Victoria’s voters ignored News Corp’s anti-Labor campaign but the controversy let Dan Andrews skate.

Extract from The Guardian 

Opinion

News Corporation

Matthew Ricketson

Murdoch’s tabloids and Sky News have opened seemingly never-ending culture wars about which the average Australian knows little and cares less.

‘All Daniel Andrews needed to do was point to the Sunday Herald Sun’s story and peel off zingers about whether the next story planned was an exclusive interview with the offending steps.’

Mon 28 Nov 2022 01.00 AEDT

Last modified on Mon 28 Nov 2022 17.03 AEDT

To paraphrase Lady Bracknell from The Importance of Being Earnest, to lose one election, Mr Murdoch, may be regarded as a misfortune; to lose two looks like carelessness.

The media outlets owned by Rupert Murdoch in Australia openly campaigned for the demise of the Victorian Labor government in the weekend’s election and for the return of the federal Coalition government in May.

In both cases, the electorate ignored or rejected the campaigns, ousting the government led by Scott Morrison in favour of the Anthony Albanese-led Labor party, and giving Daniel Andrews a third term as premier.

Daniel Andrews vindicated in Victorian election that became a referendum on his pandemic response

Read more

What does this mean for Murdoch’s media outlets, which for decades have had a reputation for boosting the fortunes of political parties they favour, or at the least for anticipating the electorate’s mood and backing electoral winners accordingly? And how did the news media perform overall in covering Saturday’s election in Victoria?

First, a caveat: Murdoch’s reputation as a kingmaker may have been overblown. The political scientist Rodney Tiffen has written that it is hard to find clear evidence of coverage by News Corporation actually swinging an election result, not least because there are so many variables in play apart from the media.

Second, News Corp’s Australian newspapers, the news website, news.com.au, and its pay-tv outlet, Sky News Australia, loom large in the media landscape but so too, increasingly, does the ABC, which has, since just before the global pandemic, been the top or second-ranked online news outlet in the country.

The ABC’s combined national audience reach across television, radio and online is estimated to be just under 70%, according to the national broadcaster’s latest annual report, tabled in parliament in September.

Some of their coverage appears to fly in the face of the Australian Press Council’s standards and principles

Whatever the ABC’s critics might say, its news and current affairs is required by its charter to be accurate and impartial. Since the University of Canberra began measuring audience perceptions of trust in its annual Digital News Report, in 2018, the ABC has been more trusted than any other news source in Australia.

In other words, any campaigning by News Corp outlets seems to be offset or diluted by the ABC’s coverage.

Third, the easy availability of masses of information online and the rise of social media has diminished the influence of mainstream media overall. Citizens can get all the information – and the misinformation – they want without opening the pages of the Herald Sun.

Finally, it is increasingly clear that from the resounding message the national and Victorian electors have given to their politicians this year that they are most comfortable with a more centrist government. News Corp outlets have likely alienated them by moving further to the right.

The “vaudeville hatreds of Murdoch tabloids and Sky News”, as Martin McKenzie-Murray calls them, have opened chapter after chapter of seemingly never-ending culture wars about which the average Australian knows little and cares less.

As Tiffen has written, once News’ tabloid newspapers had a populist touch, profitably balancing sensationalism with credible reporting. Now there is “just a grinding predictability” with the “confected outrage” and the beat-ups rarely hitting home. “Like a one-trick pony, they try ever-bigger versions of the old sensationalist ploys,” which are suffering from the law of diminishing returns.

The declining ability to influence elections looks unlikely to prompt much reflection at News Corp Australia’s Sydney headquarters – but it should.

Some of their coverage appears to fly in the face of the Australian Press Council’s standards and principles, the first of which states: “Ensure that factual material in news reports and elsewhere is accurate and not misleading, and is distinguishable from other material such as opinion”. News Corp Australia is a member of the council, the print and online news media’s primary self-regulatory body.

The problems raised by News’ coverage of the Victorian election, epitomised in the 5 November Sunday Herald Sun front-page story headlined “Revealed: the steps that brought down Dan”, have two unhappy effects.

