Crikey! Is online news too quick to the chase?

Last week, the Crikey website joyously revealed plans by News Limited to refresh its company brand.

But, in drawing a link between the proposed re-branding and the UK phone hacking scandal, Crikey may have jumped a little too hard to reach some questionable conclusions.

Rupert Murdoch

In publishing elements of a leaked News Limited document designed to brief advertising agencies on a possible scope of works to modernise the company brand, Crikey claimed the proposed new 'News Australia' was designed to distance the organisation from the dodgy practices of its British sister company.

However, reports since the Crikey scoop reveal Rupert Murdoch's media empire had registered potential new company names and logos as early as June, before the phone hacking scandal surfaced.

Given Crikey makes a living out of criticising News Limited publications for being bias and agenda-setting amongst other things, it seems a little hypocritical to me that it uses a similar strategy to attack the media conglomerate.

I'm an advocate for accountability and transparency in the media but when those I trust to uphold these values (such as Crikey) start fiddling around the margins of a fact, I have grave concerns.

The Crikey article announcing the News brand refresh 'scoop' can be viewed  here.

What do you think?  Is Crikey being hypocritical in its treatment of News Limited?

'New media' could be saving lives

Former British war correspondent Kate Adie believes the 21st Century's 24-hour news cycle has rendered the frontline reporter all but dead.  Does this mean 'new media' is saving journalists' lives?

Today, in an interview with The Australian, Adie, who received fame for her coverage of the 1980 Iranian embassy siege in London says frontline reporting from the battlefield is a thing of the past.

Adie says today's television reporting of conflicts around the world is "more of a presentation exercise and the business of actually being the eye-witness and getting your own camera footage is pretty rare".

She says a lot of the frontline footage delivered to our smart phones and televisions is shot by locals on the ground with their mobile phones.

While Adie has the scars to prove just how dangerous frontline reporting can be (she carries shrapnel in her foot from her time covering the Bosnian conflict of the 1990s), it has always amused me how journalists appear to dramatise their own situation in close proximity to the battlefield.

Crouching behind a car or embankment, protected by a helmet and flak jacket, the frontline reporter typically gives one the impression that he or she is in imminent danger, risking life and limb to get the story.

Sure, there are plenty of credible stories from war correspondents who have done just that and sadly, some of them have paid the ultimate sacrifice in the process.

So with that in mind, it could be said that the news media's fall in demand for war correspondents may actually save a few journalists' lives.  That's a good thing isn't it?

Is an Inquiry into online media practices necessary?

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy has announced an independent inquiry into Australia's media industry, which will focus on the print and online sectors.  But is this really necessary?

In the wake of Britain's phone-hacking scandal and both the ALP and Greens criticism of reporting by Rupert Murdoch's News Limited here in Australia, the review, says Greens leader Bob Brown, should focus on the concentration of media ownership.

According to ABC Online, News Limited controls around 70 per cent of Australia's newspapers.  Perhaps an inquiry into the print media is justified on this figure alone.  After all, a diverse and robust media is essential to the workings of any democracy.

But in the case of online news, it could be argued that the plethora of independent blog sites, some of which are reliable, credible and of a high quality, counters any need for a formal inquiry focused on media ownership issues.

Of course, many blogs are pretty ordinary and certainly not credible.  But at least they help spread a diversity of views on any number of topics, including the latest news. I don't think the concentration of ownership of the traditional news media and their relatively new online arms have a significant bearing on this issue.


When I did a Google search for "top news blogs Australia" the first to appear in my search results was crikey.com.au, a fiercely independent and critical source of news and views.

The others in the top 5 results included news.com.au/blogs (owned by News Limited), couriermail.com.au, heraldsun.com.au and theaustralian.com.au/opinion (each also owned by News Limited).  Actually, maybe we do have an issue here!

Another search for news blogs of relevance to Australia (searched via "The Australian Index - Exploring Australian blogs http://theaustralianindex.com revealed 93 blogs.  Many of these were the blogs of professional journalists who are employed by either Fairfax or News Limited.  Others were by independent 'citizen journalists' or online communities and many were focused on specific subjects like a particular sport for example.

When I did a more specific search on a topic of interest (in my case Australian Rules football or 'AFL' as people north of the Murray River call it), I came across many more results (I stopped counting at 50).

Like more general news blogs, many were the blogs of professional sports journalists but many more were independently-run blogs having no association with traditional news media houses.  In all cases, the information available was a mix of news and opinion.

Standards varied but there was certainly a diversity of information to draw on. 

I guess you just need to know what you're looking for.