On 4 June 2019 federal police raided home of Newscorp journalist over story detailing an alleged government proposal to spy on Australians

It seems that someone in the Morrison Government may have laid a complaint........

Braidwood Times, 4 June 2019:

Federal police have raided the home of a journalist over a 2018 story detailing an alleged government proposal to spy on Australians.

Australian Federal Police officers produced a warrant to search the home, computer and mobile phone of Canberra-based News Corp Australia journalist Annika Smethurst, The Daily Telegraph reports.

The story in question had included images of letters between the heads of the Home Affairs and Defence departments, discussing potential new powers for the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD).

The powers would have allowed the ASD's cyber sleuths to monitor Australian citizens and businesses on home soil, rather than being limited to gathering intelligence on foreigners, the story said.

The AFP said the raid is in relation to "alleged unauthorised disclosure of national security information" and that no arrests are expected on Tuesday.

"Police will allege the unauthorised disclosure of these specific documents undermines Australia's national security," the agency said in a statement…...

BACKGROUND

Sunday Tasmanian, 6 May 2018, p.13:

The Federal Government has “war-gamed” scenarios where our cyber spy agency needed to be given the power to investigate Australian citizens.

Last week the Sunday Tasmanian revealed a secret plan to increase the Australian Signals Directorate’s powers to allow them to spy on Aussies.

Department bosses claimed there was “no proposal to ­increase the ASD’s powers to collect intelligence on Australians”. But letters between Home Affairs secretary Mike Pezzullo and Defence Secretary Greg Moriarty reveal the departments of Home ­Affairs and Defence allocated staff to war game a raft of scenarios where the ASD would need to spy on Australians.

The list of scenarios were compiled in two attachments and sent to the heads of both departments under the headline “scenarios proposed by Home Affairs”.

The document explains how ASD could be used to ­disrupt “onshore and offshore online threats” such as “disrupting child exploitation networks and terrorist networks” and “illicit drug importation, money laundering and serious crimes”.

Last week’s Sunday Tasmanian exclusive has prompted calls for MPs to have greater oversight of Australia’s intelligence agencies…..

Sunday Telegraph, 29 April 2018, p.5:

Australia’s intelligence watchdog has warned the Australian Signals Directorate against any moves that would change the agency’s focus “to people and organisations ­inside Australia” instead of focusing on activities overseas.

The veiled warning came in March during a review into new laws which established the ASD as a statutory body.

In her submission, Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security (IGIS) Margaret Stone, a former Federal Court judge, said under the current laws ASD is not permitted to access digital information ­located inside Australia.

“Accessing data located inside Australia is properly an action that requires an ASIO or police warrant,” she said in her submission.

“Nothing in the Intelligence Services Act would allow ASD to access restricted data on a computer physically located inside Australia — even where doing so would assist in gathering intelligence or disrupting crime,” she said…..

Sunday Telegraph, 29 April 2018, p.4:

Two powerful government agencies are discussing radical new espionage powers that would see Australia’s cyber spy agency monitor Australian citizens for the first time.

Under the plan, emails, bank records and text messages of Australians could be secretly accessed by digital spies without a trace, provided the Defence and Home Affairs ministers approved.

The power grab is detailed in top secret letters between the heads of the Department of Home Affairs and Defence, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, which outline proposed new powers for Australia’s electronic spy agency — the Australian Signals Directorate (ASD).

The Sunday Telegraph can reveal the Secretary of the Department of Home Affairs Mike Pezzullo first wrote to the Defence Secretary Greg Moriarty in February outlining the plan to potentially allow government hackers to “proactively disrupt and covertly remove” onshore cyber threats by “hacking into critical infrastructure”.

Under current laws the ASD — whose mission statement is “Reveal Their Secrets — Protect Our Own” — must not conduct an activity to produce intelligence on an Australian.

Instead, the Australian Federal Police and domestic spy agency ASIO have the power to investigate Australians with a warrant and can ask ASD for technical advice if they don’t have the capabilities they need.