First, they squeeze out analysis of how the rest of the media covered the election. A notable innovation came from the Age which in its Victoria’s Agenda initiative sought to engage with a wide range of people to see what issues they wanted the newspaper to report on.

Second, and equally if not more important, the controversy surrounding News Corp Australia’s election coverage helped Andrews avoid scrutiny of the substantive issues about integrity, secrecy and Victoria’s massive, growing state debt that the rest of the news media was rightly trying to report on.

All Andrews needed to do was point to the Sunday Herald Sun’s story and peel off zingers about whether the next story planned was an exclusive interview with the offending steps. Some dubbed the story “Stepsgate”, the reductio ab absurdum of the original Watergate stories that did actually play a role in forcing a president of the United States to resign.

• Matthew Ricketson is a professor of communication at Deakin University and former media editor for the Age. He is the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance’s representative on the Press Council

Gambling reform is urgently needed across Australia. Lives are at stake.

 Extract from The Guardian

Opinion

Gambling

Nieves Murray

Research shows suicide rates can peak up two to three years after a crisis. We’re seeing this play out.

‘The risk of suicide needs to be part of the dialogue if we’re to have a true understanding of the harm gambling is causing.’

Tue 29 Nov 2022 14.10 AEDT

Last modified on Tue 29 Nov 2022 14.51 AEDT

There has been a lot of discussion about the need for gambling reform, quite rightly, but there is one important element that has been left out of the conversation – suicide.

Gambling is not only causing harm to people’s financial situation and relationships, it is risking people’s lives. The risk of suicide needs to be part of the dialogue if we’re to have a true understanding of the harm gambling is causing.

Reform is not just necessary, it’s urgent and it’s a non-negotiable, particularly when lives are at stake.

Proceeds of crime: gambling firms keep millions when Australians steal to fund addiction

Read more

Australia is home to less than half a per cent of the world’s population but 20% of its poker machines. In New South Wales we have almost half of Australia’s 200,000 poker machines. There has also been a 300% increase in online gambling in the last two years and Australia now holds the unwanted position of being the country with the highest rate of gambling losses per person in the world.

Gambling apps are easy to access are and increasingly pushing the boundaries. A new sports betting app controversially entered the market by offering 100-to-1 odds on all runners in the Melbourne Cup. This marketing tactic attracted more than 300,000 new customers.

During a consultation we heard from a lawyer from a gambling legal service who shared that, in one day, four out of six clients admitted they were considering suicide.

A financial counsellor also shared that a bank had extended a line of credit of $120,000 to an aged pensioner, which should not have been granted. That person attempted suicide.

These are only a handful of the stories that we’ve uncovered and, sadly, there are many more like it. We know that gambling-related suicides are happening. But they are under-reported and not getting the policy attention they deserve.

Gambling regulation is failing to provide adequate consumer protection and myriad state and federal regulators are operating in silos. Not to mention the advertising, which is pervasive and targeted towards those most at risk of experiencing the harms of gambling, and often those most at risk of suicide.

Data from NSW suggests that of those who seek help for gambling problems, as many as 11% attempt suicide. Other studies found that almost one in five people presenting with suicidality also experienced problems with gambling.

So how can we better protect people at risk?

First, it is important to understand that suicide is complex human behaviour with many varied risk factors, including social and economic factors. We know that problematic gambling can heighten two key risk factors for suicide – financial hardship and relationship breakdown. Protective factors, such as social and financial supports, are compromised by the financial harms of gambling and this leaves people vulnerable.

As we emerge from the pandemic and compounding environmental disasters, research shows suicide rates can peak two to three years after a crisis. We’re already seeing this play out.

Indications from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare Suicide and Self-harm Monitoring System point to a steady increase in suicides this year in NSW and Victoria. This rise is being observed alongside increases in gambling across the country.

‘I would have had my own house by now’: the devastating effects of a life in thrall to the pokies

Read more

The state election in Victoria and the forthcoming NSW elections are therefore are critical. Bipartisan commitment to suicide prevention and addressing gambling harm can help save lives.

