JG Estiot is the President of TELNEM, a media-watch group based in Melbourne, Australia. His weekly column below is posted every Monday by 9pm and reflects on news coverage from the preceding week. Unless otherwise specified, his comments are based on the daily monitoring of ABC, Nine and Seven TV news in Victoria. JG is not a member of a political party, special interest group, sporting or professional association other than TELNEM.
Another Presley sighting Qantasty news It's feeding time for the hacks (Pauline Hanson) The Bolger case Peter Bartels: scapegoat extraordinaire Sports Trivia Media Watch Main Menu Return to Australian News of the Day
Next week, this column will answer a
selection of your questions on the TV news or the news media in
general. Please send your questions or feedback by next Saturday.
jgestiot@netspace.net.au
Another Presley sighting
The promotional visit of Priscilla
Presley to Australia exposes the naivety or possibly the complicity
of some of our news media.
The guidelines were made clear by her
minders: she would not answer questions about Elvis, her
daughter, Michael Jackson or her private life. Indeed,
she would talk about nothing but her range of make-up and her
new perfume. This made the TV news reports look like an
early commercial break.
One really wonders about the news worthiness
of a defacto-star posing with a bottle of perfume. This week alone,
Elle McPherson (new yacht racing venture), Duddley Moore
(concert tour), Michael Jackson (new video), Joan Collins
(new book) all used the TV news as fertile promotional ground.
What was rejected to make room for these disguised commercials?
Qantasty news
On the 28th of October 1996, a parcel
bomb arrived to New Zealand on a Qantas flight. It was mailed
in Kuala Lumpur and travelled to Auckland via Sydney. Two students
were injured after opening the package. Despite the bomb failing
to properly explode, both suffered burns and were hospitalised.
Interpol has started an investigation and Qantas is refusing to
comment on how the parcel got through security.
This seems to be a case of advertising
money censoring the news. If not, how else can the lack of
interest in the story be explained? The components of a top Nine
or Seven news story were present: plane, bomb, security breach,
explosion, injuries, Interpol. Yet, neither station saw the matter
as newsworthy. It must surely be in the public interest to find
out how bombs can be carried undetected through three countries.
Overall, there was a remarkable reluctance
in the Australian media to give any kind of exposure to the item.
The ABC had a short report on Thursday 31/10/96, three days after
the bomb was exploded. The National Nine News had a report on
Saturday November 2nd that had nothing to do with the NZ bomb
episode. It described how after a warning from Boeing on the potential
failure of the 737 rudder, Qantas had promptly reacted. It
portrayed Qantas as a prompt and responsible operator on safety
matters.
How much money passes from Qantas to
the Nine Network coffers every year? If Nine does run stories
on Qantas, planes, bombs, airport security, Interpol, accidents
and injuries, why are they not interested when all the above are
combined?
It's feeding time for the hacks
Our news hacks have been circling Pauline
Hanson all week. What started as a nibble a few weeks ago is now
frenzied feeding time.
This week, all news and current affairs
reports on Pauline Hanson were negative. At times, the way the
media dumped on her was embarrassing. Among other things, she
was linked to a neo-nazi group and accused of threatening contracts
with Asia. On Thursday alone, she was blamed for putting at risk
the Olympics, the Commonwealth Games and the tourism industry.
Let's not forget she is a member of
parliament, duly elected by her constituents. Her job is to speak
on behalf of the people who elected her. This is better known
as the democratic process. Without getting involved in a lengthy
argument, it is worth pointing out the important role played by
the media in this process. I assume here both the pros and cons
of Miss Hanson's views want fair media coverage for all issues.
Instead, over the Hanson episode, it seems the power of the news
media is used as a stick, much the same way the army is used in
a totalitarian state. The anti-Hanson journalistic "carpet-bombing"
is not motivated by the desire to encourage a productive public
debate. Quite clearly, the burning of the Hanson witch on the
media stakes is just another form of censorship.
The media should plead guilty to attempting
to gag Pauline Hanson. There has been no effort by the servants
of political correctness to give any kind of exposure to the facts
and figures over which Miss Hanson has based her views on immigration,
multiculturalism and Aboriginal Affairs funding. It seems obvious,
at least to me, that the refutation of her views, if any, should
be done by way of exposing policy flaws or inaccuracies in facts
or base data. Instead, the media has largely allowed character
assassination to replace this process. This is especially true
of newspapers who are usually so prompt in flooding us with facts,
graphs, surveys and tables.
Negative stereotyping is a weapon commonly
used against anyone raising questions on immigration and multiculturalism.
