EVERY SINCE the Phage dropped Bristow, the smiles to be drawn from that newspaper have been largely accidental. Today is no exception. With Ginaphobia running rampant and office copy machines no doubt churning out bulk copies of CVs destined for the ABC recruiting office, business writer Elizabeth Knight has melded boastfulness with dread to produce some remarkable assertions about her (current) employer. For example:
For the mega-wealthy, control of Australia's most influential newspaper group, Fairfax, is like an insurance policy against political decisions that run against their commercial interests.
Influential? With whom? A doomed federal government? The sprout suckers and semi-literate humanities undergraduates who dominate its online comment threads? The weary janitors who must throw out all the unclaimed free copies of the paper left daily in organic bicycle shops and free-trade tofu emporiums?
Just in time, too. Hall [an investor and market player] was getting more concerned about the media group's advertising and readership numbers in December and January.
At least someone is concerned about Fairfax’s commercial decline. Fairfax CEO Greg Hywood might get around to expressing an interest sooner or later, but probably not until he has finished counting last week’s, and every week’s, 50K pay cheque.
For Rinehart and for Forrest the rationale is simple. Invest several hundred million to gain control of Fairfax, and wrest the political agenda from the government. In Rinehart's case this would involve using the editorial influence of Fairfax to get rid of Labor and its expensive (to her) taxes - the minerals resource rent tax and the carbon tax - an outcome that could ultimately save billions.
Again with that influence business! What influence does Fairfax wield? The Coalition knows it can expect nothing from the Phage or Silly but more of the luvvy-dovey same. On a good day, those papers might concede that Tony Abbott is not going to install a hotline to the Vatican in the Lodge, but that would be a very good day indeed. As to the other side of politics, if influence is re-printing talking points while shouting “Amen!” from the sidelines, well that is influence.
But this may not be a fool-proof plan because taking control of the editorial agenda is not necessarily that easy.
Really? The Greens found it to be not in the least challenging.
Thus, for Rinehart, waiting just one year from now would see her take effective control of Fairfax and the highly regarded editorial integrity of trust, built up over 150 years, could be sacrificed for a few hundred million pieces of gold.
Shareholders might not object to seeing the odd bit of gold coming their way, not being quite so smitten as the column’s author with fantasies of “highly regarded editorial integrity”. Would that “integrity” include having an unauthorised poke about in a Labor-voter database, now the subject of a police investigation? Or would it be the betrayal of a source, as was confirmed this week when Judge Lucy McCallum released her long-delayed views on the matter of Helen Liu and former defence minister Joel Fitzgibbon.
To do this, she would need to inject a few user-friendly editors into the Fairfax newspapers including, The Sydney Morning Herald, The Age and The Australian Financial Review
Users? Who are these users of whom Knight speaks? Could it be the papers’ former readers, the ones who walked away long ago? What a tragedy it would be if the Silly and Phage were to fill their pages with stories, columnists, entertainments and investigations of interest to the public, not merely topics that excite the passions only of the ardent luvvie in the adjoining newsroom cubicle.
Rinehart has already had some success in achieving influence through the acquisition of 10 per cent of Ten Network last year. Not only was she readily granted a board seat but the politically like-minded News Corp journalist, Andrew Bolt, was given his own program, some say through Rinehart's influence.
Well that is the party line on Bolt and Knight is sticking to it. At Fairfax the wan attribution “some say” is considered an entirely adequate source – even though Channel 10 chieftain Brian Long has repeatedly stated, and on the record, that Rinehart did not play midwife to the birth of the Bolt Report. Actually, Knight might learn a thing or two from that Sunday morning programme – like the wisdom of giving consumers content which commands their interest. Fairfax should try it sometime, even at the risk of forfeiting a few invitations to Brunswick vegans’ dinner parties.
The curious thing about author Knight’s authorised view of Ms Rinehart’s interest in Fairfax is that it overlooks the very real possibility of some active boardroom stewardship turning the company around. What if The Age were to go tabloid and hire some editors who are aware that there exists in Melbourne a considerable number of people who do not dress in black, fellate their bicycles or revere Bob Brown as the Buddha of Bellerive? The Herald Sun grows worse by the week, a southern iteration of what Clive Palmer on Lateline last week observed to be the editorial approach of the Courier Mail – a daily version of celebrity-fixated women’s gossip rags. The Herald Sun once held a generational stranglehold on what might be termed Middle Melbourne but now seems determined to trash that legacy.