We need stronger gambling regulations, especially to curb emerging online gambling and the introduction of a cashless gaming card. We need greater education and awareness of the signs of gambling harm for individuals, families and frontline workers. We need a total ban on gambling advertising. And, finally, we need a coherent, adequately funded, national regulatory structure for gambling.

Every life lost to suicide is a tragedy and more needs to be done now to prevent suicides related to gambling and associated financial stress. Governments, service providers, the industry and the community all have a role to play in suicide prevention.

Don’t gamble with people’s lives. Reform is a no-brainer.

*Nieves Murray is the chief executive of Suicide Prevention Australia

In Australia, the crisis support service Lifeline is 13 11 14. In the UK and Ireland, Samaritans can be contacted on freephone 116 123, or email jo@samaritans.org or jo@samaritans.ie. In the US, the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline is at 800-273-8255 or chat for support. You can also text HOME to 741741 to connect with a crisis text line counselor. Other international helplines can be found at befrienders.org

‘Naccflip’: National anti-corruption commission bill passes Senate after Greens backdown.

Extract from The Guardian

National Anti-Corruption Commission

Minor party resolves to support a crossbench amendment instead of Coalition on key appointment.

Greens senator David Shoebridge and independent MP Helen Haines appeal to Labor to relinquish total control over appointments to the national anti-corruption commission.

Paul Karp

@Paul_Karp

Tue 29 Nov 2022 19.22 AEDT

First published on Tue 29 Nov 2022 12.55 AEDT

The national anti-corruption commission bill has passed the Senate after Labor successfully stared down a Greens threat to support a Coalition amendment on the appointment of the Nacc commissioner.

On Monday, Guardian Australia revealed the Greens’ threat to combine with the Coalition to require a super majority of three-quarters of the Nacc oversight committee to appoint a commissioner, in a move that could have derailed the bill.

But on Tuesday, the Greens resolved not to support the Coalition but instead push a crossbench amendment requiring the government to get the support of one non-government MP or senator to make an appointment.

The “naccflip”paved the way for the passage of the bill in the final sitting week of parliament this year, fulfilling Labor’s election pledge to legislate the anti-corruption body by the end of 2023.

On Tuesday evening, Labor and the Coalition combined to defeat crossbench amendments, including a bid to remove the “exceptional circumstances” test for public hearings and to explicitly include pork barrelling in the Nacc’s scope.

In the Senate debate, the Greens justice spokesperson, David Shoebridge, argued Labor and the Liberals were prepared to cop “one bad headline” for teaming up to limit public hearings to avoid tens of negative stories about alleged corruption.

Independent senator David Pocock accused Labor of doing a “deal” with the opposition on “exceptional circumstances” which experts have warned would make it “nearly impossible” to hold public hearings.

The only successful crossbench amendment was a Greens proposal to expand the powers of the inspector that oversees the Nacc, which the Coalition supported.

The bill will now return to the House of Representatives for it to approve the Senate version. Labor is not expected to oppose the minor change.

Earlier, Shoebridge and the independent MP Helen Haines made a last-ditch appeal to the government to relinquish total control over appointments, although Shoebridge conceded that Labor is “not minded” to support it, and the Greens will not obstruct the Nacc bill.

Under Labor’s bill, the government’s proposed Nacc commissioner and inspector must be endorsed by the Nacc oversight committee, made up of six government, four opposition and two crossbench MPs and senators.

But with a government member in the chair holding the casting vote, the executive retains control of the committee and appointments.

The Coalition proposed to raise the threshold to a three-quarters majority, which the attorney general, Mark Dreyfus, warned would give the opposition an effective veto of appointments and could prevent the Nacc from being established.

Dreyfus said the amendment amounted to the Liberals “trying to frustrate the will of the Australian people” after Labor was elected with a mandate to implement its model.

“It’s completely unacceptable wrecking behaviour from a party of blockers and wreckers and we’re gonna call them out,” he told Radio National. “The bill will pass this week and I’m calling on the opposition to drop their ridiculous amendment.

