Skip to content Skip to main navigation

CT will lose another subscriber

54-11 19 June 2012 68

I have in front of me a renewal for my home-delivered Canberra Times, which I will hold onto for now without renewing.

Delivery problems? No. Cost too high? No. Dissatisfied with content? No.

I just don’t want to read the regurgitations of Ms Rinehart, mining magnate from Western Australia.

I will leave the subscription renewal in abeyance until such time as I am satisfied that she will not interfere in Fairfax editorial independence. 

That, of course, leaves me with a problem.  I refuse to spend any money on News Corp publications, so the choices of newpapers to read with my Weetbix are limited.


What’s Your opinion?


Please login to post your comments, or connect with
68 Responses to
CT will lose another subscriber
Filter
Showing only Website comments
Order
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
shauno 10:14 pm 20 Jun 12

Holden Caulfield said :

dungfungus said :

I must have missed Mrs Rineharts “regurgitations” to date so would you mind quoting a couple for me?
I have no idea why so many on this blog criticize this woman who is actually saving Fairfax Media from total destruction. I dont’t recall her ever saying that she was going to change the editorial opinion in the Faifax newspapers either (and she talks to the media very little)
From what I see, the craven opposition to her on this blog is all about her wealth.
Re your decision not to renew your CT subscription because you want to see their style preserved, did it ever occur to you that the reason their circulation is falling is because of the fact that they refuse to change?

Well, she does want three of her stooges sitting on the board.

She has every right to have people on the board. And once she gets more shares she will have the right to sack the CEO and replace the entire board. Fairfax was doomed its readership was plummeting as fast as its share price and a restructure wont help the readership numbers its the content that only appealed to a select number of inner city greens and left wing types and the whole place suffers from a serious group think mentality.

2604 8:45 pm 20 Jun 12

HenryBG said :

2604 said :

Rioters who don’t like particular newspapers don’t have to buy them. .

Just like 8-year-olds who didn’t like working in the mills didn’t have to work in them, eh?

No, not like that at all, actually.

dungfungus 11:34 am 20 Jun 12

Roundhead89 said :

Jim Jones said :

dungfungus said :

Are you talking about the Gina Rineheart who became a shareholder in Channel Ten in order to secure a spot on the network for Andrew Bolt, so that he could continue his campaign against the ‘global warming conspiracy’?

Andrew Bolt has provided the truth which disproves this fanciful conspiracy theory. Bolt was signed to his contract by TEN chairman Lachlan Murdoch before Rinehart bought into the company. It was definitely a smart move by young Lachie. The Bolt Report is now beating the ABC’s left wing Insiders program, not only in the cume ratings (as it had from the day it started) but head to head live on Sunday morning as well.

The Bolt report was indeed in place before Gina Rinehart started buying into TEN who appear to know more about making money for their shareholders than the Fairfax Media people.

HenryBG 11:24 am 20 Jun 12

Gungahlin Al said :

EvanJames said :

Monckton felt that the lack of a Fox News equivalent in Australia was a problem. So Gina’s going to try and fix that.

What? The Australian (and other News Corp publications) doesn’t already plug that niche sweetly?

Nah – once they’ve got Fairfax humming along nicely, The Australian will be, “that left-wing rag”.

Innovation 11:18 am 20 Jun 12

tommy said :

We found that while we cancelled the CT, it keeps coming (even years later). I’m guessing they need the subscriber count or something.

+1 – there’s another one on our driveway today. Given all of the discussion I thought I’d have a look at Crikey today. Very good site although I had a chuckle at the menu:

——————————————————————————–
Australia Federal NSW NT QLD SA TAS VIC WA

Perhaps they feel that they can’t compete with RA…… for ACT issues

Gungahlin Al 11:08 am 20 Jun 12

EvanJames said :

Monckton felt that the lack of a Fox News equivalent in Australia was a problem. So Gina’s going to try and fix that.

What? The Australian (and other News Corp publications) doesn’t already plug that niche sweetly?

EvanJames 11:08 am 20 Jun 12

The vast majority of people, voters, don’t go looking at small independant media sites, or even media. They consume, mostly uncritically, what they are fed by radio, TV news, and newspapers. So when Rinehart starts altering the message coming out of Fairfax, not only will the consumers of Fairfax start to recieve that message, but it will flow on to other media, other opinion-shapers. The prevailing opinions around the country will change.
Here’s a good summary of how things stand:
http://theconversation.edu.au/mps-warn-rinehart-against-editorial-meddling-at-fairfax-7771

Rinehart has declared, she wants to be able to hire and fire editors, thus directly controlling content and message.

People won’t consume that message and think to themselves “Oh, that’s Rinehart the miner, at-it again”. Unless there’s a strong opposing voice, then that message will prevail.

