Media Inquiry

There’s a kind of political kismet to the fact that the Orwellian Finkelstein media review is released while international crusader for free speech Mark Steyn is in this country on a speaking tour.

“I have an undream?”

If Finkelstein’s recommendations are implemented they would create an oppressive regime of essentially government-controlled media and overturn our cherished principle of freedom of the press.

They would in essence create a “licensing” of every media agency and even, more disturbingly, most website and blogs. Well, those that are actually remotely popular - those with more than 41 hits per day.

Latest 2 of 336 comments

View all comments
 
  • Cathy Cheeseman says:

    10:21am | 11/03/12

    I read this article in the Weekend newspaper. I think that the example used is very poor - not really an example of threatening free speech and political correctness; just using the correct terminology. An asylum seeker is not necessarily an illegal immigrant. An asylum seeker has to be out… Read more »

  • rev says:

    01:58pm | 08/03/12

    It is simple readers just practice myob (mind your own business) especially miss effie and mr rack off generation x By the way did you realize sophie is a scorpio monkey….mmh.. a rather secretive commando type, a country cocky lassie slaving away in her electorate on the mason dixon line… Read more »

 

The Federal Government’s media inquiry was ordered in response to journalistic behaviour overseas which has no equal in Australia. It was also championed most enthusiastically by those who were either in on the lie, or indifferent to the lie, about the crisis in Australia’s political leadership, an 18-month period of indulgent paralysis which came to a head in Canberra last Monday.

A threat to democracy? Yep. Photo: Renee Nowytarger

Against this backdrop it is hard for those of us in the press not to be suspicious about something which seemed politically motivated in its inception, and which would now subject the entire media, both mainstream and independent, to the most heavy-handed regulation Australia has ever seen.

It is impossible to discuss an issue such as the media inquiry without being accused of journalistic self-interest. However, the inquiry has such dramatic implications for freedom of speech – and potentially also the proper use of public money – that it also raises broader issues of public interest.

Latest 2 of 216 comments

View all comments
 
  • LC says:

    12:40pm | 27/04/12

    I just remebered Pembo that you typed up this piece concerning the internet filter a while back. You were quite happy with censorship then, what’s changed? Oh that’s right, it was not you that could be censored under that scheme (as it was pitched at least), was it? Not so… Read more »

  • LC says:

    07:46pm | 06/03/12

    “I can see no other solution to child porn [than a filter]…” Well I can: LAW ENFORCEMENT. Imagine what the AFP’s child protection unit could do with the $44 million (for the development and rollout of the filter), plus $11,000 per year per site blocked (for the last known blacklist… Read more »

 

The federal government’s media inquiry released its long-awaited report today – 469 pages of policy discussion for interested parties to absorb on a Friday afternoon.

Are you excited yet? How about now? What about now? Now? Anyone?

Guess they don’t know the end-of-the-week pub habits of journalists too well. Stay tuned to The Punch as we delve through the other 459 pages in the coming days. Here’s what it looks like at this point.

Over the past couple of weeks there has been speculation that the inquiry would propose the establishment of a media ombudsman or a licensing system for journalists. Turns out the inquiry has only ended up making one significant recommendation.

Latest 2 of 67 comments

View all comments
 
  • RyaN says:

    11:47pm | 04/03/12

    @Rubens Camejo: and of course Alcoa would want to get on the wrong side of the government by actually telling the truth as to what their reasons are. Sounds bad for business, any competent CEO will know not to get on the wrong side of government. Read more »

  • RyaN says:

    11:39pm | 04/03/12

    I smell a troll and two victims. Read more »

 

I’d been mapping out a strong, passionate critique of the media inquiry on my computer for the past fortnight. It was going to be the best article ever; a high water-mark in awesomeness.

Cats are demanding a new free-to-air channel for fish-based programming. Picture: Gary Graham

I was going to suggest that yes, a lot of very ordinary journalism gets published in newspapers these days (“Hey, this bloke just sent us some old nudie pics of someone that sorta looks like Pauline Hanson! How about I run them on the front page?”), but that’s absolutely nothing new.

And if we’re going to start investigating the state of journalism then we probably ought to start with the crap on Today Tonight (which is sometimes is the highest rating show on a weeknight), given the broadcasting spectrum, as opposed to paper, is a finite public resource.