The Attorney-General is responsible for issuing ASIO warrants, but the agency’s operations will fall under the umbrella of Home Affairs.

Under the proposal, seen by The Sunday Telegraph, Home Affairs Minister Peter Dutton and Defence Minister Marise Payne would tick off on orders allowing cyber spooks to target onshore threats without the country’s top law officer knowing.

Last month the proposal was ­compiled in a top secret ministerial submission signed by ASD boss Mike Burgess. The proposal outlines scenarios where Canberra-based cyber spies would use offensive tactics to “counter or disrupt cyber-enabled criminals both onshore and offshore”.

“The Department of Home Affairs advises that it is briefing the Minister for Home Affairs to write to you (Ms Payne) seeking your support for a further tranche of legislative reform to enable ASD to better support a range of Home Affairs priorities.” 

But The Sunday Telegraph understands Mr Dutton has not written to Minister Payne and no formal proposal for leglslative amendments have been presented to Government.

“The Australian Signals Directorate has not prepared ministerial advice seeking permissions to allow ASD to counter or disrupt cyber-enabled criminals onshore,” a spokesman for Ms Payne said.

An intelligence source said such ­reforms would allow cyber spies to ­secretly access digital information on Australians without detection, including financial transactions, health data and phone records.

“It would give the most powerful cyber spies the power to turn on its own citizens,” the source said.

The letter also details a proposal for coercive “step-in” powers, meaning the intelligence agency could force government agencies and ­private businesses to “comply with security measures”.

The intelligence source said ASD could be able to compel companies and government agencies to hand over data or security information…… [my yellow highlighting]

The Guardian, 25 January 2018:

Proposed changes to Australia’s national security laws that could see journalists and whistleblowers jailed for up to 20 years will “criminalise” reporting and undermine the media’s ability to act in the public interest, the nation’s major news outlets have warned. 

In a joint submission, 14 major media outlets including the ABC, Fairfax Media and News Corp said sweeping changes to national security laws proposed by the federal government would place journalists at “significant risk of jail time” for doing their jobs.

The reforms, tabled just hours after marriage equality became law in December, would increase tenfold the maximum penalty for anyone who communicates or “deals with” information which could potentially “cause harm to Australia’s interests,” where that information is obtained via a government official without authorisation.

Has U.S. citizen and media mogul Rupert Murdoch overplayed his hand in this Australian federal election cycle?

“It sounds unreal to say that News Corp is not a media organisation. It sounds outré to say that it is instead a political propaganda entity of a kind perhaps not seen since the 19th century, one that has climbed to its pedestal through regulatory capture, governmental favours and menace, and is now applying its energies to the promotion of white nationalism, even as white nationalists commit scores of murders.”  [Journalist Richard Cooke wiring in The Monthly, May 2019], 

It is your judgement that counts because the right and responsibility to elect the next Australian Government rests with you, the Australian voter, not with an elderly authoritarian U.S. billionaire who rarely visits this country.

Australian society is not as tolerant of Murdoch's sense of entitlement as it once may have been......

Who are you really voting for? #auspol #Elections2019 pic.twitter.com/Swe5ple9v9

— 💧🐟 Lotta Cheek (@lottacheek) May 11, 2019

March 2018 to March 2019 year-to-year data shows News Corp's principal mastheads are losing readership over the 7 day circulation period, according to Roy Morgan.

By its own admission News Corp has been lobbying local government to keep its community papers afloat in South Australia.

This move by Murdoch’s News Corp has Scott Morrison’s political paw prints all over it

Standing in the shadows pulling the strings of those willing to make spurious or defamatory claims about a political opponent worked so well for the interim Prime Minister and Liberal MP for Cook Scott Morrison in the past that he appears to be doing it again.

Last time the efforts of his political puppets cost News Corp tens of thousands of dollars in legal costs and like last time The Daily Telegraph is the Liberals vehicle of choice.