A reconstituted Age could fill that void and thereby gain a genuine measure of the influence which Knight repeatedly cites. Sadly, the prism of conceit obscures her ability to recognise the word’s true meaning, just as it has long delayed a much-needed examination of Fairfax’s editorial and commercial conscience.
One thing that hasn't been considered is this....what will happen when a new owner throws open all The Age and Sydney Morning Herald records to one and all ? Remember the embarassment at the time of the fall of the Soviet Union when the new Russian government threw open so many of the KGB's old files ? How it was revealed that all those massive unilateralist 'peace demonstrations' in the early 1980s were funded in no small part by the KGB ? Should make fun reading.....ReplyDelete
Interesting that Knight sees the Government's political agenda and that of Fairfax as being one and the same. Surely an independent media organ would have independent views?ReplyDelete
Your comment Prof, "At Fairfax the wan attribution “some say” is considered an entirely adequate source" nails it and shows why Fairfax papers exhibit little more than opinion and cut and pasting press releases.
"The highly regarded editorial integrity of trust, built up over 150 years, could be sacrificed for a few hundred million pieces of gold."ReplyDelete
The internal delusion is worse than I thought. Elizabeth, honey, to the public of NSW and Victoria, the Fairfax papers are figures of fun, self-caricatures of bias and amateurism that have flourished since people who know nothing about newspapers and media invaded the management 15 years ago. Hywood can't flick a switch to Vaudeville, unless he restores editorial budgets and appoints professionals to re-establish ethical news-gathering operating principles. Which he won't do because he thinks it is unnecessary. Doomed. The involvement of Palmer and/or Rinehart would just make the implosion more fun to watch, but would make no difference as neither knows diddley about media.
I love it! - In today's (Fairfax) Tasmanian "Advocate":ReplyDelete
As one senior executive said: "Anyone that wanted WA to secede, thought [of] using a nuclear bomb to develop better harbour facilities, does not believe in the science of climate change, thinks the mining resources tax was unfair, wants to import cheap Asian labour to help her make even more money and MOST importantly has no time for any views other than her own is not the ideal person to influence media in this country."
"As one senior (anonymous) executive said" - Executive of what? The ALP, the CMFEU, the Socialist Alliance or the local parish council?
Looking at the editorial direction of the Age and SMH (& their declining readership) I sold my shares when they were $3.98 vs. $0.75 - Right decision.
A newspaper friend who's had dealings with the Fairfax Board confirms confirms they're completely inert. If Gina can bring balance to the current Fairfax/ABC "love-in" with Green/Labor, Australia (and Tasmania in particular) might have some hope.
I notice that Kate McClymont's reports on the ongoing brothel creeping/credit card saga are now co-authored by none other than Labor Groupie in Chief Coorey. I imagine this reinforcement of her,up until now,perfectly adequate reporting has something to do with the aforementioned need to protect from possible sacrifice "the highly regarded editorial integrity of trust"ReplyDelete
Prof, yet another candidate for the Elizabeths of No Sense Lefty Collective, as opposed to that much preferable group, the Independent Elizabeths of Good Sense.ReplyDelete
And this Elizabeth Knight is a business writer? Go figure, Prof, 'cos I can't.
I wish we had a broadsheet in Australia of the quality of The Telegraph (UK) or the Wall Street Journal. The Oz is great but not in those leagues. Here's a chance...one can but wish.ReplyDelete
Lizzie: It is obvious that you cornered all the intellectual gifts available to the Elizabeths of the world. The deprived rest have no choice but to work for Fairfax.ReplyDelete
On the money, Prof, with your contention that a reconstituted Age could richly harvest the neglected land that was once the Herald and Sun's domain. Suburban and regional courts are awash with fascinating tales that go unreported; the biker gangs story has hardly been touched; a week in the life of a Barwon prisoner would make compelling reading and outrage the populace; an examination of the political backgrounds of Hulls-appointed justices is surely overdue; I could go on, there's a squillion stories in the naked city...ReplyDelete