This will spill over into controlling politics also. Look at what the miners and big business did to Rudd and his super tax on mining. With the removal of the counter voice coming from Fairfax, politicians had better not cross Rinehart and co, or the same will happen to them. The implications of this are severe and widespread.

Jim Jones 10:52 am 20 Jun 12

EvanJames said :

Small internet sites are not enough. The larger media organisations shape the national view, they have the loud voice that is heard widely. If News Ltd and Fairfax both fall, we don’t have a huge amount left.

Sorry, but I disagree with pretty much everything there:

– They’re not all ‘small’ internet sites – there are some massive online news presences, from the Guardian on the left to Fox on the right, and an uncountable mass of sites in the middle. Some of them are terrible (95% of everything is terrible). But there are also some real gems. The days of reading one newspaper are pretty much gone. The new way of consuming ‘print’ media is a process of looking at numerous sources.

– “Larger media organisations shape the national view”. Why is this desirable? I don’t find it desirable at all. I also don’t think it’s as true as people like to believe. The Australian is rabidly right-wing, but is read mostly by University educated lefties (those who the paper purports to despise). Similarly, I find it hard to believe that anyone takes the tabloid rags that seriously anymore either – recent stats show that trust in tabloid media is at an all-time low (and they’ve brought it on themselves).

– “If News Ltd and Fairfax both fall, we don’t have a huge amount left.” Print media circulation is in free fall because new technology and the general sh1tness of print media means that it’s simply not an attractive proposition for readers. Advertisers are leaving in droves because the audience is already elsewhere. If News Ltd and Fairfax fall, it’s not for a lack of alternative sources of media.

For me, the big question is going to be how the serious, in-depth investigative journalism (which has been on the decline in print-media for decades anyway) is going to be conducted and funded. The Australian (bless their cotton socks) used to do a lot of this. Now it’s more likely to be crowdsourced and crowdfunded, or come from independent media organisations like Huffington Post, etc. Which is all fine and well, except for the lack of credible local examples (perhaps with the exception of Crikey).

EvanJames 10:34 am 20 Jun 12

In fact, GetUp on their campaign page have some footage of Monckton saying his piece, if anyone wants to see what’s led to all this (and where it’s going):
https://www.getup.org.au/campaigns/mining/monckton/

As for relying on the ABC, what if a new government decides to reduce their funding further, and change the composition of the ABC board? The ABC is not safe, or sacrosanct. If we lose Fairfax, what do we really have left?

Small internet sites are not enough. The larger media organisations shape the national view, they have the loud voice that is heard widely. If News Ltd and Fairfax both fall, we don’t have a huge amount left.

    johnboy 10:39 am 20 Jun 12

    If the owner is not exercising a strong editorial view the advertisers quickly are (and you’ll note Governments dominate the print advertising landscape).

    Admittedly I’m biased, but a plethora of bolshy media owners is the best way forward.

    You should get out and support them (with money) if you want diversity and quality.

EvanJames 10:28 am 20 Jun 12

Fairfax has been a poor share risk for some years, unfortunately. Rinehart’s buying up vast numbers of the shares are not about the health of the company, she’s following the playbook outlined to her and a number of her mining colleagues by one Lord Monckton, the guy with the bulgy eyes, who visited last year and lectured them on how to make the country more agreeable to their activities: buy up media, and use the media to project a positive message about mining.

It was quite well-reported at the time. Here’s an article by Robert Manne but there’s heaps of others, in a variety of media outlets.
http://www.themonthly.com.au/blog-lord-monckton-and-future-australian-media-robert-manne-4575

Here’s another, in the SMH:
http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/politics/mining-in-a-new-vein-20120201-1qtcd.html

and GetUp ran an awareness campaign at the time, to get the message out there.

Monckton felt that the lack of a Fox News equivalent in Australia was a problem. So Gina’s going to try and fix that.

Jim Jones 10:26 am 20 Jun 12

johnboy said :

Jim Jones said :

Mysteryman said :

You do have choices in what you read, see, and watch.

You can read the newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch, or the ones owned by Gina Rinehart.

Or you can support something different.

Heck if every fairfax reader put a couple of hundred into fairfax shares and voted en bloc they could blow even Gina’s deep pockets out of the water.

Do they care enough?

Meh … newspapers are long-dead anyway (thank great-Odin’s-beard). They’ve all been fiddling their subscription figures (and giving away bucketloads of papers) for years in order to try to prop up a dissolving business model, but now it’s all coming crashing down.

Rupert’s kept The Australian going at a loss for many years solely so he can maintain some political influence, and Gina’s looking to go the same way (after also getting involved in TV as well).

Given that these are the sorts of players that are involved in the media game (and it hasn’t changed greatly since the Randolph Hearst experiences in the US, or even the highly partisan pamphleteers of early Modern Britain), the shift to decentralised media consumption is a much needed panacea.

