MPs warn Rinehart against editorial meddling at Fairfax

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says mining magnate Gina Rinehart has no right to trash the reputation of Fairfax Media by overriding the company’s charter of editorial independence. In an unusual display of bipartisan politics, shadow minister Malcolm Turnbull has also voiced his concerns about…

Ss64pfpm-1340083842
Fairfax’s reputation for independent journalism is at stake. AAP/Joel Carrett

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy says mining magnate Gina Rinehart has no right to trash the reputation of Fairfax Media by overriding the company’s charter of editorial independence.

In an unusual display of bipartisan politics, shadow minister Malcolm Turnbull has also voiced his concerns about a takeover by Mrs Rinehart, and warned that “if Fairfax … were seen to be a mouth piece of Gina Rinehart and a spokesvehicle for the mining industry, that would undermine its business model dramatically”.

The coal and iron ore billionaire recently increased her shareholding in the publishing house to 18.67% and is poised to seize as many as three seats on the board. She has intimated that she wants the power to hire and fire editors at the company’s iconic mastheads, including The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.

For months the Fairfax board, led by chairman Roger Corbett, has resisted pressure by Mrs Rinehart for representation, largely over concerns about her intention to influence editorial direction. But the board is expected to capitulate soon as the world’s wealthiest woman increases her stake to almost 20%.

Senator Conroy told ABC Radio National that Mrs Rinehart was “entitled to representation but what she’s not entitled to do is trash the brand for all the other shareholders. She should be aware that that Charter is something that the readership of The Age, the Sydney Morning Herald believe in and have supported over many, many years. And if she was to directly interfere and breach that Charter, it would actually lead to a crisis of confidence in the – among the readership and if the readership deserted, then the share price for every shareholder would decline.”

Several reports have claimed that Mrs Rinehart believes directors should be able to overturn the charter, if it is in the commercial interest of the organisation. On a trip to Australia last year that was reportedly funded by Mrs Rinehart, British climate change sceptic Lord Christopher Monckton decried the state of Australian media and said that “devoting some time and effort to encouraging those we know who are super rich to invest in perhaps even establishing a new satellite TV channel – it’s not an expensive thing and then get a few Jo Novas and Andrew Bolts to go on and do the commentating every day but keep the news straight, fair and balanced, as they do on Fox, that would break through and give to Australia, as it has for America, a proper dose of free market thinking”.

Senator Conroy said it was the sort of thing that “sends shudders down the spine of many readers of the Fairfax publications and Ms Rinehart needs to be conscious that the 80% of shareholders that she doesn’t directly represent would take a view that anything that diminishes the brand – anything that diminishes the support for the newspaper among readers will destroy value. It will destroy their value.”

Mr Turnbull agreed that the reputation and credibility of Australia’s oldest newspaper businesses could be at threat from vested interests. “There’s a subtle difference here between the very wealthy individual like a Rupert Murdoch or a Kerry Packer in days past, or you know the Fairfax family in days past who were very wealthy and had strong opinions, exercising those opinions through their publications, and somebody who is also very wealthy but has very substantial vested interests in other parts of the economy.

“Someone with strong vested interests in other parts of the economy, there’s always going to be the question, well is the newspaper opposing this Government policy in order to benefit the vested interests of substantial financial investments of the owner. So whether Gina is on the board with 20% or buys the company, if she wants those newspapers to maintain their influence then they have to be seen to be objective and independent and not pushing a barrow that happens to be coincidental with the financial interests of the owner.”

Sign in to Favourite

Want to follow The Conversation?

Sign up to our free newsletter to get the day's top stories in your inbox each morning, with a special wrap on Saturday.

