JF_RMPTY_STRING
Was there really no editorial interference under Kerry?
Stephen Feneley writes:
A question out of the blue: did
Kerry Packer support the independence of news and current affairs at
Nine? Did he support the principle of editorial independence at any of
his media outlets?
I believe there's strong evidence that he
didn't but, hey, that's just me, and everyone knows I'm just a
disgruntled ex-Nine minion. If, indeed, it were true that Packer was
completely disinterested in the editorial approach taken by his various
programs and publications, it's a wonder why politicians, both Liberal
and Labor, were prepared to go through all manner of legislative
contortions so as not to incite his wrath.
If it were true that
his editorial executives were unaffected by their boss's prejudices,
then Kezza's falling out with Paul Keating before the '96 election
would have been of no consequence. We would simply have to accept that
it was a complete coincidence that Nine developed such an intense
interest in Paul's piggery and that the Bulletin devoted so much space to dismantling the Keating legacy. 
Previously
I have cited my own examples of where Packer has directly intervened in
editorial matters or where editorial executives have self-censored in
accordance with their understanding of what he might want.
In
late 1990, during the American troop deployment in Saudi Arabia ahead
of the first Gulf War, I was reprimanded for a report I filed from
Washington which my boss deemed to be overly critical of the US. I was
instructed not to do "anything that questioned the US presence in the
Gulf". In a separate conversation with another producer I was told that
Packer had complained that National Nine News had become too analytical
and that it wasn't "everyman enough".
Some months later, a Today
show producer was in the control room putting the program to air when
he received an irate call from the proprietor. Packer complained about
a story that had just gone to air in which psychologists were
discussing the impact on children of television coverage of the war.
A
few months after that I was carpeted for a report I did from Las Vegas
in which I detailed the shabby treatment Jeff Fenech was receiving from
fight promoter Don King ahead of Fenech's fight with Azuma Nelson. My
boss accused me of belittling a national hero because I had said Fenech
was being treated like a nobody. As it turned out Fenech later backed
up my version of events when he spat the dummy after the judges made
the scandalous decision to declare the fight with Nelson a draw.
Crikey is committed to hosting lively discussions. Help us keep the conversation useful, interesting and welcoming. We aim to publish comments quickly in the interest of promoting robust conversation, but we’re a small team and we deploy filters to protect against legal risk. Occasionally your comment may be held up while we review, but we’re working as fast as we can to keep the conversation rolling.
The Crikey comment section is members-only content. Please subscribe to leave a comment.
The Crikey comment section is members-only content. Please login to leave a comment.