The smear campaign revealed……..

The Saturday Paper, 11 May 2019, excerpt:

Midweek, Murdoch’s Sydney tabloid The Daily Telegraph went for broke. On page one, it ran a story under the headline “Mother of invention”, and set out to destroy what it said was hailed as Shorten’s “election-winning moment”. It accused him of omitting the fact his mother went on to enjoy an illustrious career as a barrister. The paper said he had failed to disclose that his mother graduated law later in life “and [practised] at the bar for six years”. It said the Labor chief had only told half the family story. If that were the case, however, he left out the half that gives even more potency to his mother’s legacy.

One senior Liberal wondered who was the genius on their side who thought it a good idea to prompt the Telegraph’s ill-considered and cockamamie attack. Gallery journalists confirm the “Libs were shopping the story around on Tuesday”. 

Melbourne’s Herald Sun, unlike its Brisbane stablemate, The Courier-Mail, refused to take it. Scott Morrison played the innocent bystander. He told reporters it was a “very upsetting story” and he can understand that Shorten would have been “very hurt by it”. That was an understatement. The opposition leader was furious.

For 10 minutes during a half-hour press conference on Wednesday, Shorten spoke of his mother’s achievements. Fighting back tears, he told of a woman in her 50s with grey hair, who, even though she topped her law school, could not get a law firm to take her on for articles. When she eventually got to the bar, she struggled for briefs – “she got about nine briefs in her time”. Far from fulfilling her dream, as the Murdoch hatchet job claimed, she went back to education. The partisan attack on the Labor leader opened the way for him to hit back at one of the Liberals’ biggest vulnerabilities: their failure to promote more women through their parliamentary ranks. Their most high-profile and credible woman, Julie Bishop, has quit. She won’t be at the party’s Mother’s Day launch on Sunday to support Morrison, the man who blocked her run for the leadership. Shorten says the experience of his mother – “the smartest woman I’ve ever known” – is why he believes in the equal treatment of women.

News Corp sources say the Tele has another story on their news file to throw at Shorten. It is highly defamatory and legally dubious. The desperation that led to the attack on Shorten and his mother’s memory may give them pause to think about running it. As one Labor campaign worker says, “It’s difficult to know where the government ends and News Corp begins.” [my yellow highlighting]

Phase Two of the smear campaign.......

A scurrilous, below-the-radar whispering campaign has broken through onto social media.

News Corp cries poor - wants local government funding

The comment of tweeter @Greg_MarineLab says it all:

"How very NewsCorp! Begging for a taxpayer handout while never paying any tax & subverting democracy...."

News Corp unsuccessfully lobbied a number of South Australian councils and, like the City of Tea Tree, Campbelltown, Playford and Salisbury councils didn't want to prop the Murdochs up when in all probability it would mean raising rates.

InDaily, 3 May 2019:

InDaily has confirmed with several sources a senior delegation of News Corp executives, including South Australian executive general manager Ish Davies and Messenger Newspapers editor-in-chief Nadja Fleet, approached four north-eastern councils in March requesting significant investment – totalling at least $1.6 million over two years – to keep the print run of the local North Eastern Weekly afloat.

It has only taken the Murdoch's 32 years to run this once independent group of community newspapers into the ground.

Bypass the Murdoch press and read Labor's policy costings for yourself

Going on the behaviour of Murdoch's News Corp mastheads during the 2019 federal election campaign to date, by 6am the headlines will be misleading at best.

Scott Morrison & Co have already begun their scare campaign in response to the policy costings Labor released yesterday.

Therefore I invite readers to bypass political posturing by both the Coalition and a large section of the media and look at the policy document for yourselves.

It is your judgement that counts because the responsibility to elect the next Australian Government rests with you, not with an elderly U.S. billionaire who rarely visits this country.

2019 Labor Fiscal Plan by clarencegirl on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/409452342/2019-Labor-Fiscal-Plan

Scott Morrison and News Corp need fact checking - again!

