The federal government’s media inquiry:
Justin Templer writes: Re. Yesterday’s editorial. In your editorial on the current government inquiry into the media you suggest that anyone believing that there are no pressing issues with the media be asked: “Do you hold the Australian media in high regard and are you confident in the media’s ability to self-regulate?” This is a dangerous linkage, which is surprising coming from Crikey.
Many of us hold sections of the media in contempt but do not necessarily then follow that really scary link into a need for government regulation — merely because sometimes we feel a tad uncomfortable.
The question you should instead be asking is: “Given the evident bias exhibited by sections of the Australian media and especially its failure to support the current Labor/Green government alliance, do you believe that the current government media enquiry is at least in part prompted by an adversarial government view of the press and may ultimately result in reduced press freedom in this country?”
YES and YES?
Andrew Crook writes: Re. “Real estate wars: Fairfax set to buy back half of Catalano’s Weekly Review?” (yesterday, item 5). I said yesterday that Stefanie Kirk was married to Antony Catalano. The wedding is on the way but they’re not quite hitched yet.
Politicians and microphones:
Niall Clugston writes: Re. “Richard Farmer’s chunky bits” (yesterday, item 12). Surely the major story shouldn’t be about politicians not realising the microphones were on (Richard Farmer, Wednesday, item 12), but that two very different world leaders think the Israeli Prime Minister is an obnoxious liar.
If Obama has to deal with Netanyahu every day, the Palestinians are expected to negotiate peace with him!