The big question is how will serious investigative journalism be conducted and funded in the future.

johnboy 10:17 am 20 Jun 12

Jim Jones said :

Mysteryman said :

You do have choices in what you read, see, and watch.

You can read the newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch, or the ones owned by Gina Rinehart.

Or you can support something different.

Heck if every fairfax reader put a couple of hundred into fairfax shares and voted en bloc they could blow even Gina’s deep pockets out of the water.

Do they care enough?

Comic_and_Gamer_Nerd 10:09 am 20 Jun 12

Jim Jones said :

Roundhead89 said :

Wow! Quoting Wikipedia, definitely a reliable source (not!). Last week it was confirmed that The Bolt Report was now beating Insiders on the first-run Sunday morning showing. The Bolt Report has consistently beaten Insiders in the cume ratings (all showings combined) since it began.

HA – I just figured out where you’re getting your figures from … the Andrew Bolt blog. BWAA AHA HAHA HAHAHAHAHA

He’s fiddling the figures so that he can look more popular than he actually is (cume ratings … a Bolt invention – much akin to his *cough* climate change stats), and you’re quoting him.

BWWWWWAAAAAAAAAHA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

lol

Thumper 10:04 am 20 Jun 12

johnboy said :

Editor-in-Chief Bolt soon enough one suspects.

But if that’s how she wants to spend her money so be it.

Readers, in turn, are free to make their own decisions about their media consumption.

Pretty much my view as well.

And makes no difference to me as I don’t read the Australian or Herald Sun and generally rely on the SMH or ABC for my news.

Jim Jones 9:54 am 20 Jun 12

Mysteryman said :

You do have choices in what you read, see, and watch.

You can read the newspapers owned by Rupert Murdoch, or the ones owned by Gina Rinehart.

EvanJames 9:54 am 20 Jun 12

SnapperJack said :

Sadly, this type of immaturity is common among leftists when it comes to discussing opinion leaders who do not subscribe to the fairly warped green/left view of the world.

Opinion-leaders? That’s a nice term for it. Demagogue is another. A few hundred years ago he’d have been leading the mobs hunting out witches.

Throwing around labels at people who have no clue about, calling them “leftists” with a “warped” view of the world just makes you sound like a person who knows they haven’t got a strong argument.

Mysteryman 9:42 am 20 Jun 12

Jim Jones said :

poetix said :

dungfungus said :

I must have missed Mrs Rineharts “regurgitations” to date so would you mind quoting a couple for me?
….

http://theworstofperth.com/2012/02/13/la-gina/

Just in case you missed it. Poetry on the rocks.

OMFG do not click on that link … I can never unsee that, it’s like being violated. It’s even worse than all that whiney high-school poetry written by the angsty girls I used to try to sleep with.

It can’t be worse than reading your ever-so-valuable contributions to RA.

c_c said :

Who cares about Rhinehart, news organisations always have vested interests, various influences, and even if a journalist or editor isn’t trying to be bias, they none the less on some level write from their viewpoint. Nothing is neutral, the only way you can be informed is by seeking diverse sources of information.

johnboy said :

Editor-in-Chief Bolt soon enough one suspects.

But if that’s how she wants to spend her money so be it.

Readers, in turn, are free to make their own decisions about their media consumption.

+1 to both of these. I don’t see what the big deal is. It’s no different than anyone else buying into a company in order to have a say in the way it operates. If you don’t like what they produce, don’t consume it. You do have choices in what you read, see, and watch.

p1 9:34 am 20 Jun 12

Jim Jones said :

Still waiting to hear why wikipedia is a gigantic left-wing conspiracy and should be ignored.

That is obvious, Wikipedia relies on “science” and “facts”, both leftist, warmest conspiracies.

p1 9:30 am 20 Jun 12

SnapperJack said :

….. blah blah blah Andrew Bolt blah blah blah….

I think I express an opinion held by many people when I say the reason people dismiss Bolt is because he is a nut job on the far right of the media and deserves nothing else. I dismiss him casually in the same way I dismiss what comes from the far left (like people who dig up ‘roo graves, or vegans).

Actually, for a long time I thought his show was a satirical comedy performance lampooning the likes of Alan Jones.

Jim Jones 9:22 am 20 Jun 12

Also – love the fact that you’re citing ‘australian conservative’ and the herald sun (giggle) in support of your *cough* argument.

That wikipedia article does have references to all stats. Still waiting to hear why wikipedia is a gigantic left-wing conspiracy and should be ignored.

CBR Tweets

Sign up to our newsletter

Top
Copyright © 2019 Region Group Pty Ltd. All rights reserved.
the-riotact.com | aboutregional.com.au | b2bmagazine.com.au | thisiscanberra.com

Search across the site