The Australian Labor Party released its dividend imputation policy in 2018 and began to come under sustained political attack by the Morrison Government and News Corp with claims that there was a $10 billion dollar hole in Labor’s costing of its policy.

On 18 June 2018 the Parliamentary Budget Office issued a media release:

Imputation credits policy costing

Earlier today, comments have been made about the Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) estimates of the gains to revenue that may flow from the Australian Labor Party’s (ALP’s) policy to make imputation credits non-refundable.

“The PBO brings our best professional judgement to the independent policy costing advice we provide.  We have access to the same data and economic parameters as The Treasury and draw upon similar information in forming our judgements,” Parliamentary Budget Officer Jenny Wilkinson stated today.

“We stand behind the PBO estimates that have been published by the ALP in relation to this policy, noting that all policy costings, no matter who they are prepared by, are subject to uncertainty.”  In its advice, the PBO is explicit about the judgements and uncertainties associated with individual policy costings.

The PBO confirms that it always takes into account current and future policy commitments, as well as behavioural changes, in its policy costings.  In this case, as outlined at the recent Senate Estimates hearings, these included the superannuation changes announced in the 2016–17 Budget and the scheduled company tax cuts.  In addition, the PBO explicitly assumed that there would be significant behavioural changes that would flow from this policy, particularly for trustees of self-managed superannuation funds. 

The PBO was established as an independent institution in 2012 with broad support from the Parliament.  A key rationale for the formation of the PBO was to develop a more level playing field, by providing independent and unbiased advice to all parliamentarians about the estimated fiscal cost of policy proposals.  The purpose of establishing the PBO was to improve the public’s understanding of, and confidence in, policy costings and enable policy debates to focus on the merits of alternative policy proposals. 

Ten months later on 25 April 2019 News Corp’s The Daily Examiner ran an article on page 8 concerning Labor’s dividend imputation policy which stated:

The independent Parliamentary Budget Office has estimated Labor’s plan would save $7 billion less over a decade than the party expects and that it would affect 840,000 individuals, 210,000 self-managed super funds (SMSFs) plus some bigger funds.

Now the Parliamentary Budget Office publishes the requests for information it receives, including requests for policy implications and costings, however there appears to be no new request for information and costings on Labor’s dividend imputation policy on its website.

Morrison & Co have been caught out misrepresenting the source of their costings before and even flat out lying on occasion, so one has to suspect the veracity of their latest attack on this particular policy.

It's just as likely costings and other figures were done on the back of an envelope by Morrison or Frydenberg.

News Corp mastheads back Big Coal during 2019 federal election campaign

These were News Corp mastheads on 18 April 2019.

Images found @JennaCairney1 on Twitter

Apparently we voters don’t understand the role mining has in our country and Murdoch journalists are eager to pressure politicians on the subject of mining jobs and taxation revenue which they fear are on the line because these same politicians might “go weak-kneed at the sight of Stop Adani hashtags, earrings or stage invasions” [Townsville Bulletin, 18 April 2019, p.2].

I on the other hand think rural and regional areas know the mining industry rather well when it comes to jobs and taxes.

According to the Australian Government Labour Market Information Portal as of February 2019 the Mining Industry in this country“employs approximately 251,700 persons (ABS trend data), which accounts for 2.0 per cent of the total workforce. Over the past five years, employment in the industry has decreased by 5.4 per cent”.

Employment growth in the industry in the five years to February 2019 was in fact minus 14,400 employees.

Projected employment growth in the five years to May 2023 is predicted to be 2.4 per cent.

Not all mining industry employment is new jobs created by a mining venture either. The Australia Institute points to the fact that economic modelling done by Waratah Coal in 2011 found that a single Qld mine would displace 3,000 jobs in other industries and crowd out $1.2 billion in manufacturing activity.

