,

No. it's not just you Sir.
I often cringe at times -
when I go back and re-read some of the things that
I have posted.
That is not the way I was brought up. And I have
been short-tempered and not as gracious as I should
have been. Especially in this discussion.

I apologise for my behaviour as I should. Especially
to Shadow Minister and
Josephus.

Thank You for pointing it out to me.
I shall try to do better.

cont'd ...

Canem Malum,

We may not always see eye-to-eye but your behaviour
on this forum Sir, has always been exemplary.

Kudos Foxy.

Canem Malum,

Thank You Sir.

That means a great deal.