Spinner
Become a friend of The Conversation and donate

Join the conversation

17 Comments sorted by

  1. trevor prowse

    retired farmer

    If I had been the person who had been derided in the federal parliament because I had been successful in business and had no other choice to answer the critics, then I think it would be ok to buy some influence to counter those critics.

    report
  2. Garry Baker

    resarcher

    This one will be a test on how well our politicians represent the people - Indeed both sides of politics, and the least vocal side will be seen as nothing but stakeholders with the mining game. Added to this, it would seem that short memories are embracing the Fairfax business ploy, forgetting that just a short time ago Gina R was getting very pushy about bringing in foreign labour to work her mines, and since then a great deal of resistance has emerged - So it begs the question as to whether Gina is acting vicariously for a foreign entity to buy Fairfax - A bag lady, if you like

    report
    1. Ken Swanson

      Geologist

      In reply to Garry Baker

      This is pure fantasy
      Rheinhardt will make a fortune turning around a poor performing company by being sensible and commercial
      This means expanding audiences and investing in a better business model.
      Rich people like her did not get rich being stupid
      She does not need a failing media group with declining readership to get what she wants in Canberra. She can buy any amount of influence she wants through support of existing media outlets (advertising) and lobbying, combined with back room political deals with the ALP, Unions and the LNP (ie: foreign workers deal). This costs a lot less.
      No she is in this to make a dollar on the turnaround and she will.

      report
    2. Mark Chambers

      Business & Marketing Consultant

      In reply to Ken Swanson

      Fantasy indeed. Any of us who believe that the media has a shiny side to be tarnished in the first instance is extremely fortunate to have lead a somewhat sheltered life. Political Parties greatest concern is that they may not be able to maintain their influence over it, particularly come election time.

      As for Fairfax shareholders ... 'Seriously' !! There's now a law that they can't either sell or trade their shares if their investment appears to be failing ????? There is another 2,000+ choices on the ASX that are available to all of us and many (including blue chips) already vastly outperform the media sector.

      report
    3. Ken Swanson

      Geologist

      In reply to Mark Chambers

      Mark
      You are obviously ignorant of the details of the Fairfax empire.
      Most analysts agree that the components most profitable are the on line portals it already has up and running.
      The loss makers are the newspapers. So logically if rationalised by a combination of cost efficiencies, back end synergies and the odd divestment of a non core asset, she could double her money easily.
      Of course your concern is well founded if you take the same myopic view of Fairfax as its current board.
      For this…

      Read more
    4. Mark Chambers

      Business & Marketing Consultant

      In reply to Ken Swanson

      Ken,

      Putting aside for a moment that I was agreeing with your comment, and not in any way arguing with it, you state that I am obviously ignorant of the ways of the Fairfax empire. That's actually not really that much of an issue for me. Having owned and run an advertising agency for over 20 years I've been called a great many things worse than that, some of them on a regular basis by entire departments ... at Fairfax. (never ignorant though ... maybe that's a new thing)

      I'll leave your additional comments about Fairfax and the ASX alone, except to politely suggest that honestly held beliefs are just that and you really need to know the internal workings of the media 'and' have experienced other media outlets changing ownership to speculate on what effect it may have. Perhaps you can do that with those contributors here seeking your expertise.

      report
    5. Dalit Prawasi

      Auditor, Accountant, Trade Teacher

      In reply to Garry Baker

      We do not get much dough from the mining game. Its is the foreign money, foreign machinery and the foreign men (includes women) who get the bigger slice of the cake.

      I am sure Gina has the right to braiwash the Fabian readers of the Fairfax.

      report
  3. Graham Perham

    Retired Archaeologist

    Ken Swanson,
    "Rich people like her did not get rich by being stupid" rich people like her got rich by inheriring wealth from her father. What claind did she strike, what mining management decisions did she make to become rich?

    Whether or not she makes a dollar in this venture remains to me seen.

    report
    1. Ken Swanson

      Geologist

      In reply to Graham Perham

      She was left with nothing like what she has today.
      She has got this far through just being smart. Check your facts.

      report
    2. Gil Hardwick

      Anthropologist

      In reply to Graham Perham

      The quote might have been rather, "Rich people like her did not get _richer_ by being stupid". Yes, she got her start from her father - what would you have had him do, hand it all over in probate? - but she has vastly expanded her business dealing on her own behalf. There are many who might have lost it all, as many do.