Australian Tax Office (ATO) data for 2013-14 to 2015-16 show that almost 60 percent of corporations in the energy and resources sector paid zero tax in that period.

This percentage appears to be something of an industry norm as in 2007-08 ATO data indicated there were 4,290 mining companies operating in Australia and 68.3pc of all these companies paid no tax.

It is worth noting that in 2007 the Business Council of Australia (BCA) calculated corporate tax (as a percentage of profit) at 20pc for the mining industry.

Interestingly, BCA also stated “taxes collected are negative for the mining industry group because as major exporters survey participants reported a significant GST refund which more than offset other taxes collected”.

In 2016-17 BHP Billiton Aluminium Australia Pty Ltd with a total income $1.81 billion for that year paid no tax. Neither did Whitehaven Coal Limited with a total income of $2.39 billion, Claremont Coal Mines Ltd with a total income of $1.01 billion and Ulan Coal Mines Limited with a total income of $1.03 billion - to name just a few examples for that financial year. 

So there we have it.

An Australia-wide industry sector which in February 2019 employed less people than sectors such as Health & Social Assistance (est.1,702,700 persons), Retail (est.1,284,700 persons), Education & Training (est,1,032,400 persons) and Manufacturing (est. 872,500 persons) and, has a future growth projection which makes it unlikely to return even 2015 employment levels.

A sector which also regularly takes tax minimisation to an extreme.

Yet for some reason voters are supposed to ignore the ramifications of continuing to allow open slather to fossil fuel mining corporations as climate change impacts begin to bite.

The mining industry has pulled this sort of stunt before when it fought the proposed Resource Super Profits Tax which would have applied to mining companies involved in the extraction of non-renewable resources. It talked up inflated figures for mining employment and tax revenue and quoted the same in industry media releases.

The stakes for present and future generations were not quite as high nor as urgent then as they are now and it’s time the rapacious mining industry is firmly put in its place by concerned voters on 18 May 2019 – right at the back of the queue along with those political parties and candidates who blindly support Big Coal and Big Oil.

Australia can't afford politicians of that ilk anymore.

"USING 150 INTERVIEWS ON THREE CONTINENTS, THE [NEW YORK] TIMES DESCRIBES THE MURDOCH FAMILY’S ROLE IN DESTABILIZING DEMOCRACY IN NORTH AMERICA, EUROPE AND AUSTRALIA"

With Murdoch’s News Corp mastheads dominating the local newspaper landscape in the NSW Northern Rivers region this should interest readers…….

The New York Times, 3 April 2019:

Rupert Murdoch, the founder of a global media empire that includes Fox News, has said he “never asked a prime minister for anything.”

But that empire has given him influence over world affairs in a way few private citizens ever have, granting the Murdoch family enormous sway over not just the United States, but English-speaking countries around the world.

A six-month investigation by The New York Times covering three continents and including more than 150 interviews has described how Mr. Murdoch and his feuding sons turned their media outlets into right-wing political influence machines that have destabilized democracy in North America, Europe and Australia.

Here are some key takeaways from The Times’s investigation into the Murdoch family and its role in the illiberal, right-wing political wave sweeping the globe.

THE MURDOCH FAMILY SITS AT THE CENTER OF GLOBAL UPHEAVAL.

Fox News has long exerted a gravitational pull on the Republican Party in the United States, where it most recently amplified the nativist revolt that has fueled the rise of the far right and the election of President Trump.

Mr. Murdoch’s newspaper The Sun spent years demonizing the European Union to its readers in Britain, where it helped lead the Brexit campaign that persuaded a slim majority of voters in a 2016 referendum to endorse pulling out of the bloc. Political havoc has reigned in Britain ever since.

[Read the complete investigation into the Murdoch family.]

And in Australia, where his hold over the media is most extensive, Mr. Murdoch’s outlets pushed for the repeal of the country’s carbon tax and helped topple a series of prime ministers whose agenda he disliked, including Malcolm Turnbull last year.

