The Sydney Morning Herald Web Diary Margo Kingston Cross media endgame
Friday, January 11, 2002 Clear the decks, start the new year fresh, and return to yet another attempt to abolish the cross media ownership laws. The fights keep getting harder to stop the Packers getting Fairfax - the wobbly last bastion against complete domination of Australia's media by the big two. Oligopoly, of course, means a handshake - the collapse of independent (even any in some cases) reporting of the affairs of Murdoch and Packer - their media, their casinos, their sports competitions, their financial dealings - and totally unaccountable, almost complete control over our politicians. They're just about there now: in 1996 Packer and Murdoch met in London to carve up the media between them - Packer would sell his Fairfax shares to Murdoch, Murdoch would sell his shares in the Seven Network, the super-league battle would be settled, and Fox would supply programs to the nine Network. (The deal lapsed through disagreements between the men.) I've been involved in many Fairfax journalist's battles on this over the years - each is harder, each ends with our backs further in the corner. Each time, fewer voices - inside and outside journalism - protest as the big two's power increases and alternative employment sources dry up. My sense is that this time is the last. We'll lose, as we knew we would, one day. Labor will fold while pretending it hasn't by adding a couple of meaningless amendments to the Lib-Packer-Murdoch fix. After he won in 1996, Howard wanted to abolish the cross media rules banning ownership of both TV and newspapers, but to keep stopping foreigners buying newspapers. Why? Packer had changed his mind and lo and behold, Howard followed suit. In 1991, Packer and Canadian publisher Conrad Black bid for Fairfax, then in receivership, Packer said foreign ownership restrictions were wrong. So did the Liberals - they argued foreign players would increase competition. (Packer later withdrew from the consortium when certain evidence was placed before the TV regulator concerning his claim that he would not control Fairfax if his consortium won.) But by 1997, when he wished to bid for Fairfax on his own, he insisted foreign ownership restrictions stay, as this would save him the trouble of a bidding duel with a foreign player. Murdoch wanted foreign controls on TV ownership lifted so he could buy a TV station. Howard agreed with Packer - cross ownership goes, foreign control stays - but backbench pressure within his own ranks and Labor opposition saw him drop the plan. Then, James Packer said yes to lifting foreign ownership restrictions. This is crucial. Back in 1997, it was the Libs with Packer (the Nats weren't onside) and Labor with Murdoch. But now, its the Libs, Packer and Murdoch on the same team. Labor must be dying inside. What a diabolically cunning way for Howard to start his third term!! He gets what the big two want for them, and they like him for a while, and if he doesn't the big two blame Labor and ... The government is running its usual garbage on how media ownership doesn't effect diversity of news and opinion. It's untrue, and they know it. This time, they promise a rule saying that editorial management structures in TV and newspapers must be separate. That's pure formalism. Who picks the bosses of each structure? The same man. The only way this catastrophe for our democracy will be stopped is if Labor is courageous, strongly argues it out in public on the merits, and conceives an alternative media policy to seriously protect independent journalism. Odds on any of that, anyone? Here's a piece I wrote last time Howard and communications minister Richard Alston played for Packer and a Webdiary entry last year on the One Tel debacle, which is proof of the farce media will become if this goes through. The big two join the same gig. It blows up in their faces. Murdoch's papers run his line. Channel Nine pretends James Packer doesn't exist in the story. Jodee Rich makes his claims against the big two only in Fairfax. Goodbye Fairfax - goodbye any need for the big two to justify anything to anyone. And try this game - find any opinion piece in any Murdoch publication opposing the proposed Howard changes. Before these pieces, another blast from the past. In 1991, during the controversy over the Black/Packer consortium, 128 or the 225 MPs and Senators signed a bipartisan petition opposing the bid. It called on the Labor government to ``oppose the sale of the Fairfax group to any individual or consortium that would result in a greater concentration of ownership, and thus a diminution of competition in and diversity of information sources in Australia.'' Signatories included John Howard, now PM, John Anderson, now deputy PM, David Kemp, now environment minister, Peter Costello, now Treasurer, Alexander Downer, now foreign affairs minister, Amanda Vanstone, now family and community services minister. It also included former National Party leader Tim Fischer, former health minister Michael Wooldridge, former defence ministers Peter Reith and Ian McLachlan and former family and community services minister Jocelyn Newman. *** http://www.smh.com.au/news/webdiary/2002/01/11/FFX1RAIUAWC.html ************************************************************************* This posting is provided to the individual members of this group without permission from the copyright owner for purposes of criticism, comment, scholarship and research under the "fair use" provisions of the Federal copyright laws and it may not be distributed further without permission of the copyright owner, except for "fair use." . -- -- Leftlink - Australia's Broad Left Mailing List mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Archived at http://www.cat.org.au/lists/leftlink/ Sponsored by Melbourne's New International Bookshop Subscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=subscribe%20leftlink Unsubscribe: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Body=unsubscribe%20leftlink
