Companies

Mar 10, 2014

Consumers and shareholders come last in media ownership reform

Consumers and shareholders miss out whenever governments start talking about allowing more media ownership changes, write Bernard Keane and Glenn Dyer.

12 comments

Leave a comment

12 thoughts on “Consumers and shareholders come last in media ownership reform

  1. klewso

    Charlie’s brother? Murdoch’s got his very own “Malcolm McCarthy dummy”?

  2. The Pav

    Since , if Turnbull has his way, we probably won’t have an effective internet I find it hard to take his ruminations seriously

  3. paddy

    LOL
    Turnbull’s certainly tying himself in knots.
    Between no NBN and “the Internet is the super platform”, he should probably arrange another appearance on qanda to explain himself.

  4. drmick

    Paddy; When he was cornered about local content disappearing in an interview this morning the minister for misinformation and disconnection nearly told the truth, caught himself, and bullshat and moved on.
    Destroy the NBN`s effective selling point, (sped), then sell the NBN as a vehicle for change. Its the magic pudding NBN now.
    He then spent more time explaining that Murdoch wasn’t the demented plutocrat that he described last week, He was actually talking about ANOTHER demented plutocrat. The smell emanating from the radio car was of the large bovine type and there was plenty of it.

  5. Daly

    Part of the IPA and Murdoch agenda for this government?
    Makes no sense but neither does most of the rest of their thought bubbles or decisions. Just gravy for mates.

  6. Jimmyhaz

    Reading through the Coalition’s endless piles of bullsh*t is starting to leave a very bad taste in my mouth.

  7. zut alors

    That’s rich, Malcolm Turnbull spouting off about the internet ‘super platform’
    considering he’s determined to reduce the NBN to the speed of a startled slug (it being, currently, merely that of a slug).

    Nor do I buy Turnbull’s explanation of demented plutocrats who run papers at a loss. He actually meant Hearst? Hearst ran newspapers at a profit after initially buying flagging titles cheaply & then boosting circulation. Sure, it was his hobby & not the principal source of his wealth, but his papers still made money. Unlike ‘The Australian’.

  8. klewso

    It makes complete sense:- knowledge is power.
    Control intelligence, manage information, edit it to the message you’re selling (which party is “most fit to govern”) and you can manage enough (“5(?)”% – the majority of the swinging vote) of the electorate’s perception to deliver government that suits you and your interests.
    It doesn’t always work, but how many Labor governments have we had in the last twenty one years? Two and a half (even Murdoch couldn’t help Hewson, try as he did)?
    [Little Joey Goebbels did it.
    Pravda did it.
    Kim Jong might be ill, but do it.
    Let’s do it,
    Let’s fall in line.]

  9. AR

    Bullturd has clearly had a bollocking from the boss about describing him so accurately. How many elections has Hearst stolen in the last 20 years?
    It was truly hilarious listening to him with Fran this morning – one could “see” the smiles of both their faces as he went traipsing through the daisies, or perhaps asphodel?

  10. drmick

    Interviewing this scum must be horrific for honest journalists. They both know someone stinks like they have stacked their daks; they both know who it is; but no one confesses and no one owns up; and we are expected to swallow it. We keep looking for information with the least amount of ka ka to swallow and the nicest smell.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...