At the center of this upheaval sits the Murdoch family, a clan whose dysfunction has both shaped and mirrored the global tumult of recent years.

The Times explored those family dynamics and their impact on the Murdoch empire, which is on the cusp of succession as its 88-year-old patriarch prepares to hand power to the son whose politics most resemble his own: Lachlan Murdoch.

A key step in that succession has paradoxically been the partial dismemberment of the empire, which significantly shrunk last month when Mr. Murdoch sold one of his companies, the film studio 21st Century Fox, to the Walt Disney Company for $71.3 billion.

The deal turned Mr. Murdoch’s children into billionaires and left Lachlan in control of a powerful political weapon: a streamlined company, the Fox Corporation, whose most potent asset is Fox News…..

The Murdoch empire has also boldly flexed its muscles in Australia, which was for many years Lachlan’s domain.

In Australia, Lachlan expressed disdain for efforts to fight climate change and once rebuked the staff at one of his family’s newspapers, The Australian, for an editorial in support of same-sex marriage (He says through a representative that he is in favor of same-sex marriage). He also became close to the politician Tony Abbott, whose 2013 election as prime minister was given an assist by Murdoch newspapers.

The Murdoch family changed Australian politics in 2016 when it took control of Sky News Australia and imported the Fox News model. They quickly introduced a slate of right-wing opinion shows that often focused on race, immigration and climate change. The programming became known as Sky After Dark.

Last year, Mr. Turnbull and his staff accused Rupert and Lachlan Murdoch of using their media outlets to help foment the intraparty coup that thrust him from office in August. Mr. Turnbull, a moderate and longtime nemesis of his friend Mr. Abbott, was replaced by the right-wing nationalist Scott Morrison.

The Murdochs have denied any role in Mr. Turnbull’s downfall.....

The night after his arrival, Lachlan invited a small group of Sky employees and managers to his $16 million mansion in Sydney for drinks. With its new prime-time lineup of hard-right opinion hosts, Sky had become a force in Australian politics. Its audience was still small by American standards, but it was the network of choice in the capital, Canberra, and it was finalizing a deal to expand its reach into the Australian Outback — demographically speaking, the equivalent of Trump country.

It was a mirror of Fox News, with its fixation on race, identity and climate-change denial. Night after night, Sky’s hosts and their guests stirred anger over the perceived liberal bias of the media, “suicidal self-hatred” of Western civilization and the Australian equivalent of the Central American “caravans” that were dividing the United States: asylum seekers coming to the country by boat from Indonesia and Malaysia, many of them Muslim. Days before Lachlan’s arrival, a national neo-Nazi leader, Blair Cottrell — who had recently been fined for “inciting contempt for Muslims” — appeared on one of the network’s shows. Cottrell had been interviewed on Australian TV before, but his deferential treatment by Sky caused a national outcry. Under gentle questioning, he called on his countrymen to “reclaim our traditional identity as Australians” and advocated limiting immigration to those “who are not too culturally dissimilar from us,” such as white South African farmers. (Sky apologized and suspended the program.)

Inside Lachlan’s living room, the talk turned to national politics. “Do you think Malcolm is going to survive?” Lachlan asked his staff. Malcolm was Malcolm Turnbull, the relatively moderate Australian prime minister who took office a few years earlier. Inside the government, a small right-wing uprising had been brewing over his plans to bring Australia into compliance with the Paris climate accord. It is well established among those who have worked for the Murdochs that the family rarely, if ever, issues specific directives. They convey their desires indirectly, maybe with a tweet — as Murdoch did in the spring of 2016 when he decided to back Trump — or a question, the subtleties of which are rarely lost on their like-minded news executives.