A few years ago, Professor Geoffrey Blainey was at the receiving
end. Today, it is Pauline Hanson. Representatives of minority
lobby groups have free access to the Australian media. Some sections
of the news media (I didn't say SBS) are closer to being an advocacy
group than an impartial news service. Journalism has become a
bureaucracy made of lack of resources, laziness and questionable
professional standards . The scribes who call themselves journalists
are office workers who swallow the propaganda which drips down
their fax machine. Investigative journalism no longer exists.
The number of news reports using another media report as its primary
source is alarming. Is this the media we had to have?
The immigration policies of the Asian
countries reportedly offended by Pauline Hanson are kept under
wrap. Applying current media standards, the immigration policies
of Indonesia, Malaysia, Japan and China would be considered racist.
These are facts far more relevant to the issue at hand than the
biased and ill-informed opinion of Kathy Freeman on Pauline Hanson.
For many years now, there appears to have been a consistent 75%
support for a review of immigration policies in Australia. Either
we put all these people on little boats and send them out to sea,
or we start talking. The role of the media in promoting a fair
debate is essential. So far, we have been short-changed.
My tip for the week is not on the Melbourne
Cup. I predict that next week, the anti-Hanson media coverage
will continue as strong as ever. You don't break bad habits overnight.
The Bolger case
The Deputy Victorian Coroner, Mr Iain
West brought forward an inquiry into the death of three-year old
Katy Bolger to quash media speculations. Sections of the media
had already drawn conclusions, even before the coronial inquiry
had started. The Herald Sun newspaper was attacked by the Coroner
for reporting in a grossly inaccurate and misleading manner. The
Seven Nighly News had led the charge on the TV news, unleashing
a sustained barrage of speculative nonsense. Finally, the wake-up
call put the house in order. Katy Bolger had not died of physical
abuse and the Child Protective Services were not responsible.
The post knuckles-wrap comments of Herald Sun Editor Peter Blunden
did not help change the perception that the media is reluctant
to accept criticism. He said his paper had been responsible and
sensitive at all time. Pull the other leg.
Peter Bartels: scapegoat extraordinaire
This week saw yet another beat-up, this
time over the salary of Coles Myer Chief Executive Peter Bartels.
A remarkably candid Mr. Bartels could only laugh at the baseless
barking of Channel Nine "journalist" Peter Slate. Nine
reported on the 29th of October how "angry shareholders have
all slammed a 76% pay-rise for Coles-Myer Chief Peter Bartels."
After much dripping, Mr. Slate concluded "Peter Bartels is
now the highest paid executive in Australia." Some of his
inflammatory comments had included the following: "His earnings
of $55,000 a week - disclosed in the company's latest financial
statement - are likely to cause a storm at next month's annual
general meeting, since shareholders are already outraged by the
company's 30% slump in profits." The "angry shareholders"
consisted of a well-known opponent of the Coles Myer board Channel
Nine tracked down in Japan! As often with tabloid journalism,
the information was not only false but it was used to cause reactions,
and the reactions used further to cause more reactions. As we
know today, Mr Bartels did not get a 76% pay-rise at a time where
profits slumped 30%, and he is not the highest pay executive in
Australia. Mr Bartels salary has not changed in four years. The
inclusion of superannuation, last year's bonus and legal fees
is hardly a fair way to calculate a salary increase. The next
day, rather than withdraw and apologise, Nine continued on its
crusade. The ABC did no better and involved the unions, who used
the band-wagon to push the claim for a wage increase for workers.
A baseless story was snow-balling all over the country. Before
the facts could be checked, the beat-up had made the parliament
knee-jerk and Chief Executives around the country had been stereotyped
as pigs.
At around the same time, news of another
media beat-up, the "Atlanta bomber" Richard Jewell
saga, made the news. Apparently, the US news media are doing
a little soul searching and self-analysis. It may be time to do
the same in Australia.
I have been told that three NewsCorp
executives collect a total package of $21 million. That is a lot
more than three times the $2.87 million Peter Bartels will collect
this year. Finally, will the media report next year, when his
salary drops by $500,000 or more?
Sport trivia
This week, I looked at the proportion
of sport related news stories directly reporting on a sporting
event. Of all the sport reports broadcast on ABC, Nine and Seven,
only 37% related to a sporting event either in progress at the
time of the news, or played on the day or the day before. In other
words, 63% of the sport this week was previews, photo opportunities,
politics and speculation.
Return to Media Watch Menu
Return to Media Watch Menu
Return to Media Watch Menu
Return to Media Watch Menu
Return to Media Watch Menu
Return to Media Watch Menu