A parliamentary report born from a push for a royal commission into Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp has thrown its support behind such an inquiry — a proposal that was immediately rejected by both major parties.
On Thursday the Senate’s Environment and Communications References Committee published its media diversity in Australia report. Led by Sarah Hanson-Young and featuring members from both major parties, the inquiry was the end result of a Kevin Rudd-led petition that received more than 500,000 signatures.
More than 9000 submissions were made (including 4400 collected by GetUp). The committee held five days of hearings, which included appearances by Rudd, Malcolm Turnbull, News Corp’s global head Robert Thomson and its Australian CEO Michael Miller, and senior management figures from prominent Australian media companies.
The major finding is that Australia’s media regulation is dysfunctional. A mishmash of regulatory regimes colliding with the stratospheric emergence of digital media has left publishers, platforms and news consumers worse off.
The combination of a highly concentrated media market and the emergence of Facebook and Google has left regional media markets particularly vulnerable. (Strangely, the report relies on newspaper revenue as a major indicator for the size of media companies in Australia — which is at best a lagging indicator of current trends and at worst, increasingly irrelevant.)
Although the inquiry’s terms of reference don’t mention it, the committee’s report narrows in on the influence of News Corp in Australia. It needles the company over its much publicised net zero by 2050 policy, focuses on its harassment campaigns against individuals, allegations of a toxic culture, and even considers the question of whether Murdoch is a “fit person” to lead the company.
This close scrutiny shows the inquiry’s clear provenance as the child of an anti-News Corp campaign, and bears out many of the complaints as legitimate.
The report’s major recommendation is for a judicial inquiry into media diversity. Such a mechanism — which could include a royal commission — would be an independent investigation chaired by a judge who could compel witnesses to testify.
Here’s the reality: both major parties oppose a royal commission. Deputy chair of the committee Senator Andrew Bragg immediately called the report a “political stunt that shouldn’t be taken seriously” and said he opposed the call for a judicial inquiry. Then Labor’s communications spokeswoman Michelle Rowland ruled out Labor launching one if it wins the 2022 election.
Even with a well-organised campaign backed by former prime ministers hoping to mobilise the huge support in the community, the Murdoch royal commission isn’t happening any time soon.
So what are we left with? A second recommendation sketches out some suggestions ranging from the obvious (funding the ABC, SBS and newswire service AAP) to the broad (upgrading the NBN). The most interesting ideas like tax reductions for new public interest journalism publishers are floated but not fleshed out.
It’s disappointing that such a thorough investigation that had the courage to identify the influence of News Corp has kicked the can down the road by hanging its hopes on a politically unlikely solution. By making a royal commission its Hail Mary, the committee missed an opportunity to channel unprecedented popular support for media reform and instead has pointed it towards a dead end.
We have the findings and the recommendation – put it on the backburner until after the election, then let’s all make sure it’s the last one that Murdoch ever has influence over. No federal politician in their right mind is going to risk poking the rancid bear just now.
“No federal politician in their right mind is going to risk poking the rancid bear just now.”
Really. Roy Harper, back in the 1960s, pointed out “But all the time it’s now somehow, All the time it’s now”
It’s obvious why the Coalition is happy with the News Corp monopoly. It’s more disturbing to see Labor going along with it, but it’s nothing new. Albanese believes he’ll be thrown a few crumbs if the polls start showing he’s got a chance, and that’s good enough for him. As it was for Rudd back in the day, and indeed Tony Blair when in his pomp back in the UK. News Corp knows the value of betting on the winner every time, even if it puts its big fat thumb on the balance for those it prefers. After Albanese is booted out and he leaves politics, bitter and broken, he will of course turn on News Corp exactly as Rudd has done. The country is littered with ex-politicians who discovered their principles once it was too late.
Albanese poking the rancid bear will indeed result in an all out campaign against Labor by Newscorpse. To first change things you need to be in power or, to put it another way, “softly, softly catchee monkey”. Better to win then have the RC followed swiftly by implementing whatever recommendations come out of it.
Will not happen. Past experience tells us that Labor here, just like Labour in the UK, does not do anything about News Corp if it is in power. It remains intimidated, and it accepts the comfort of being thrown some crumbs of support by News Corp as the best it can do. That continues until it looks like Labor (or Labour) is in trouble in the next, imminent, election, when News Corp reverts to attacking Labor (or Labour) with everything its got. The betrayal from News Corp is timed when it’s too late to do anything, and after the election catastrophe we add one more ex-party leader to the list of those wandering the wilderness complaining about the Murdochs.