In the days that followed, Sky Australia’s hosts and the Murdoch papers — the newspaper editors had their own drinks session at Lachlan’s mansion — set about trying to throw Turnbull out of office. Alan Jones, a Sky host and conservative radio star, called for a party “rebellion” against him on his program. Days later, the Murdochs’ major paper in Sydney, The Daily Telegraph, broke the news that a leadership challenge was in the works. Cheering on the challenge, Andrew Bolt, the Murdoch columnist who was once convicted of violating the country’s Racial Discrimination Act, told his Sky viewers that Turnbull’s “credibility is shot, his authority is gone.” Peta Credlin, the commentator who was Tony Abbott’s former chief of staff, chewed out a member of Parliament for the chaos inside Turnbull’s administration. The Australian, the Murdochs’ national newspaper, was soon declaring Turnbull a “dead man walking.”......

It was always difficult to separate the personal from the financial and the ideological with the Murdochs. All appeared to be in evidence in their decision to turn against Turnbull. To begin with, he took office a few years earlier by ousting Lachlan’s friend Tony Abbott, and it was Abbott who helped lead the Turnbull uprising. Turnbull’s policies were also not perfectly aligned with the Murdochs’ interests. For instance, he had expedited the construction of the country’s national broadband network, which directly threatened the family’s highly profitable cable business by giving Netflix a government-subsidized pipeline into Australian homes.

The small number of Australian media outlets that the Murdochs did not own portrayed Turnbull’s ouster as a Murdoch-led “coup.” Kevin Rudd, a former prime minister whom the family had helped push out of office years earlier, described Murdoch in an op-ed in The Sydney Morning Herald as “the greatest cancer on the Australian democracy.”

Turnbull was replaced by the right-wing nationalist Scott Morrison, who quickly aligned himself with Trump. The two met in person for the first time in late 2018 at the G-20 summit meeting in Buenos Aires. “I think it’s going to be a great relationship,” Trump said afterward. With a national election scheduled for May 2019, Morrison quickly staked his party’s prospects on the polarizing issue of immigration, promising a new hard-line approach. It dovetailed with Sky’s regular prime-time programming. Andrew Bolt, who previously warned of a “foreign invasion,” said in one segment, “We also risk importing ethnic and religious strife, even terrorism,” as the screen flashed an image of Australia’s potential future: rows of Muslims on a city street, bowing toward Mecca. When the opposing Labor Party managed to muscle through legislation that would allow doctors to transfer severely sick migrants in detention centers on the Australian islands of Nauru and Manus into hospitals on the mainland, Sky Australia’s prime-time hosts went on the offensive.

Read the full article here.

The absurd level to which the faux federal election campaign sinks

An overexcited and breathlessly earnest attempt to assert inherent bias on the part of the public broadcaster against the right wing of politics in the lead up to the federal election.....

And here again @chriskkenny and @australian: The word used was “conservators”, in a light-hearted chat about a murder mystery book set in an art museum. pic.twitter.com/XlHyxvyE7j

— ABC Communications (@ABCMediaComms) April 1, 2019

The Bolt name considered toxic by Sky News?

Ad News, 28 February 2019:

Sky News has confirmed to AdNews that it intentionally made the decision to drop ads from The Bolt Report in order to protect advertisers from any potential backlash.

Yesterday, The Sleeping Giants found that Tuesday night’s The Bolt Report aired with no paid ads as the host, political and social commentator Andrew Bolt, angered Australians with his defence of Cardinal George Pell.

This week Pell was found guilty by a jury for molesting choirboys as an archbishop in the 1990s.

In an opinion piece following the verdict, Bolt said Pell had been "falsely convicted" and in a preview for his Sky News show he said he ‘doesn't accept' the verdict.

Now, Sky News has confirmed to AdNews that it actively made the decision not to run ads, rather than giving advertisers the option to first to pull out, in order to prevent advertisers from being the target of public campaigning.

“Sky News is committed to providing a platform for robust debate and discussion, and is not afraid to tackle confronting and controversial issues,” a Sky News spokesperson said.

“Sky News recognised that the controversial topic of George Pell’s conviction to be covered by one of its highest rating commentators may have presented an environment that left advertisers open to campaigns by activists.

