November 5, 2011

Lies about Murdoch and the murky Greens


The Murdoch Media Inquiry, bludgeoned into existence by the Australian Greens, albeit, Gillard and her woeful government was an eager bride, is at least partly driven by a lie.
Remember the figure, the concentration of Murdoch's power?  
He, or News Ltd, of which he is the majority sharedholder, to be more accurate, supposedly owns - and therefore influences the editorial content of - 70 per cent of Australian newspapers.  We know this because Bob Brown has banged on and on and on about it.  It was a figure he used repeatedly when lobbying for an expensive and unnecessary media inquiry.  
That figure is a lie.  It's not even close to being true. 
Murdoch's company only publishes 32 per cent of all Australian newspapers. 
Yes.  Really.  No lie. 
''There is clearly a problem with media diversity in Australia. We have some of the greatest concentration of media ownership in the world, notably of course in the fact that News Limited owns some 70 per cent of the print media.
............
News rejects the often-quoted 70 per cent ownership figure. It says it publishes 32 per cent of all Australia's newspapers. Parliamentary library figures suggest News's share of circulation - as distinct from ownership - is 68 per cent in the capital cities and 77 per cent of the Sunday market.
Senator Brown, whose attack on News coincides with a visit to Australia by Rupert Murdoch, proposes the Finkelstein inquiry consider a new fit-and-proper-person test for newspaper ownership ...
He also proposes the introduction of new tax breaks for not-for-profit journalism enterprises to encourage quality journalism providing ''a platform for more media voices, particularly in investigative and in-depth journalism''.
Senator Brown argues encouraging philanthropic journalism would enhance diversity and independence.


The murky and amateurish political ploys of the Australian Greens, led by the persistently devious Bob Brown, continue to astound.  

They've only just completed ruining one executive bureaucrat's career, and now they're putting forward another - in a long line of many - absurdist policy proposal, the only person so far identified as being a beneficiary being their major donor during the last election - that person having made the largest single political donation in Australian history. 

After 17 years in parliament, Bob Brown still has no scientific or environmental qualifications, and nor, apparently, has he acquired any knowledge of democracy or the Australian parliamentary system.   

Power, lies, corruption.  He knows that stuff. He also gets away with it.  Every time. 

Apart from being such a stupid, economically and socially ill conceived policy proposal that I could scream, the philanthropic journalism notion wasn't Brown's idea; it's an idea given to him, and that's another murky story -  a retired judge, and now journalism professor, Dr Ricketson, was one of the signatories to the idea sent to Bob Brown only weeks before Ricketson was appointed to assist the media inquiry.

Ricketson is claiming he has no conflict of interest. 

Bob Brown has not claimed any such thing for himself.  He never does. 



7 comments:

  1. "After 17 years in parliament, Bob Brown still has no scientific or environmental qualifications, and nor, apparently, has he acquired any knowledge of democracy or the Australian parliamentary system. "

    In other words he's a lying fuckwit, Caz!

    He's in good company with Abbott and Gillard. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I don't understand why Brown doesn't get called out on his crap, Kath.

    On the weekend he carped about the major parties not preferencing the Greens, most particularly the potential for the ALP to preference the Libs in future. He called this "doing dirty deals" (or something like that).

    It's not, of course. It's routine political strategy, and an obsessively observed / commentated part of Australian politics.

    The Libs refused to preference the Greens at the last Victorian State election and won. The ALP post-analysis showed that doing deals with the Greens didn't help them.

    Brown also seemed to threaten the ALP "don't take the Greens for granted". Rather than trying to convince them that preferencing the Greens is good politics, he is preempting the next election with a bit of blackmail.

    He is, perhaps, afraid of losing voter share if HE doesn't have deals with the major parties. Who's happy to do dirty deals, then?

    Meanwhile, this bizarre and false comment on an article in today's The Age (emphasis added):

    I would term it Gilliard haters.
    Reason - at no other time in Australian history have we experienced a rancid fuelling of hate towards the PM by a monopoly media especially Murdoch and it's subsidiary the ABC.
    Furthermore, a joke of an Opposition are gently stroked and never brought to account.

    Sophie Mirabella for Aged Care Minister | Brighton - November 07, 2011, 7:45AM


    http://tinyurl.com/6qbdeo2

    ReplyDelete
  3. geoffff5:24 PM

    The Libs would be insane not to preference the ALP ahead of the Greens across the country next election. They don't need to do a deal, dirty or otherwise, to do that. They should just do it.

    The ALP is then on the spot. If they preference the Greens ahead of the Libs, that would be a gift for the Libs. They could then portray a vote for the ALP as a vote for another minority Govt or some other seedy coalition with extremists.

    Moreover there is a strong and growing anti-Green wing in the ALP. A dirty pref swap deal with them would seriously damage party cohesion.

    Both parties should preference the Greens last of course. No deals. Just do it. That should break their insidious grip immediately and get rid of them entirely from every legislature and chamber in the country, including the Senate, within six years. Just like they did with One Nation.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Geoffff - the Vic Libs didn't deal, they just dumped the Greens. Baillieu was momentarily pillared for his about-face, but was obviously proven right - he won!

    As much as it entrenches the two major parties, for both of them to dump the Greens from preference deals would at least be more honest, and would avoid this hideous type of parliament in future. Sure, there's always going to be a bunch of harebrained independents, but I don't mind that, and they sometimes manage to gain better outcomes. The Greens, on the other hand, are as purely destructive as Abbott is in opposition, just more devious than Tone.

    ReplyDelete
  5. geoffff7:37 PM

    I remember what happened in Victoria and remember predicting that it would help the Libs enormously in the poll. The public respect that. It is honest and it takes guts. That's easy to sell.

    I reckon the Libs will do it nationally in the next Federal poll. No deal, just do it. An announcement putting the Greens last everywhere. Andrew Robb is their best strategy person and he's a very smart man indeed.

    The ALP have smart people too. They have a wing that hates the Greens more than the Libs do. They may even attempt to pre-empt the Libs. They hate the Libs too of course. Either way they are on the spot.

    The Carbon Dioxide Tax is bad policy of course but that is not the reason why I truly despise that bunch of grinning toothless hyenas. They should hug and gum one another while they can because I've got a feeling they'll be irrelevant to Australian politics from about 9.00 pm next election night.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Any pocket in the ALP of simmering hatred for the Greens can only be a good thing, long term; short term, not so much.

    Gillard and her friggin' back room negotiating skills.

    Yeah. Right. Fuck that.

    ReplyDelete
  7. geoffff10:11 PM

    Slightly but not entirely off topic is this bloke and this is as good a place as any to post it.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LeGYAfh9A1k&feature=feedu

    Must watch this guy. In my humble opinion. It's about six minutes.

    ReplyDelete