“It is a ridiculous amendment that they never included in their own proposed model when they brought a model forward as a draft in 2021.”

Dreyfus warned the Coalition’s “new allies, the Greens party” that if the amendment were successful, Labor would “reject it when it comes back to the House and send it back [to the Senate] again”.

The fighting words had the intended effect – as the Greens resolved at their party room later on Tuesday morning not to support the Coalition amendment and recommitted to passing the Nacc bill this year.

Instead, the Greens and senator David Pocock proposed an amendment requiring a simple majority on the oversight committee to appoint the Nacc commissioner and inspector, meaning the government will need one non-government MP or senator to approve its pick.

Shoebridge told reporters in Canberra transparency experts agreed the government should not have “complete power” to make appointments “because obviously one of the critical jobs for the national anti-corruption commission is to hold the government of the day to account”.

He said the government would have “three alternatives” to find the votes for their appointments, with the opposition members, crossbench MP or senator on the oversight committee able to give the green light.

Only time will tell if the Nacc will be the ‘big broom’ promised to sweep through our corridors of power.

Katharine Murphy

Read more

“[The amendment] removes the absolute power from the government of the day for this critical appointment,” he said. “But it also removes a veto from the opposition. No, opposition of themselves can simply [withhold agreement]. And we think that gets the balance right.”

Haines said the crossbench amendment was “modest” and would be “good for the nation, [and] good for the longevity of the national anti-corruption commission”.

“Whoever is in government … we need to make sure that this anti-corruption commission is fully independent, that no government nor no opposition can stymy its operation.

“So I stand here today, calling on the attorney general, calling on the prime minister, Please listen to this. You will regret this if you can’t back it.

“This is a good faith amendment. It will make the Nacc stronger and it will embed your legacy, immemorial, I would say, if you listen to this and get this right.”

The Greens-Pocock amendment was defeated by Labor and the Coalition.

‘Eroded public trust’: text of Scott Morrison censure motion revealed as colleagues back former PM.

Extract from The Guardian 

Scott Morrison

But one opposition MP, Bridget Archer, says she is ‘inclined’ to support Labor push against the former prime minister.

Alex Hawke, a close friend and ally of Scott Morrison, has distanced himself from comments he is reported to have made about the former PM’s leadership.

Paul Karp

@Paul_Karp

Tue 29 Nov 2022 20.00 AEDT

First published on Tue 29 Nov 2022 18.05 AEDT

Scott Morrison has thanked colleagues for their support resisting a censure motion over his multiple ministries scandal, but at least one Liberal MP will join the push against the former prime minister.

On Tuesday, the Liberal MP, Bridget Archer, told Guardian Australia she was “inclined” to support the censure and took a veiled swipe at the Liberal leadership team for deciding to oppose it without proper consultation in the party room.

The government will move the censure motion on Wednesday, a push that will almost certainly succeed due to Labor’s lower house majority and support from the Greens.

The text of the motion, to be moved by the leader of the house, Tony Burke, notes that Morrison was appointed to five ministries without informing “the cabinet, the relevant departments, the House of Representatives or the Australian public”.

It notes the former high court justice Virginia Bell labelled the secrecy of the appointments “corrosive of trust in government” and concluded they undermined responsible government – the same verdict reached by the solicitor general.

“Therefore [the house] censures the member for Cook for failing to disclose the appointments to the House of Representatives, the Australian people and the cabinet, which undermined responsible government and eroded public trust in Australia’s democracy,” the motion states.

Liberal MP may support Labor censure of Scott Morrison over secret ministries scandal

Read more

On Tuesday, the Nationals leader, David Littleproud, said that Morrison had “done the wrong thing” by failing to disclose his appointment to five additional ministries during the pandemic.

Littleproud told ABC News Breakfast he did not think the censure was necessary and argued Australians were “sick of the politicisation” of the issue.

In the party room the Liberal leader, Peter Dutton, said the Coalition would not support the censure motion, labelling the move a “stunt”. “So much for a kinder and gentler parliament, this is Anthony Albanese at his political brawler best,” Dutton said.