Ordinarily I would agree with you but 500K in signatures and a Senate inquiry are tough to ignore.
Maybe you missed it, but Labor is ignoring all that. It’s already said so. Albanese will not budge from his declared opposition to doing anything.
Not what I am seeing. The ALP small target strategy means staying shtum on a lot of things.
Like Chris ‘Don’tVote for Us’ Bowen, the soi disant Shadow of a Climate Minister, telling the assembled reptiles of the Press Club last week that ‘Labor’ had a Climate Plan/Policy/piece of Puffery but that he was “keeping it secret for now.”
Nothing sez courage of convictions, or sheer pusillanimity, like that.
As reported by Tyrone Clarke of Sky News, on the day the report came out:
Labor and the Morrison Government have united behind the rejection of a report tabled by the Senate committee into media diversity…
Within hours of the report being tabled, Shadow Communications Minister Michelle Rowland dismissed concerns of a backroom deal between the Greens and Labor over changes to Australia’s media landscape.
Ms Rowland said Labor would not seek a judicial inquiry nor a royal commission should it win the next election.
“The key thing here is this is done in confidence, the Senate in confidence undertakes these, it’s not undertaken as part of a Party policy process,” Ms Rowland told Sky News Australia.
“But I can tell you clearly that this is not Labor Party policy.”
It takes an awful lot of faith to ignore past experience and expect a Labor government to deliver the things it promises, but to expect the things it clearly does not want to do is super-crazy-optimistic. Where Labor is keeping shtum, the way to bet is it will do nothing if it is in government. Although there is one clear precedent for Labor taking action when it said it would not, and that’s Julia Gillard’s carbon price, or tax as some called it. And didn’t that go well for her. Can you imagine Labor setting itself up for another few years of ‘broken promise’ lunacy from the Coalition and the Murdochs if it did act on media diversity after what it has said?
Time will tell. A lot of ALP Members are behind this and I expect pressure to be brought to bear to bring this to fruition. PS. I always though you were a Sky News viewer! 🙂
Digital signatures are easy to garner but half a million opposed to the Iraq invasion, simlar numbers against Vietnam (when half our current population) and the Reconciliation march across the Coathanger didn’t ‘…amount to a hill of beans in this crazy world‘ of suborned government and donor ownership of B1 & B2.
And too many NewsCorp journalists too….
Nice recall – Roy Harper is a too little known Minstrel from the daze when they meant something.
It’s a strange suggestion that something else – not a judiciary enquiry – would have had any better chance. It’s naive to think so. Even if the only recommendation was for the Senate president just to shake his head in disapproval of our media, it would have got exactly the same feedback from the well known suspects. There simply cannot be any even remote suggestion of touching the untouchables. Nothing would ever get any support.
It is even more strange to be scared of taking up the recommendation considering how widespread was the support for it in the community across the entire country. With proper messaging, a lot of people would be on board.
And the tired myth about how “Labor will be destroyed by Murdoch if they don’t suck up to him”, while they are destroyed regardless of what they do anyway, has been on a loop for so long, it’s not even worth commenting on.
“focuses on its harassment campaigns against individuals”
So youre a politician who wants change like I do. Which option do you choose?
Option A. Speak out publicly, knowing the first politicians who vote in favor of such a royal commission can expect swift retribution from Murdoch.
Option B. (Rupert Murdoch is 90 years old)
Option B isn’t viable. His successor is a chip off the old block.
Yes. There are suggestions that once Lachlan is in full control we might begin to regard Rupert’s time as the good old days.
Other article have comment in moderation, citing dialogue in US, unreported in Oz, between ADL and Lachlan Murdoch on Fox’s Tucker Carlson et al.; little disturbing the denial coming from one end….
I stand corrected. https://www.thedailybeast.com/lachlan-murdoch-is-even-more-of-a-right-wing-ultra-than-his-old-man
it seams no one wants to open the can of worms that would possibly happen, looks like to many may fear what would come out .
As it stands, 70% of Australia’s print media is owned by an American billionaire. His company is registered in Delaware, takes 40% of total Australian television revenue (combining free-to-air advertising and subscription), yet pays no tax in Australia.
Given our leaders over 50 years or so have allowed a mob boss to cement a lucrative monopoly while enjoying tax-free status, it would take extraordinary political courage to even begin to reverse this state of affairs.
All credit to Rudd and Turnbull for their bravery now in taking on this status quo. But it is perhaps telling that they didn’t quite exhibit the same courage when they were on the payroll.
Hell hath no fury like politicians scorned after having done all – and more – that was demanded by their owner.