Viner to US, leaves Guardian Oz to Emily Wilson. Guardian Australia launch editor Kath Viner announced today she’s stepping down from that role in “mid 2014”, to take up the editor-in-chief position at Guardian US. She’s being replaced by the former network editor at The Guardian‘s London mothership, Emily Wilson, who’ll be moving here soon.

The move is unsurprising: Viner was always designated as “launch editor”, and the site is well-established now, due to open up a Melbourne office ahead of schedule and reporting revenues at 300% of expectations.

Viner will be replacing Janine Gibson, currently Guardian US editor-in-chief, who’ll be returning to London in a leadership role. Gibson was asked by The New York Times whether she saw herself replacing current editor Alan Rusbridger one day; she said she’d just focus on the job in front of her. “Guardian journalists have watched with interest as a pool of talented and ambitious editors, including Ms Gibson and Ms Viner, have circled the paper’s top editing position,” the NYT reported. “The current editor, Alan Rusbridger, took the help in 1995 and shows few signs, at 60, of relinquishing control.” — Myriam Robin

Ten’s last roll of dice on programming? John Stephens, one of the smartest people in Australian TV, has been recruited by Ten (thanks Peter Meakin?) to try and teach the network and its programmers how to convince viewers the network can produce and show interesting programs. Stephens will be Ten’s “director of scheduling and acquisitions”, meaning he will oversee what Ten buys, commissions and where it goes in the schedule.

In his 40 years he was Nine’s programming boss and the head of programming and acquisitions at Seven, as well as a Seven consultant after he retired. He joins fellow dinosaur Meakin, Steve Wood and others at Ten. The Last Chance Saloon play is well and truly on now at Ten — if this fails, the network collapses. If “Stevo” can’t save you, no one can. — Glenn Dyer

Can you spot the dodgy journalism? In a thoroughly unsurprising adjudication, the Press Council has ruled that sections of a story published six months ago on — titled “Could you spot a paedophile? Here’s a guide on how to pick a child molester” — breached its principles for fair reporting. The article, by Candace Sutton, originally read:

“Paedophiles are often the victims of child molestation themselves. If you know this about a person’s past, beware. It’s all very well for you to feel sorry for a person, but don’t [let] them anywhere near young people you know. Child molestation victims frequently seek out children at the age or stage of physical development at which they were molested, and are able to more easily justify their repetition of history. They may network with others like them whose beliefs and practices are that sex with children is acceptable.”

This section, promptly removed after a public outcry, was deemed by the council as “so gravely offensive that it breached its principle requiring publications to balance the public interest with the sensitivities of readers”. It also objected to the paragraph on not justifying its claims: “The publication’s acknowledgement that evidence of a significant number of perpetrators being victims does not establish the frequency of victims becoming perpetrators.”

The story was widely panned by child abuse experts, with University of Western Sydney professor of criminology Michael Salter telling Crikey he objected to the whole premise of the article. “It’s really sad that the level of public discussion around child abuse has been brought back down to stereotypes,” Salter said. “Sex offenders are a heterogeneous group – they have almost nothing in common.” The original story has been updated to include the press council adjudication, linked on top. — Myriam Robin

Front page of the day. Under new management, Newsweek is back (in print) — and they scored quite the scoop for the cover …

“Satoshi Nakamoto stands at the end of his sunbaked driveway looking timorous. And annoyed.

“He’s wearing a rumpled T-shirt, old blue jeans and white gym socks, without shoes, like he has left the house in a hurry. His hair is unkempt, and he has the thousand-mile stare of someone who has gone weeks without sleep.

“He stands not with defiance, but with the slackness of a person who has waged battle for a long time and now faces a grave loss.”

Nakamoto is, we’re told, the founder of digital currency bitcoin — an identity nobody had known until now. But should the magazine have named him — and published photos of his house and car? Plenty are slamming it in the comments and on social media …