Brilliant article, thanks for explaining things so clearly .As you say we can not give up the fight. We need a much fairer media landscape. Independent Media to get proper funding and more coverage would be great.
It was simpler when it was just the Murdoch media we had to fight against.
Seven, Nine and half of the ABC leaning further right means the bias and misinformation is even more widespread than ever. And yet the majority of voters still rejected the conservative push coming from all those media outlets.
Will be interesting to see where things stand by the time of the next election, especially if more 'palatable' conservatives are produced in the meantime.
Great article. Sadly the reality. It is def time for greater media diversity laws and the continued expansion of excellent independent media in Aus. Also whistleblower protection so that those who see wrong can speak up without fear of prosecution and gaol.
Alas, Lachlan Murdoch and Bruce Gordon hold the majority shares in Channel 10. Last month they deliberately bankrupted Channel 10, in September they we take control. News Corp will now have a free to air channel.
Morrison, Margaret Court's bitch, has stacked all the important administrative departments with Murdoch's minion's. All the print media is now in control of right wing ideologues. Seven Stokes, Nine Costello and soon to be Channel 10, plus Sky News metro and free Sky News rural
The News Corp template of fear and loathing, is a tried and true method of forcing left leaning governments to bend the knee or face a barrage of hate, all so known as the Credlin doctrine.
One thing that puzzles me is why does he leave Canada alone?
I look forward to more of your articles, great stuff.
Good governance demands that people like Rupert Murdoch should be held accountable for their crimes. In America, RICO provides a more than adequate sets of laws under which to charge Rupert for the crimes he has blatantly committed.
I struggle with the assumed impact of media campaigns. The article refers to the Labor State governments election and re election and then lists the counter cases. So democracy produces different winners?
Looking longer term - since The Oz founded in 1964 it has supported the national election winner in little more than half the elections. What real impact does that show?
Take a look at the role of propaganda in 1930’s Germany. A murderous, megalomaniac junkey clown was adored. Same MO, demonisation, repeat a lie often enough etc. In Australia Pig iron Bob, an admirer of NS, despite being lauded by RW media, was thrown out. Meanwhile Curtin, in our darkest days, was hounded by Murdoch snr etc till his death just before the end of hostilities. Fun fact KM was appointed “director general of information. “ by Menzies. Inside story.org.au
Germany's case very much the clever use by Goebbels etc of new technology - in that case radio. Now we have the manipulation of new technology, social media, - combined with the almost complete disappearance of trye investigative journalism from the troubled traditional media.
So like the article you cite wins and losses across all sides.
So again I ask what evidence that in a democracy (which 1930s Germany was not) that the influence of News has the impact they and you would like to think. Or is it that when the public flavour is more inclined to News style views then they get more traction.
As I said since Oz founded in 1964 it has little more than a 50% success rate in Australian national elections.
The impact of News Corp (and our extreme media concentration in general) is clearer when you look at long-term societal changes rather than standalone election results, although the LNP has been in power for the vast majority of time since the Second World War.
The long-term destruction of union membership, constant widening of inequality, stalled action on climate change, vilification of refugees, casualisation of the workforce, starving of the ABC, and erosion of privacy and civil rights are all deeply successful phenomenons that have been fiercely supported by our largest media empire.
News Corp's ability to set the Overton Window (the margins of acceptable public discussion) has, in my view, played a significant role in the creation of what Australian society looks like today.
This has depended less on success at every election than it has on sustained long-term messaging, fierce support and protection for politicians who progress the vision, and has resulted in significant opinion modification among the public.
One academic who took no prisoners re Murdoch before the election was Dr Scott Burchill. Even ABC ‘s Michael Rowland was taken back by the cutting analysis. He used to have a commentary gig but clearly was too astute for that time in the morning for Ita.
Sure it’s not a perfect hit rate even with Stokes, Costello and mostly Ita, but I would suggest is a criminal organisation ie Levinson enquiry, criminal hacking, destroyed reputations. Recipient of Vatican, Tory knighthoods. The oz has a piddling circulation but it’s hit jobs feed the lazy MSM, ABC mostly and the damage is often done before it’s revealed as speculation, smear.
Brilliant article, thanks for explaining things so clearly .As you say we can not give up the fight. We need a much fairer media landscape. Independent Media to get proper funding and more coverage would be great.
It was simpler when it was just the Murdoch media we had to fight against.
