A royal commission into the influence of the Murdoch media empire is almost certainly dead, according to the outgoing co-chair of the campaign for one.
Australians for a Murdoch Royal Commission (AFMRC) announced this week that the organisation would be wound up and the campaign handed over to progressive think tank The Australia Institute.
A letter from its co-chairs, former prime minister Malcolm Turnbull and trade unionist Sharan Burrow, was sent to the AFMRC email list, urging recipients to donate to the institute, while the think tank will also take carriage of the AFMRC’s contact list.
Turnbull, speaking to Crikey, confirmed the organisation’s original goal of a royal commission into the Murdoch media was dead.
“Unfortunately, it’s pretty clear that the original goal of getting a royal commission, which would be a very valuable exercise, is not going to be achieved because both of the big parties are resolutely opposed to it,” Turnbull said.
“So no sign of that changing.”
The transfer of the campaign, in Turnbull’s view, has “a number of advantages”.
“The Australia Institute [is] … a deductible gift recipient, which the Australians for a Murdoch Royal Commission was not, and it’s got an established infrastructure and, I think, better capacity to carry the cause forward.”
Turnbull said that making changes to Australia’s dominated media landscape was difficult while he was prime minister “because people are scared of Murdoch”.
“I mean you guys [Crikey] experienced it, you know exactly how they operate — they’re bullies, and they intimidate a lot of people.”
Turnbull said the “media landscape has changed dramatically” in Australia, and while he was optimistic the nexus of power for Murdoch publications would shift in the future, he believes its outlets have become “much more tribal”.
“If you add up the eyeballs or eyeball minutes or attention — I’m sure some genius has got a good measure of that — the share of Australian media represented by Murdoch tabloids, for example, is a lot less than it was 30 years ago,” he said.
“What has happened, however, is that the Murdoch media has become much more tribal. I think in many ways it’s gone from being ideological — it’s gone from being leaning in one direction in the case of, say, The Australian, from being ideological to being more tribal. And this matches the way Fox News is perceived. How could any organisation or publisher who claims to be a conservative support Donald Trump’s attack on the judiciary, for example?
“The hero of the right-wing angertainment ecosystem nowadays is, of course, Trump. There he is, assailing and bullying judges in a way that is just extraordinary … there was a time that you could say of, say The Australian, that it was broadly a conservative newspaper. But it is now … much more tribal.”
Asked about specific media reform he would like to see, Turnbull said it was a longer conversation for another time — noting that he called Crikey while stuck in a typical Sydney traffic jam.
The AFMRC was established in 2021 following the original chair, former prime minister Kevin Rudd (now Australia’s Ambassador to the United States) campaigning with a 2020 petition, which garnered 501,128 signatures. The federal petitions process, unlike petitions to state parliaments such as New South Wales, does not compel action from the Parliament, no matter how many signatures it may get. Rudd’s petition got a response from then minister for communications Paul Fletcher, who said the government would not be acting on demands for a royal commission.
Despite that, Australia Institute executive director Richard Denniss says petitions still have value, even if they have no formal power at a federal level.
“I do think that petitions are a way for citizens, voters to say ‘this is something I care about, and this is something that I’ll put my name to’,” Denniss told Crikey.
“These days, people are often led to believe that they’re alone with their concerns or they’re alone with the values and priorities they have. Getting half a million people to sign anything is a significant democratic achievement.
“Now whether politicians choose to ignore that issue or not, well that’s up to them. If elected members of Parliament won’t change their priorities, voters are free to change the way they vote.
“The reason we’re doing this is because we think that lots of Australians are interested in issues like media reform, whether it’s social media reform or truth in political advertising or regulating social media.”
Denniss said he didn’t agree with the proposition that Australian governments were gun-shy on media reform.
“In terms of media reform generally, I don’t think [governments have been reticent]. This government rushed some legislation through around social media access for people under 16. I mean, I think they were quite enthusiastic about that particular reform,” he said.
Asked why media concentration was neglected, Denniss said it was difficult to take on big business in an economy like Australia’s.
“The same reason bank concentration is neglected, the same reason that supermarket concentration is neglected.”
Similarly to Turnbull, Denniss was hesitant to point to specific reforms he would like to see, citing his own reticence to pre-empt The Australia Institute’s research, but said that regulation did not necessarily harm ideals of free speech, as successive governments have argued as an excuse for not addressing media concentration in Australia.
“I think that diversity is a good antidote to disinformation. And if there’s lots of media outlets putting lots of different opinions and with lots of different focuses, it makes it a lot easier for citizens to get access to a diverse range of views and make their mind up for themselves.”
Have something to say about this article? Write to us at letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication in Crikey’s Your Say. We reserve the right to edit for length and clarity.