The best way to appreciate press freedom is to lose it

A great piece, attacking the same agenda but with much greater class than others referenced above. That makes it all the more powerful IMHO.

I’ve long been a fan, but that reached a new level with this statement:

“We were being very well paid, and if we didn’t rock the boat we could have a very nice life and go back to proper journalism once we left. But we decided that once you do make those compromises, the habit is probably too hard to break after returning to the real world. We decided to see it through.”

Kudos to you sir.

“However, directly or indirectly, the Royal families of the United Arab Emirates owned most of the major institutions, including the media.”

The press in Australia is owned by the Australian Royal Family (Murdoch, Singo, Reinhart, etc)

We need some sort of reform to protect the ignorant from the greedy don’t we? Surely?

Great piece Tim.
More like this…

A great read. Thank you.

“If you’ve got a problem with what I write, you can complain to the Press Council. Their details are at the bottom of this page. If they decide I’m in the wrong, they’ll say so, in excruciating detail. Even if I disagree with the umpire’s verdict, I’ll have to publish it.”

You mean, you will actually have to publish the verdict? That’s just straight out draconian already! Bloody Stalinist, commies.

I mean if that severe punishment is not enough to incentivise journalists in a commercially struggling industry to publish the truth and not sensationalise things – well then I just don’t know what could!

Best leave it the way it is then I guess, any talk of extra media standards should be dismissed immediately.

One quick question – is Conroy allowed to sue the Tele for defamation for depicting him as a mass murdering dictator?

yawn.. who cares. these laws are not going to get up past the senate anyway.. all a big hoo ha over nothing.

brilliant tactical diversion by Gillard though. her own leadership issues are now 2nd place to the so called media reforms as the headline stories in every paper

Thanks Tim. A well balanced and mature piece.

Well argued, well said. I toiled in Myanmar in 2005 and saw the full effect of govt interference in the media.
Coincidentally today Mizzima reports

he Myanmar government have suspended a controversial draft media bill until mid-April. The media bill drafted by the Interim Press Council will now be put forward to the Lower House when the parliamentary sessions resume after Myanmar’s traditional Water Festival ends on April 17, Kyaw Min Swe, the general secretary of the Interim Press Council, told Mizzima.

The bill was drawn up by the Ministry of Information without input from media groups. Now a meeting will be held on March 23 for politicians to discuss the draft bill with journalists.

Very pertinent article and glad you published it.

I think the laws are pretty tame once again News going into over drive. Self regulation hasn’t worked in UK and it’s not working her either.

Nice piece, but so far with this debate all I’m hearing is complaints without solutions.

Media Sheik is on the money: “We need some sort of reform to protect the ignorant from the greedy don’t we?”

At the moment, we’re simply debating which group of powermongers we should allow to exercise too much control over what we read/see/hear in the mass media: the government or the media moguls. Both have strong agendas that would often be best served by obfuscating, censoring or ignoring the truth, and punishing those who tell it.

Conroy may have stuffed this, but something needs to be done, and the Tele front page only proves it.

Correctly said, but simply not severe enough in examining, from a helicopter view, the ultimate issues.

After a couple of world wars, thousands of Aussie soldiers dead for the western worlds sense of freedom this party of supposed higher moral principles, has been trying to join Pravda and Der Sturmer. Their assault on press freedom will bring us closer to the Eddie Obeid look a likes getting away with anything. The larger issue is not that there should be a free press and media, but that this government owns two major media outlets- ABC and SBS – just like Stalin and Himmler did.

Irrespective of the principal that no Government should own a substantial suite of media, it is also a travesty of my tax payer funds. Did the ABC or SBS discover Eddie Obeid’s misdeeds – the worst theft by a public official of Government assets in Australia’s history – despite a budget of $1.4b pa – No. It was a free from ABC/SBS, media.

Furthermore, if the government wants to compete in the ideas market, let media supporting the Government be self financing. The ABC SBS should be advertiser and PAY subscription supported at least before final privatisation or conversion to a PBS public donation style foundation. This tax subsidy to an un means tested TV watching elite is, given trends to means test health, education and other Government services on the grounds of equity, unjustified. The hoi polloi watch ACA or Today Tonight and suffer advertising, the upper class watching the ABC news and 7.30 report, doesn’t.

An informed piece. However, Media Sheik above captures the flip-side that the mis-guided Labor efforts are trying to counter.

p.s. If a tabloid mimicked Malcolm Turnbull the way a tabloid has mimicked Conroy; do you think Turnbull would sue? He has certainly taken media to court before…

In this day and age, with most most media companies here seemingly in a slow death march, this entire debate just feels so ridiculously quaint.

Tim, great piece.

A quick question as you will know far better than me, but I though the proposed legislation was that the PIMA was to be bilaterally appointed, i.e. with the support of the government and opposition of the day. A small point I know, but an important one.

You talk about powerful men in the UAE controlling who says what about whom, and worry that the same kind of censorship will find its way into Australia… we already have that with Murdoch and to a lesser extent Packer.

Look at Gina Rinehart’s attempt to buy into Fairfax for the clear purpose of controlling media…

We already have media censorship thanks to the Murdoch family – censorship that means trash like the aforementioned DT articles runs, and media owners control the news, rather than there being honest and unbiased (or at least not sensationalist) journalism.

The media regulations are there to stop sensationalist and biased crap that the DT and other papers put out and try to brin reporting back to a respected state. There’s a reason why journalism is one of the least-trusted professions…

Most Australians are disengaged from politics. It takes a front page like that of the Telegraph’s comparing Conroy to despots to wake people up from their slumber and realise what exactly’s being proposed here. Australians have had it so good for so long, they just believe that either party is much the same and will have their best interests at heart. It is time for Australia to wake up. Labor seem to be a bumbling mess but one needs to ask why would they want to muzzle the media, what is the agenda?

I find a little daily dose of internet conspiracy theory is a good antidote to an overly global-mogul mediated media.

Tim, or someone, could you explain why ensuring the Press Council enforces its own rules is such a bad thing? As I understand it, that’s all the new legislation proposed. Perhaps I’m wrong. You might talk about the principle of having a government body ensuring a private body enforces its own rules, but the broadcast media has been subject to much stricter control for years (and yes, I do know the difference between the publically-owned spectrum and the print media, but these days the difference is well blurred). And, Roger, please take of of Kev’s cold showers. You are reading too much Daily Telegraph.

Interesting piece, thanks… BUT.

why is it assumed that.. “The Media” are the only people interested and capable of deciding what is legitimate?

we all KNOW..without question and undoubtedly that the Press Council is piss weak and its decisions and punishments are rarely (if ever) as damaging as the stories that they are acting on.

I could not be more opposed to manipulation of the media… but seriously, we are supposed to already have it and the current set up is doing close to NOTHING to ensure it is becoming any more free and open.

A government selected council worries me LESS than a Murdock/Reinhart/Stokes selected group of yes people.