Morrison stood up and thanked the party room for its support this week and since the election when the Coalition lost 17 seats.

Archer later said she had attended the party room but chose not to argue for the censure motion.

“It has become clear to me over time that there is not much point speaking up in there, but particularly given [the] leadership announced a position yesterday prior to [the] party room even meeting,” Archer told Guardian Australia. “I am inclined to support the censure motion.”

Archer told the ABC it “would be an act of extreme hypocrisy” if she did not support the motion, describing Morrison’s secret multiple ministries as “an affront to democracy, as I have said previously”.

“I think it is important in terms of the future of the party, to look at the lessons of the past, and I think that these actions of the former prime minister are intrinsically linked to lessons we need to learn … to get out from the shadow of that time and reset.”

In August the shadow home affairs minister, Karen Andrews, also called on Morrison to resign.

But on Tuesday Andrews fell into line, saying she “expected Labor to milk this and that’s exactly what they’re doing”.

“It’s not about fixing the problem of publishing the ministerial arrangements or acting arrangements,” she told Guardian Australia. “It’s a political stunt.”

Labor has agreed to adopt all six recommendations of the Bell inquiry, to formalise the publication of ministerial arrangements and prevent a repeat of the secret ministries.

On Monday excerpts from Niki Savva’s book Bulldozed revealed the former immigration minister Alex Hawke had criticised Morrison’s treatment of colleagues after his upset 2019 victory.

“He got addicted to executive authority,” Hawke reportedly said.

Hawke also reportedly said that Morrison “didn’t really take advice from people” and “wasn’t the greatest listener”.

Hawke, a close friend and political ally of Morrison, distanced himself from those words on Tuesday without directly repudiating them, claiming they “are not representative of views” he holds about Morrison.

“Having known Scott Morrison for many years in many different capacities I have only the highest regard for his character, ability, and service as prime minister,” Hawke said in a statement.

Scott Morrison likely to be censured for ‘usurping’ parliament, Albanese suggests

Read more

“For absolute clarity, when looked at in the context of the global pandemic, I believe the administrative decisions taken by Scott Morrison as prime minister make sense for the time they were taken and the situation the government faced.

“In context I have no concerns that these measures were taken or the fact that the executive of the government had to assume a stronger concentration of emergency powers during such a significant and unusual emergency period.”

Hawke said that “like several other colleagues my only concern is in not ultimately being made aware of the unusual reserve administrative arrangements even though these were clearly emergency and pandemic related”.

Hawke accused Labor of “a politically charged, payback approach”.

“Today I have caught up with Scott Morrison and like every day look forward to joining him in parliament and in particular supporting him against the Labor party’s divisive political tactics.”

Albanese made hay over the apparent division between the pair in question time, approving Hawke’s “good comments about his mate, the member for Cook [Morrison], that they were addicted to power … but weren’t very good at energy”.

“That’s the problem for those opposite. All about power policy, nothing about energy policy.”

In a statement on Friday afternoon, Morrison said he had acted to “best advance and protect Australia’s national interests”, explaining that the decisions to take on extra powers “were taken during an extremely challenging period, where there was a need for considerable urgency”.

NASA's Orion spacecraft reaches record-breaking distance in space exploration mission.

 Extract from ABC News

Posted 14 hours ago

Orion reached its maximum distance from Earth during the Artemis I mission. (Supplied: NASA)

Help keep family & friends informed by sharing this article

NASA's Orion spacecraft has reached more than 432,000km from Earth — the farthest distance scheduled on its Artemis I mission and the farthest any spacecraft built for humans has travelled. 

Key points:

• The uncrewed spacecraft is designed to carry astronauts to deep space destinations
• Orion is in a healthy condition as it continues its journey in a highly stable orbit where little fuel is required
• NASA and the US Navy are preparing for recovery of Orion when it splashes down on December 11

The uncrewed spacecraft designed to carry astronauts to deep space destinations reached the halfway point of it's 25.5 day mission on Tuesday morning, AEST. 

