First it's the removal of constitutional rights and liberties, next it's the race to the bottom with industrial relations changes driven purely by ideology and now it's pandering to his mates Murdoch and Packer so that control of the media is absolute. Can anyone now doubt the hazard for Australia in ceding power to this man?
From Crikey.com Has the penny dropped? Is there finally a realisation that the federal government's proposed "reforms" of Australia's media laws are set to create "the greatest and most unseemly concentration of media in Australia's history," in the words of former Prime Minister Paul Keating in an op-ed piece in three newspapers this morning? And the former PM couldn't have put it any better than us when he writes: "In practice, were these changes to come about, ordinary bods would need the Packer and Murdoch organisations to stamp their passports for their free movement through Australian society." Let's hope the debate is about to begin, and sensible politicians who care about the health of democracy will emerge to oppose the Howard-Coonan-Packer-Murdoch blueprint to enrich Australia's two most powerful families and direct the information traffic.
And if you need more evidence of the power of the moguls, we look at how the Murdoch column-writing rottweilers Piers Akerman and Andrew Bolt work in unison to push their conservative causes. It happened this week over the issue of global warming ("How did Flannery come to write such stuff? Is it because he didn't care enough to check?" (Bolt) ... "Tim 'Calamity' Flannery has been hitting the headlines hard with predictions of the end of civilisation as we know it" (Akerman)), which is at least the fourth time this year the two op-ed page bruisers have combined their muscle and 2,717,000 mass circulations to try to set the agenda.
The News Limited pincer movement
Marika Webb-Pullman writes:
One of the key results of proposed changes to cross media ownership laws will be the concentration of more political power in the hands of Rupert Murdoch and his duo of attack-dog columnists, Andrew Bolt in Melbourne's Herald Sun and Piers Akerman in The Daily Telegraph.
When the big issues break the Bolt-Akerman pincer movement can often be relied upon to run the same line for their combined 2,717,000 readers in their Sydney and Melbourne tabloids – arguments that, coincidentally no doubt, reflect Rupert Murdoch's own political views and empire-building objectives.
Take a look a few recent examples of the Bolt/Ackerman pincer movement in action:
Kyoto Protocol: AKERMAN (17 February): “Only the Greens and the blinkered premier of NSW could have celebrated the enforcement of the meaningless Kyoto Protocol on gas emissions yesterday... The Greens and Mr Carr seem to take their information on climate change from Hollywood scripts and dubious modelling from committed environmentalist think-tanks rather than from the informed consensus.”
BOLT (18 February): “ …. Professor John Christy of the University of Alabama in Huntsville, asks “Will increases in carbon dioxide affect the climate significantly? Are significant changes occurring now? Climate models suggest the answer is yes. Real data suggests otherwise... This is why Lindzen calls the Kyoto accord, which demands expensive cuts to our emissions, ‘absurd'. But so much is absurd in the global warming hysteria, not least the media's willing surrender of its reason.”
Paul McGeough BOLT (22 June): ”Even the jury of this year's Graham Perkin Award, headed by the ABC's Kerry O'Brien, said it could make no 'informed assessment' on the truth of McGeough's story, although it still named him our Journalist of the Year for his 'wide body of work' in I raq – work which persuaded many Australians I raq was a h ell-hole.”
AKERMAN (23 June): “Kerry O'Brien, host of ABC TV's 7.30 Report and chairman of the panel which gave McGeough his Perkin award, said lamely that the judges could not make a final positive or negative judgement on the Allawi story – so they put it to one side... But given McGeough's track record, it would seem that O'Brien and his fellow judges were prepared to overlook the obvious disbelief about McGeough's incredible reportage and give him the prestigious award because his own boy's tales of derring do accorded most closely with their political sensibilities.”
R adical I slam BOLT (10 August): “How much longer can we pretend our M uslim clerics are mainly moderates who are allies in our war against I slamist terror?... As I've warned for years, the duty of M uslim leaders is not just clear, but urgent... They must take responsibility for the extremists in their midst and fight them. They must attack those who, like bin L aden, make so many Australians fear their faith. They must join themselves to us, and side with us against our enemies.”