      I agree, standing back away from the panic, watching in some bemusement in fact (telling, isn't it?), that she is in it for business reasons. Like Robert Holmes a Court, of course…

      Read more
  4. Tim Niven

    Tim Niven is a Friend of The Conversation.

    IT Manager at KJ Risk Group Pty Ltd

    I agree with Turnbull's judgment that the difference between Rinehart pushing her agenda through media and Murdoch pushing his remains "subtle". Though I do believe it makes a bigger difference when Rinehart threatens what painfully small diversity of opinion we do have in the corporate media today. We should be having the much harder conversations about whether wealth should buy that much influence in the first place, and what that means for the substance of our "democracy". I imagine we're seeing…

    Read more
    1. Ken Swanson

      Geologist

      In reply to Tim Niven

      So who should decide who has the right to own the media?
      Who decides whether they are allowed to actually determine what sort of product they can produce by directing the editorial approach?
      I am sure Morrie Schwartz and other left leaning publications would love to have Tony Abbott deciding the panel members judging their content!
      Tim, what you want is to control those you do not like and cannot see the need to control those you do.
      Not objective.
      Not going to happen.

      report
    2. Tim Niven

      Tim Niven is a Friend of The Conversation.

      IT Manager at KJ Risk Group Pty Ltd

      In reply to Ken Swanson

      Hi Ken,

      I cannot quite understand how you've leaped from my mentioning diversity twice, and being concerned over a few wealthy individuals wielding massively disproportionate influence, to a view that I want to control those I do not like. Though perhaps I don't have your level of objectivity. But I'm truly puzzled about the end of that sentence, "the need to control those [I] do" - are you saying "those I do like" (presumably, from the previous sentence, you have something you would call "left-wing" in mind) need to be controlled?

      report
  5. Graham Perham

    Retired Archaeologist

    Ken.

    To be perfectly honest, after more that 70 years on this planet I really don't care who owns what. Obviously having loads of money is what turns you on and that is fine by me. I'm perfectly happy living as I am without owing a cent and loving it.

    What does bother me about tories like Rheinhardt, Cowin, and their kind is that they seem to have a total lack of consideration for anyone who is not driven by seeking wealth. Given the chance, they can and will, buy their way into power and abuse that power to increase their wealth at the expence of the lesser souls on the planet..

    You may think that that is smart, I don't. Is this OK by you?

    report
  6. Garry Baker

    resarcher

    Perhaps the point that is being missed here is the sort of legacy we want to pass onto future generations. A media influence on their lives that's predicated on business owners using it as tool to further their own ends - or a news media subject to checks and balances for the benefit of the public at large. In other words, a relatively Ad free zone. The font of information for the average Joe has traditionally been newspapers, TV, etc - Indeed, the working mans gospel, and for our supposed gatekeepers…

    Read more
    1. Mark Chambers

      Business & Marketing Consultant

      In reply to Garry Baker

      Hi Garry,

      I agree with you about George Orwell but 'possibly' for different reasons. Is it possible that 'as a population' we are being just a little bit paranoid and at the same time not giving ourselves enough credit ?? For example; do we honestly think that everything currently in Fairfax Newspapers is fact, believe each and every printed word, and worrying that the truth will be somehow tainted or our access to it denied should there be an ownership change ???

      If we do believe that, at least the success of 'reality television' is explained. If we instead give ourselves a little more credit, couldn't we happily continue on with the old adage of 'don't believe anything you read and only half what you see' ... unless it's in colour of course ?? :)

      report
  7. Graham Perham

    Retired Archaeologist

    Yes Garry, my point exactly, but my last comment to Ken was evidently against "The Conversation" policy although I have no idea why.

    It seems that greed is his credo, but not mine. <shrug>

    report