Seven, Nine and half of the ABC leaning further right means the bias and misinformation is even more widespread than ever. And yet the majority of voters still rejected the conservative push coming from all those media outlets.
Will be interesting to see where things stand by the time of the next election, especially if more 'palatable' conservatives are produced in the meantime.
Great article. Sadly the reality. It is def time for greater media diversity laws and the continued expansion of excellent independent media in Aus. Also whistleblower protection so that those who see wrong can speak up without fear of prosecution and gaol.
God, it's so refreshing to read this piece.
Alas, Lachlan Murdoch and Bruce Gordon hold the majority shares in Channel 10. Last month they deliberately bankrupted Channel 10, in September they we take control. News Corp will now have a free to air channel.
Morrison, Margaret Court's bitch, has stacked all the important administrative departments with Murdoch's minion's. All the print media is now in control of right wing ideologues. Seven Stokes, Nine Costello and soon to be Channel 10, plus Sky News metro and free Sky News rural
The News Corp template of fear and loathing, is a tried and true method of forcing left leaning governments to bend the knee or face a barrage of hate, all so known as the Credlin doctrine.
One thing that puzzles me is why does he leave Canada alone?
I look forward to more of your articles, great stuff.
The article is a wake-up call!
Anecdotally propaganda works but not on everyone. The stronger the moral compass the less propaganda works?
Good governance demands that people like Rupert Murdoch should be held accountable for their crimes. In America, RICO provides a more than adequate sets of laws under which to charge Rupert for the crimes he has blatantly committed.
I struggle with the assumed impact of media campaigns. The article refers to the Labor State governments election and re election and then lists the counter cases. So democracy produces different winners?
Looking longer term - since The Oz founded in 1964 it has supported the national election winner in little more than half the elections. What real impact does that show?
Take a look at the role of propaganda in 1930’s Germany. A murderous, megalomaniac junkey clown was adored. Same MO, demonisation, repeat a lie often enough etc. In Australia Pig iron Bob, an admirer of NS, despite being lauded by RW media, was thrown out. Meanwhile Curtin, in our darkest days, was hounded by Murdoch snr etc till his death just before the end of hostilities. Fun fact KM was appointed “director general of information. “ by Menzies. Inside story.org.au
Germany's case very much the clever use by Goebbels etc of new technology - in that case radio. Now we have the manipulation of new technology, social media, - combined with the almost complete disappearance of trye investigative journalism from the troubled traditional media.
So like the article you cite wins and losses across all sides.
So again I ask what evidence that in a democracy (which 1930s Germany was not) that the influence of News has the impact they and you would like to think. Or is it that when the public flavour is more inclined to News style views then they get more traction.
As I said since Oz founded in 1964 it has little more than a 50% success rate in Australian national elections.
The impact of News Corp (and our extreme media concentration in general) is clearer when you look at long-term societal changes rather than standalone election results, although the LNP has been in power for the vast majority of time since the Second World War.
The long-term destruction of union membership, constant widening of inequality, stalled action on climate change, vilification of refugees, casualisation of the workforce, starving of the ABC, and erosion of privacy and civil rights are all deeply successful phenomenons that have been fiercely supported by our largest media empire.
News Corp's ability to set the Overton Window (the margins of acceptable public discussion) has, in my view, played a significant role in the creation of what Australian society looks like today.
This has depended less on success at every election than it has on sustained long-term messaging, fierce support and protection for politicians who progress the vision, and has resulted in significant opinion modification among the public.
One academic who took no prisoners re Murdoch before the election was Dr Scott Burchill. Even ABC ‘s Michael Rowland was taken back by the cutting analysis. He used to have a commentary gig but clearly was too astute for that time in the morning for Ita.
Sure it’s not a perfect hit rate even with Stokes, Costello and mostly Ita, but I would suggest is a criminal organisation ie Levinson enquiry, criminal hacking, destroyed reputations. Recipient of Vatican, Tory knighthoods. The oz has a piddling circulation but it’s hit jobs feed the lazy MSM, ABC mostly and the damage is often done before it’s revealed as speculation, smear.
I get you do not like its views - yet somehow you are not influenced. Why are others not also forming their own views?
I start from view that most people know their own views which includes many sharing elements of the News themes.
The Australian in its first decade leaned Laborwards, hence it ‘failed’ first two elections.