AKERMAN (11 August): “Moderate M uslims must disown these monsters and their particular perverse stream of I slam and the fifth column apologists for such evil-doers should join them in branding all those who proclaim their support for terror as outlaws... Those within Australia who encouraged Hicks and his Aussie-accented brother-in-blood to take the path of violence and terror must be hunted with the same energy used by allied troops in Ir aq and A fghanistan … “
Global Warming BOLT (September 28): “How did Flannery come to write such stuff? Is it because he didn't care enough to check? Or because he – like so many now – thinks the truth isn't sacred when the world needs/saving from wicked humans? Whatever. We are in danger when myths rule men's minds. You should be scared when even a Flannery seems to lose his reason to our new green gods.”
AKERMAN (September 29): “Museum curator Tim 'Calamity' Flannery has been hitting the headlines hard with predictions of the end of civilisation as we know it as he promotes his new disaster tome The Weather Makers. However, with just as much certainty, a plethora of meteorologists have deluged the airwaves with their view that nothing out of the ordinary is taking place... The doomsday predictions are the mantra of the world's newest quasi-religion, environmentalism, and, like converts everywhere, those newly born into Gaia's flock aren't worried about the facts because they have the faith and conviction." Back to Top
2. Keating exposes the government's recipe for massive media concentration
Former prime minister Paul Keating lobbed an unsolicited op-ed piece in to The Australian, The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald late yesterday afternoon – and by this morning several hundred thousand Australians were finally alerted to the threat to democracy posed by the federal government's proposed changes to media regulation.
As Keating wrote in his story:
"The Government's apparent decision to close down any option for new free-to-air television outlets or multiple channels while removing the existing cross-media laws and foreign ownership restrictions is a recipe for massive media concentration and further abuses of power by the existing network owners."
"Such a change would see the potential for the greatest and most unseemly concentration of media in Australia's history. And if people think they have seen exercises in media power already, it will be as nothing like it may be should these two corporations have their way unfettered."
"The simple point is that John Howard does not have to do this. The pressure for this comes only from Publishing and Broadcasting, News Limited and the loitering Fairfax."
"Proposed policy changes of this kind are always sold on phoney arguments and an almighty sleight of hand. The phoney argument goes to how digital convergence is changing traditional media and communications and how in the technical determinism of it, as night follows day, traditional print and television companies ought be permitted to merge."
"Nobody should be seeking obscurantist curbs on the proliferation of communication channels and media whether of the Blackberry variety or more cable channels. But there is a cut and dried case with nought to do with convergence in respect of the big traditional print and TV outlets."
"What is proposed is a bit of dirty home-town play for the principal benefit of the major incumbents. In practice, were these changes to come about, ordinary bods would need the Packer and Murdoch organisations to stamp their passports for their free movement through Australian society. Not as dire as in the days of the Völkischer Beobachter but heading in that direction." CRIKEY: Let the debate and the opposition begin – for the sake of Australian democracy. Back to Top
3. Another victory to the gatekeepers of media policy
ABC presenter and journalist Quentin Dempster writes:
So the fix is in for Murdoch and Packer. (PM reins in media reforms – The Australian 28/9). Our worst fears are confirmed if Steve Lewis's information from sources close to the PM is right and that free to air multi-channelling and data casting have been shelved.
We can now expect Murdoch and Packer to acquire 100% of Foxtel as Telstra is fully privatised, delivering them a monopoly in multi-channelling. Murdoch and Packer aren't called the gatekeepers of media policy in our country for nothing. They have had a testicular hold on our prime ministers from Fraser to Hawke to Keating to Howard.
Now we are witnessing the technological betrayal of the people of Australia. Digital free to air (FTA) broadcasting could deliver up to 35 standard definition channels for a ONCE ONLY cost to consumers of a few hundred dollars for a set top box (compared with $50 to $100 A MONTH for Foxtel's channels). FTA digital is extraordinary technology. We could have multiple education, practical learning, English and other languages channels, children's, youth, history, documentary and community access as well as fully commercial channels for no additional delivery cost to audiences. Instead multi-channelling is to be handed to a Murdoch/Packer monopoly for the foreseeable future.