“A proactive decision was made to replace advertisements during last night’s program.”

Despite the measures Sky News took, companies have still been facing protests after The Sleeping Giants posted a list of advertisers on Sky News for the week ending 26/02/19.

So far, brands including Nib, Samsung, Procter & Gamble, Coles, McDonald’s and CommBank have had Twitter users urge them to stop advertising on Sky News.....

@TheRock man, I love everything you do and can not wait to see fighting with my family, but I thought you should know your film is being advertised on a. Show where they are defending a convicted child rapist. Put a stop to this!

— addyourname (@jshawtaylor) February 27, 2019

Dear @Coles @CommBank
As a share holder in the company I’m somewhat dismayed that we choose to advertise on a program which provides a platform for child abuse apologists like Andrew Bolt. His attack on the veracity of the victim is reprehensible. @slpng_giants_oz

— Natasha yann (@natasha_yann) February 27, 2019

Moving our health insurance from @nibhealthfunds because they advertise on @theboltreport defending #Pell #auspol @slpng_giants_oz pic.twitter.com/gRk70rvdVn

— Fr Rod Bower (@FrBower) February 27, 2019

Read more at http://www.adnews.com.au/news/proactive-sky-confirms-it-intentionally-axed-bolt-show-ads-to-protect-brands#vvkrMxS4P23IaG2z.99

Why is the Australian Government subsidising a News Corp television program?

On 21 December 2018 the Australian Communications and Media Authority announced:

The ACMA has awarded up to $3.6 million in grants to regional and small publishers under the first round of the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund.

Round one of the Innovation Fund will support 29 projects by 25 successful applicants nationwide, with a mix of regional and metropolitan proposals funded. 

Grants will support innovation and digitalisation across a wide range of activities, including market research, trials of new business models, podcasts, and video capability.

A list of successful applicants and their projects is here.

However, there is another grant stream which sees News Corp’s Sky News Channel - part of multinational media empire  - receive money to cover 15 per cent of a particular Sunday program’s production costs.

BuzzFeed, 25 January 2019:

The show is partly funded through a Commonwealth government grant awarded to Mundine's business Nyungga Black Group, through a closed non-competitive selection process, according to the grant information published online.

The grant, running from June 18, 2018 to Aug. 1 this year is for a total of $220,000. The Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet confirmed to BuzzFeed News that the grant was for Mundine's Sky News show.

News Corp’s 2018 annual report states of the corporation’s news channel:

Australian News Channel

ANC operates 10 channels featuring the latest in news, politics, sports, entertainment, public affairs, business and weather. ANC is licensed by Sky International AG to use Sky trademarks and domain names in connection with its operation and distribution of channels and services. ANC’s channels consist of Sky News Live, Sky News Business, Fox Sports News, Sky News Weather, Sky News UK, Sky News Extra, Sky News Extra 1, Sky News Extra 2, Sky News Extra 3 and Sky News New Zealand. ANC channels are distributed throughout Australia and New Zealand and available on Foxtel and Sky Network Television NZ. ANC also owns and operates the international Australia Channel IPTV service and offers content across a variety of digital media platforms, including mobile, podcasts and social media websites. In addition, ANC has program supply arrangements with third parties such as WIN Corporation. ANC primarily generates revenue through monthly affiliate fees received from pay-TV providers based on the number of subscribers and advertising.

ANC competes primarily with other news providers in Australia and New Zealand via its subscription television channels, third party content arrangements and free domain website. Its Australia Channel IPTV service also competes against “over-the-top” IPTV subscription-based news providers in regions outside of Australia and New Zealand.

This is a corporation which admits to having assets of over $16 billion in June 2018 - $2 billion of which was held as cash or cash equivalents - and yet the Australian Government feels the need to subsidise its weekend programming?

This is the second time in less than two years that the Coalition Government has given News Corp money for programming. Then it was a funding package worth a cool $30 million.