The mission will provide a foundation for human deep space exploration, with the goal of a safe crew module entry, descent, splashdown and recovery. 

On Tuesday, NASA confirmed the mission was on track, with the spacecraft in a healthy condition as it continued its journey in deep retrograde orbit, a highly stable orbit where little fuel is required. 

"Because of the unbelievable can-do spirit, Artemis I has had extraordinary success and has completed a series of history making events," NASA administrator Bill Nelson said.

"It's incredible just how smoothly this mission has gone, but this is a test. That's what we do – we test it and we stress it."

Engineers had originally planned an orbital maintenance burn around the halfway mark, but determined it was not necessary because of Orion's already precise trajectory.

Based on Orion's performance, managers are examining adding seven additional test objectives to reduce risk before flying future missions with crew.

Flight controllers have completed about 37.5 per cent of the test objectives associated with the mission, with many remaining objectives set to be evaluated during entry, descent, splashdown, and recovery.

NASA's Exploration Ground Systems team and the US Navy are beginning initial operations for recovery of Orion when it splashes down in the Pacific Ocean on December 11. 

Anthony Albanese plans to censure Scott Morrison this week. Here's what is expected to happen now.

Extract from ABC News

By Liana Walker

Posted 1 hours ago

Anthony Albanese says the censure will ensure Scott Morrison faces some consequences for his actions.(ABC News)

Help keep family & friends informed by sharing this article

After being highly criticised last week in a report on his decision to secretly appoint himself to several ministries, Scott Morrison is set to face more harsh words this week when a censure motion is moved against him.

The former prime minister's actions were described as "corrosive" to trust in the government in the report written by former High Court Justice Virginia Bell and released on Friday. 

The government agreed to implement all the recommendations of the report, but on Monday Anthony Albanese announced Labor would also look to censure Mr Morrison this week.

So how does a censure motion work and what does it mean for Scott Morrison? 

What is the process? 

Scott Morrison will face a censure motion over his secret appointment to several ministries.

When parliament is dissatisfied with the performance of a particular member, a censure motion can be moved. 

What this particular motion will say is not yet clear, but the wording will be specific to the incident and it will name Mr Morrison. 

Like other motions, the mover will deliver a speech and there will be an opportunity for debate. 

Following that, a vote will be called and parliamentarians will make a decision on the motion.  

Notice can be given, however there have been occasions where standing orders are stopped on the day for a censure motion. 

When will it happen? 

This is the last sitting week of parliament for 2020.(ABC News: Matt Roberts)

It's likely the censure motion will happen on Wednesday. 

However, given this is the last sitting week of parliament this year, the motion and vote will have to happen some time this week. 

The motion will be confirmed in the morning parliament notice. 

What happens next? 

Although there are no direct legal consequences from a censure, there is an opportunity for leaders to express severe disapproval. 

With a Labor-majority government, the motion is expected to be passed, however the opposition is expected to oppose it. 

Liberal MP Bridget Archer has indicated she will break ranks with the Coalition and cross the floor in favour of the motion. 

Being censured can sometimes have a significant political impact, and it can affect an MP's chances of re-election.  

Has a politician been censured before? 

Yes, but it is uncommon. 

The last time a minister was successfully censured was in 2020 when the Senate censured then-aged care minister Richard Colbeck for failing to recall basic facts about the state of COVID-19 outbreaks in aged care homes.

The year before that, then-senator Fraser Anning was formally censured by the Senate for expressing extreme anti-immigration views following the Christchurch massacre.

In 2018 former Liberal minister Bruce Billson was censured for undeclared payments.

Bruce Billson admitted he failed to disclose his salary from a lobby group while he was still an MP.(ABC News: Gus Goswell)

At the time an inquiry found Mr Billson took a job at the Franchise Council of Australia (FCA) as he retired, but did not declare a $75,000 salary for the job while he was still an MP. 

Related Stories

• PM confirms censure motion will be moved against Scott Morrison

  

• A report was released on Scott Morrison's secret ministerial power: Here's what it found

  

• Morrison 'misled parliament every single day' says Albanese, after report into secret ministries revealed