Derryn Hinch (Victoria, Derryn Hinch's Justice Party) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to support the government's changes to the media laws—with some amendments that we proudly recommended, such as guaranteed funding for community radio. I speak today as probably the person in this chamber with the most experience working in the media and the most inside information about the media.

I spent more than 55 years as a working journo before I 'jumped the shark', as they say, and ended up at this place. I worked in all forms of media: newspapers, magazines, radio, television and online media websites. I have been a cub reporter, a foreign correspondent, a Sydney newspaper editor, a TV current affairs host on free-to-air and pay TV, a radio current affairs host and an internet website blogger. Let me give the Labor Party media experts and some crossbenchers some personal statistics—and not the one about being sacked 16 times!

I started out as a cadet reporter on a small town daily newspaper across the ditch in New Zealand—TheTaranaki Herald, circulation 11,000. It was the oldest daily newspaper in New Zealand. It started in 1852. I say 'was' because it closed in 1989. I then worked on the Christchurch Star. It was first published in 1868, and it stopped publishing in 1991. I then worked for the WaikatoTimes in Hamilton, New Zealand. It started in 1872 and six years ago changed from being an afternoon paper to a morning paper. It's really struggling now, having just been bought by Fairfax. Speaking of Fairfax, I crossed the ditch on the MV Wanganella in 1963 and got a job as a police reporter on the Sydney Sun. I worked there for several years before going to New York as a foreign correspondent and returned in 1975 to become editor in 1976.

The Sydney Sun no longer exists. Neither does our bitter rival, Rupert Murdoch's Daily Mirror. All those papers have gone. All have closed down. This is the media fact that I want to ram home. They couldn't all have closed down just because I worked on them! The Fairfax papers, TheSydney Morning Herald and The Age, are being circled by bottom-feeding sharks. Their print editions could cease any time—maybe even by the end of this year. That New York landmark the Daily Newswasimmortalised in Guys and Dolls'What's in the Daily News? I'll tell you what's in the Daily News.' I'll tell you what's in the Daily News. It was sold to the Chicago Tribune last week for $1.

I had the HINCH program on the Ten Network. That network has been in receivership and has now been sold—it hasn't gone through yet. It has been bought by CBS, a foreign corporation. That's why I ask: are you getting the drift? Are the senators getting the drift? That is why I say to any crossbenchers who oppose the relaxation of draconian, Neanderthal, out-of-date media laws—including the two-out-of-three rule and including the 75 per cent reach—that you have rocks in your head, and the Labor Party, too. Labor's shadow minister for communications, Michelle Rowland, has said that the planned relaxation of the laws 'threatens media diversity'. She said:

Labor opposes removing the two out of three rule because it would achieve very little at potentially great cost - further media consolidation and a reduction in the diversity of voices across the media landscape.

Well, the two-out-of-three rule prevents media companies from owning a TV network, a radio station and a newspaper in the same market. That's what they're perpetuating. Ms Rowland also said that Labor does believe that the pragmatic course of action—one of them—at this time is to repeal the 75 per cent reach rule, and that is good news. She said that this would ensure that local content is bolstered following a trigger event and provide immediate licence fee relief to the commercial broadcasters. But her claim that removing the two-out-of-three rule threatens media diversity is patently wrong—Noddy Land! If we do nothing, if we play ostrich here in this house, with our heads in the sand, that is what will threaten media diversity.

I remember the days when the morning paper, especially on Wednesdays and Saturdays, weighed a tonne. Those were the days of the fabulous rivers of gold from classified advertising that made the fortunes of the Packers, the Fairfaxes and the Murdochs. But I believe that the shift of audience—and, more importantly, the advertising—to multinational giants, such as Google and Facebook, with all their tax dodging as well, threatens the very existence of newspapers and the viability of free-to-air and subscription television.

Scrapping the two-out-of-three rule will allow Australian media companies to compete on a more level playing field with global challenges. The Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, said that the sale of the Ten Network to CBS actually showed that change to the media laws are no longer necessary. Well, in my view, the sale of Channel Ten to CBS means an even more urgent need for a review of media laws. The way it stands at the moment, the way it stood when CBS got in and ambushed Lachlan Murdoch and Bruce Gordon—but leaving them out of it for a minute—no other Australians could have a level playing field and a chance to compete against CBS.

I believe all of this should have happened years ago. And I agreed with communications minister Mitch Fifield when he said awhile back that a few facts have escaped some of the knockers in the other place and in the Senate. He said that, No. 1, Kylie Minogue does not live on Ramsay Street anymore, and, No. 2, the internet does exist. He said that it is very important that our media laws reflect the second of these facts. Consider this: people no longer rush home to watch the six o'clock news—or shall I say, immodestly, the old Hinch at Seven. News now is 24/7. The current laws, the deliberately restrictive laws, were brought in years ago, long before we had pay TV, before the internet, before smartphones, before podcasts, before website editorials and before online newspapers—some of them, of course, behind paywalls. I must admit that my advice to Rupert Murdoch, as an ex metropolitan newspaper editor, was that he should never have posted anything on the website for free, because if you then start charging for stories people won't want to pay for them. Well, that's another story.

Getting back finally to this media package: as a former newspaper editor, as an old journo with more than 50 years of experience in the game, let me warn you that I have never known the Australian media to be under such a threat. Some will sink; that is true. Some will thrive. New platforms will appear that we have never even dreamed of. I, for one, want that diverse media freedom to grow and flourish around the country, in metropolitan areas and in the regions. And I say that today because I'm not going to just sit back and say, as somebody once said, 'That's life; good night'!