Why, precisely, is the Government so determined to “reform” Australia’s media laws in a way which will entrench more power in the hands of fewer big media owners?

Is it due to public pressure (no), political consensus (no), economic necessity (no), social equity (no), conclusive technology shifts (no) or part of a worldwide trend (no). It is simply because a handful of powerful media owners want to make more money — and a handful of leading politicians want to keep them happy.

But even that rationale is crumbling as the big media companies engage in an unedifying outbreak of public bickering over various aspects of the proposed legislation.

In fact, apart from the Communications Minister Helen Coonan and PBL owner James Packer, there is almost no conspicuous support for the changes. Just look at the growing list of opponents of the proposed media laws:

POLITICIANS: Growing opposition within the National Party, including Deputy Prime Minister Mark Vaile, independently-minded Senator Barnaby Joyce and led by backbencher Paul Neville, chairman of the backbench committee on communications. Liberal senators Ian McDonald and Alan Eggleston have expressed misgivings. Also opposed by the federal Opposition, the Democrats, the Greens and under scrutiny from Family First.

BIG MEDIA: Fairfax yesterday declared public opposition to the laws; News Corporation’s Rupert Murdoch has called for the reforms to be scrapped. It’s understood that Kerry Stokes and Channel Seven are also opposed to the legislation.

THE PUBLIC: 52% of Australians oppose the plan to drop cross-media restrictions, 64% oppose the plan to relax foreign ownership restrictions, 36% believe the changes to the media laws will have a negative impact on the integrity of reporting and 35% say the reforms will reduce diversity (Morgan Poll, August 2006).

JOURNALISTS: 82% believe the changes to the media laws will have a negative impact on the integrity of reporting, 85% say the reforms will reduce diversity, 87% oppose the plan to drop cross-media restrictions and 74% oppose the plan to relax foreign ownership restrictions (survey of Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance (MEAA) members conducted for Crikey. August 2006).

COMMENTATORS: In a survey of 11 leading commentators and editorials in July, Crikey found that 10 were opposed to the proposed legislation: Stephen Bartholomeusz (Age and SMH), Malcolm Maiden (The Age), Financial Review (editorial), John Durie (Financial Review), Neil Shoebridge (Financial Review), David Crowe (Financial Review), Canberra Times (editorial), Terry McCrann (The Australian), The Age (editorial), Alan Mitchell (Financial Review).

Has any legislation affecting the fabric of Australian democracy ever had so little support?