Latest 2 of 92 comments

View all comments
 
  • TheRealDave says:

    03:45pm | 23/11/11

    Bollocks Dick, Teh Australian isn’t ‘questioning’ anything. They are printing outright fraud and utter bollocks. If you maybe had a clue about IT you’d see it in about 5 seconds flat, but seeing as though you don’t….of course, their very first articel that was utter crap about the NBN jsut… Read more »

  • Tom says:

    10:27am | 23/11/11

    Yes, Kipling we all bring the baggage to the debate (oh, sh*t, except for you?). Having said that, IMHO Bolt represents the average punter far more than the ABC. ABC commentators (funded by all taxpayers) palpably want Labor in power so badly, you can feel it. That supposedly intelligent and… Read more »

 

From a crowded field, one of the more embarrassing moments from my troubled phase as a teenage Trotskyist involved selling issues of the socialist newspaper Direct Action on the streets of Adelaide. On occasions I sold it outside Football Park, Adelaide’s home of Aussie Rules, where I hoped to capitalise on that niche readership of people who both loved their footy and loved the idea of capitalism being paralysed by its contradictions.

Now, get some ink and paper….

In hindsight “selling” isn’t the right word. On a good day I sold three copies of Direct Action. On most days I sold no copies of Direct Action. The reason I sold no copies of Direct Action is that it wasn’t a very good newspaper. It was a crap newspaper. It was preachy, dour, earnest, poorly designed, massively overpriced for what it was, and full of articles which were about as far away from mainstream sentiment as you could imagine, with discussions of whether indigenous organisations should take up arms against their oppressors, calls for trade bans with pariah nations such as the United States, editorials calling for transgender prisoners to be given sex changes on Medicare.

Today, about three million Australians will shell out a couple of dollars to but their favourite Sunday newspaper. They do so because they like and enjoy it.

Latest 2 of 67 comments

View all comments
 
  • Colin says:

    11:55am | 16/11/11

    “It shouldn’t be the job of government to step in and prop up a product for which there is no demand.” You’re right, Penbo - That’s News Ltd’s job. The Australian isn’t profitable either, and the viability of our only national daily isn’t so much built on consumer demand but… Read more »

  • Roadknight says:

    08:48am | 16/11/11

    Wow… talk about deluded. You might just be the biggest fruitcake that has posted on this thread. ” If the far-right was in power? You think we would be bombing Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya?” Errr… you don’t get much further to the right than W and Dick Cheney and their… Read more »

 

IT’S a quarter to teatime at the media inquiry. Chair SIR ROBERT ELDERBERRY-TONSON is hearing evidence from journalism expert DR. WILLIAM FOXBOTTLE-SMYTHE. The late afternoon sunlight ripples through the plate glass windows…

The headline that sums up the inquiry

SIR ROBERT: So what’s to be done Doctor.

DR. WILLIAM: Well, I’m not advocating that we ban newspapers.

SIR ROBERT: Who said anything about banning newspapers?

DR. WILLIAM: Certainly not me.

Latest 2 of 54 comments

View all comments
 
  • jf says:

    11:54am | 13/11/11

    And why assume that the person on the “switchboard” is a “girl”. And if it were, I believe (from talking to lots of working females) that most females prefer to be called women rather than girl. Every day, acotrel, you demostrate your casual and ingrained bigotry whilst trying to take… Read more »

  • jf says:

    10:42am | 13/11/11

    acotrel says:06:47pm | 12/11/11 “Tony Abbott could ha rdly go to Europe and talk dpwn the Australian economy, they’d laugh at him.” He has never talked down the Australian economy. He has talked about the impact that Gillard et al’s stupid policies are bound to have on the economy. I… Read more »

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Anthony Sharwood

How much fun is it retweeting people who can't spell?

Anthony Sharwood

In other Olympian news, Steph rice is advertising Sunrice Chinese style Mongolian chicken. Think about that for a tick

Anthony Sharwood

Oops, just trying to say thanks all four your follows and Hackett yarn feedback, especially the dude who called me an opinionated dipshit

David Penberthy

@GreenJ lady boy.

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

Is there a nicotine patch strong enough for this?

Is there a nicotine patch strong enough for this?

Ok. I am not a leading expert in world’s best practice on prisoner rehabilitation — my experience…

A great win by Webber, but it sure as hell wasn’t sport

A great win by Webber, but it sure as hell wasn’t sport

This morning I joined millions of other Australians in accelerating, braking, swearing and spilling coffee…

Fighting Assad one strongly worded statement at a time

Fighting Assad one strongly worded statement at a time

This weekend’s massacre in Houla, Syria, is one of those stories that invites but doesn’t…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

Michael S says:

"A teacher at Geelong Grammar had criticised her for using words that were too long, which had left her confused and had made her doubt her ability to write essays. She became ''quite distressed'' when her English marks began to fall." I can sympathise. My scholastic mentors conveyed to me a causal relationship… [read more]

From: Welfare for breeders is a bonus for everyone

Change Up! says:

I have no problem paying my taxes. As a single, childless person on a very decent income, I can afford it and not have my life severely altered. Plus I understand that my taxes paying for things like schools, childcare and infrastructure is ultimately a good thing. A better community is better for me… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

They must pay for one’s bitter disappointments

A private school girl’s family is sueing her elite, extremely expensive private school for not… Read more

243 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter