Young Labor is having a Darth Vader moment – the shock and horror when Vader tells young Luke who his father is.
In his crusade to ensure government regulation and oversight of media content, Communications Minister Stephen Conroy is pursuing a regulatory act that would breach fundamentally the liberal ideal of a free press.
The democrat within me sympathises with the need to ensure that media agencies do not fall into the hands of an elite few, for a plurality and diversity of voices is important in any free society.
However, the introduction of a government-appointed Public Interest Media Advocate who can determine what constitutes the “public interest” in relation to approving the standards of self-regulatory bodies is where the true danger lies.
…
For the many members of the Labor Party at a youth level who are strong advocates of civil liberties, the abridgment of these freedoms should never be an election issue but protected by Labor governments.
It turns out that the ALP is not the party of civil liberties that it advertises itself to be. Of course, the proof of the pudding will be in the eating – how many Young Labor types turn out to letter-box and hand out how-to-vote cards will be a better indication of their commitment to civil liberties.
Of course they’ll still turn out at polling booths. And so will many older fellow travellers. Because its not rational. It’s emotional. And those that are rational will be thinking they’ll do better under Labor. Eg over 50% of female workforce now in public sector.
Paul CO
20 Mar 13 at 8:55 am
Well said.
The problem is that she is exhibiting the well tuned skill of Labor types to emoting in opposition.
Look at Daniel Andrews in Vic or Robertson in NSW. Each sound like they get accountability and the need for reform.
Give them 2 minutes on the Treasury benches and they’ll be back to looting the taxpayers in the next stage of the crony capitalism with the unions, the legal/rights industry and friendly big businesses.
Token
20 Mar 13 at 8:59 am
Young Labor is like the ALP’s Independents in Parliament. They will make lots of noise in protest, but when the time comes, they will roll over to have their tummies tickled. All they believes it is maintaining their own power and sprouting progressive bullshit.
Johno
20 Mar 13 at 9:03 am
OK – enough.
The left is now openly committed to the destruction of free expression and freedom of thought.
This is out of the closet and front and centre in plain view for all to see.
No more denialism, you totalitarian shitheads.
Rabz
20 Mar 13 at 9:05 am
Read that sentence again and then try and tell me that ‘public interest’ isn’t exactly the same as ‘government interest’. More bullshit.
Just rename it the “Government Interest Media Plenipotentiary” (GIMP) and be done with it you loathsome, lying dirtbags.
Rabz
20 Mar 13 at 9:09 am
Rabz,
Conservatives too, apparently.
Look at what Comrade Cameron is doing in the UK.
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:09 am
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:09 am
The Poms have been ferked since Margaret stepped away.
Mike of Marion
20 Mar 13 at 9:12 am
That oleaginous imbecile isn’t a conservative.
Rabz
20 Mar 13 at 9:14 am
“Look at what Comrade Cameron is doing in the UK.”
Comrade Cameron UK is the Malcolm Turnbull or Ted Baillieu of Australia
OldOzzie
20 Mar 13 at 9:17 am
So now even Young Labour has qualms. But strangely, still not a peep from Hamilton, Brennan, Burnside … and all those other self-appointed champions of human rights.
ACTOldFart
20 Mar 13 at 9:19 am
It is all the usual lefty double speak. Barnaby Joyce expressed it well:
[H/t Cut & Paste]
Token
20 Mar 13 at 9:19 am
Rabz,
But Comrade Camerson leads the Conservative Party. It seems to support some press regulation too.
Oh noes!
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:22 am
As the Howard government took a dump over certain civil liberties I doubt it affected the base of young liberals who disagreed with the policies. They like their labor counterparts would likely stick with the cause.
Sean
20 Mar 13 at 9:27 am
Listen, you f*cking stupid totalitarian twat – I don’t give a flying f*ck what those so called ‘conservatives’ in that disgusting pre-islamic toilet think or ‘feel’ about anything.
Like the other cameron (that unintelligible drunken scottish marxist f*ckwit) do you need a f*cking map?
Rabz
20 Mar 13 at 9:29 am
Comrade Howard wasn’t much better.
Look at the powers he gave to ACMA in 2005-2006; to investigate complaints about factual accuracy and enforce corrections, as well as the ability to remove broadcast licenses for failure to adhere to content regulation.
I’m sure you were all aghast at the end of democracy back then??
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:29 am
Rabz,
I understand your anger – the left is for more press regulation, the conservatives too.
What to do?
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:31 am
Howard wanted to ensure the press did not print lies.
Conroy wants to ensure they do.
Leigh Lowe
20 Mar 13 at 9:32 am
Wow, this has quickly drifted into one of those POBTH cliches to muzzle discussion on the odious legislation in front of us.
Ok, I’ll play for now. Yes, and we spoke up about it then as well. At least I did.
That said, there were boundaries and an underlying conceptual framework to the coalition government which was not wrapped up with the need to silence all disent.
*Pox on both their houses – as in the overused ploy used by the Left in a last desperate tactical defense / distraction from the current clusterf**k by the statists.
Token
20 Mar 13 at 9:33 am
Token, it can’t be that odious, if Comrade Abbott supported the totalitarian ACMA.
I believe that Comrade Joyce, quoted above by yourself, was highly enthusiastic about the new ACMA overlord.
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:41 am
Leigh,
Well said.
Good to see support for the Government approval of what is truth.
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 9:46 am
“Public” (read “Political”) Interest Media Advocate.
Anne
20 Mar 13 at 9:47 am
Great thread wrecking trolling Michael.
So what do you think of the legislation currently on the table by Conroy? You seem to be dodging that material point.
Token
20 Mar 13 at 10:00 am
So you’re just another fascist troll.
Tom
20 Mar 13 at 10:01 am
“Young” politicians of either brand usually have extreme ideas and are passing grandiose motions. They are best ignored.
steve from brisbane
20 Mar 13 at 10:06 am
Every day in every way Labor proves its critics are correct.
Gab
20 Mar 13 at 10:07 am
By the way, the ACMA we have now is the Labor get-Alan-Jones ACMA, not the ACMA that the Liberals invented in 2006. Labor amended the legislation in 2010 to turn it into a leftist attack dog. It is an expensive make-work bureaucracy. It should be abolished and its functions folded back into the Department of Media and Communications.
Tom
20 Mar 13 at 10:08 am
Everyone in the Left knows about Lenin’s useful idiots but none of them ever understand who he meant. Understanding dawns!
Bruce
20 Mar 13 at 10:08 am
Michael,
What to Be Done?
Woolfe
20 Mar 13 at 10:08 am
What functions, Tom? Just close the entire department.
Winston Smith
20 Mar 13 at 10:30 am
“Look at what Comrade Cameron is doing in the UK.”
“Comrade Cameron UK is the Malcolm Turnbull or Ted Baillieu of Australia.”
Or the John Boehner of the US.
This type of “oleaginous” scum can’t really be thoroughly cleansed from conservative ranks, unfortunately.
I’ll settle for them being there as the “conscience” amongst us, ala Petro Georgiou who, while spending the Howard years being a minor thorn in the side in material terms, was a totally ineffective waste of space and thereby the conscience crumb is thrown to leftist numbskulls who think we’re totally heartless no matter what we do.
Ant
20 Mar 13 at 10:58 am
Do you mean like Mal Wishy-Washy does now Ant?
Who can forget his “humanitarian” intervention to break momentum in the case against the brothel-trawling money-stealing spiv from the Central Coast.
Token
20 Mar 13 at 11:03 am
So in Steve land, freedom of speech is an “extreme idea”?
I thought it was only the geriatric convoy of incontinence that had extreme ideas? Like less government control.
Steve, do you have a fetish for being dominated by ‘strong and feisty’ women? You seem to be gagging to be controlled…
Skuter
20 Mar 13 at 11:25 am
Couching this as an attack on freedom of the press is disingenous . Conservatives want to protect the freedom for anyone to buy up as much of the press as they want , because their friends own most of it now . No diversity = boring democracy
sunshine
20 Mar 13 at 12:14 pm
Do we really have to argue with these airey-fairy children about the details of how this totalitarian legislation will work – and about how, if it becomes law and isn’t repealed, they’ll be squealing about it in 12-24 months’ time?
Tom
20 Mar 13 at 12:27 pm
Not only are do the proposed reforms reach far more broadly than press ownership, we have existing anti-trust laws to stop monopolisation of media markets.
You clearly have no understanding of either the proposed legislation or current anti-trust legislation in place.
Having no clue what you’re talking about = boring blog post.
tgs
20 Mar 13 at 12:31 pm
Sunshine; so you support the punishment by government for any media outlet that dissimenates information that makes that government look bad?
How would you define the public interest that Julia Gillard drew up legal documents for her boyfriend that allowed him to rip off unions for a big pile of money? Would you say that was in the public interest? Would you support a government that forced a newspaper to withhold that story?
Do you think it’s a good idea for a government to appoint a person to insert their nose into media content and approve/reject publishing of content they find inappropriate?
brc
20 Mar 13 at 1:11 pm
brc: anybody ripping off unions is certainly in the public interest. The less well they work the better.
James
20 Mar 13 at 1:40 pm
Hear, hear Tom (@12.27pm)
Let the legislation get up, and then use it to belt the living suitcase out of the ALP, Greens, corrupt union officials, et al for the next 3 years after September 14…
.. then repeal it only a few weeks before the next election in 2016.
Watching those same people posting here (and the compliant ‘jounalists’ of Fauxfacts and the ABC) squeal when they get hit by the unintended consequences will provide months of popcorn-worthy entertainment.
Brian of Moorabbin
20 Mar 13 at 1:48 pm
Sunshine how many media giants can buy up the ABC, SBS, The Conversation and all the rest of the government funded crap? So what your really suggesting is that free enterprise can’t buy up any other money making public informers just in case people voluntarily choose to buy it rather than watch/listen/read all the free (yeah free) government outputs. Yeah your so right that really has to be stopped. We really need to stop people being able to buy stuff they want to read rather than stuff the government says they have to. It’s a real crime that needs punishing.
Simon
20 Mar 13 at 1:51 pm
Sigh!
Brian, the “hit them with their own stick” argument doesn’t hold water on two counts.
Firstly, I suspect Conroy’s grand plan is to afford his new Commissar(s) some form of lifetime tenure (ie quasi-judicial status) so that they can’t be removed.
Secondly, the restrictions are shit and I don’t want to see ANY polly using them to suppress debate.
Leigh Lowe
20 Mar 13 at 1:55 pm
Central Coast?
Or Sunshine Coast?
Or both?
Leigh Lowe
20 Mar 13 at 1:57 pm
From a very bitter Shanahan:
“What’s more, like the bungled mining tax the bungled media policy will only ensure that if the Coalition is victorious the prospect of any sensible mining tax and any reasonable media reform will be dead forever.”
Hooray!
Uber
20 Mar 13 at 2:17 pm
How I long for the days of an exciting dictatorship.
Infidel Tiger
20 Mar 13 at 2:21 pm
Leigh (@1.55pm)
Very true. My desire for revenge outweighed my desire to protect free speech.
Consider me suitably chastised.
Brian of Moorabbin
20 Mar 13 at 2:50 pm
“So what do you think of the legislation c – urrently on the table by Conroy? You seem to be dodging that material point.”
It could be good. I can’t quite get with the hysterical Chicken Little’s here.
Though I’d prefer to see it introduced with a Bill of Rights. They’d make a good pair – strengthen individual rights and get the media to live up to to the standards it professes to hold.
I’m not sure we can get Comrade Abbott on borad with this. The Country Socialists, AKA Comrade Barnaby, should be OK.
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 2:59 pm
Whenever you hear totally subjective terms like ‘fairness’ & ‘public interest’ being paraded as if they had an obvious objective meaning, then you know you are dealing with a narcissistic politician with totalitarian tendencies very happy to manipulate ignorant people.
Richard D
20 Mar 13 at 3:55 pm
Who invited the children in? shoo! Back to the trampoline in the backyard with you!
duncanm
20 Mar 13 at 4:42 pm
These reforms will merly make the press adhere to their own standards which they already have made . By the time this passes the Media Advocate will be made independent of the govt of the day .
Now the Greens have announced conditional support , and bob katter is contributing too – it is more evidence of how minority govt delivers the best results .
You all know we need diversity to get the best results for Aust . Your man has had free reign for too long .
Anti-trust laws cleraly dont work when 2 media giants can own 85% + of newspaper coverage in Aust .
Polling last week showed only 30 % trust newspapers (70% trust the ABC). Despite growing power of the internet , newspapers still set the newsagenda for the day . Media giants (Rupert) and their billionaire mates (Gina) must be prevented from buying up internet news power and wrecking that too .
sunshine
20 Mar 13 at 5:03 pm
Oh god, how did these mouthbreathing trolls get through the filter?
Fisky
20 Mar 13 at 5:17 pm
Never been able figure why leftards are so unproductive. Now we know, they let newspapers set their daily agenda.
Here’s a tip sunshine – use that supercomputer between your ears and set your own agenda. Uncle Rupert doesn’t give a fuck what you do.
Empire Strikes Back
20 Mar 13 at 5:28 pm
which planet do you live on, sunshine?
The ALP has been in power for over 5 years.
duncanm
20 Mar 13 at 5:28 pm
Probably because the ACCC doesn’t take the incredibly simplistic view of media markets that you appear to. Do you honestly think that newspapers aren’t easily subsituted by a wide range of other media products such as online news, blogs, social media, radio, TV etc? They are obligated under legislation to act when a merger substantially lessens competition. Clearly they don’t think that has happened.
So what? Why does this have anything to do with the government? If they’re so untrustworthy either they will go out of business as their customer base evaporates or their consumers aren’t reading them because they are trustworthy.
Either way there is no conceivable role for government to play here.
tgs
20 Mar 13 at 5:28 pm
It seems to me that beneath this latest push from the Left to impose this regulatory regime on the media is a rather insidious assumption. This assumption, made either explicitly or implicitly, is that the average person is not intelligent enough to consume media products without being brainwashed into beleiving whatever agenda or stance the product takes. This is constantly touted by the left as the reason people take opposing views to their own. For example, if the population doesn’t support the carbon tax this must be because News Ltd has brainwashed them rather than people evaluating the policy on its merits and finding it wanting.
I find this assumption to be arrogant and narcissistic in the extreme.
tgs
20 Mar 13 at 5:40 pm
tgs..
the left always assumes the populace is stupid – I mean we must be, otherwise we’d all vote the greens into power, right?
As we’re too stupid, we need to be pushed to the left and kept there by totalitarian means.
duncanm
20 Mar 13 at 6:04 pm
tgs,
Was it the same assumption that saw Comrade Howard impose media regulation in 2005?
Michael
20 Mar 13 at 11:01 pm
Michael now votes Howard all the way! In addition to his cry of “Ozzies can’t vote for the ALP because they will increase media regulation! But we can’t vote for the UK Conservative either! OH GOD WHAT CHOICE DO WE HAVE??”
Dude, comedy gold. Please hang around and win more arguments in just this manner.
wreckage
21 Mar 13 at 1:28 am
Gosh, I guess I better not vote for Howard at the upcoming Federal Election, then. Thanks for the heads-up, Michael!
wreckage
21 Mar 13 at 1:32 am
Very possibly, I did not support those regulations imposed by Howard and I do not support the current proposed regulations.
Howard was not a saint, nor was every policy he enacted necessarily a good one.
Your appeal to tribalistic bullshit shows you are more interested in pathetic point scoring than discussing policies on their merits.
Good day, troll.
tgs
21 Mar 13 at 9:49 am