Solidarity

Today’s Crikey daily email reckons the media — especially the Murdoch press, and very especially The Australian — is severely biased against Labor on industrial relations. First, Richard Farmer sums up the recent reporting:

On Monday Kim Beazley was “to axe AWAs in backflip”. On Tuesday that had become “Unions push ALP for more”. Wednesday saw “Beazley to risk pay cuts.” And this morning Beazley had become “another Latham: business.” The Opposition Leader’s plan to make industrial relations the key election issue was certainly captivating The Australian with four front page leads in a row; every one of them putting a negative slant on Labor’s plans.

Further on, Stephen Mayne offers a theory that might explain this coverage:

Mind you, there’s plenty of conflicts of interest amongst media companies as well. Mark Latham wrote this in his diary after a cosy dinner at Cavan with Lachlan Murdoch and News Ltd CEO John Hartigan on 11 March 2004:

Two main political issues: AWAs and Foxtel. Murdoch’s company has the highest number of AWAs in the country; all their journalists are on individual contracts. Hartigan pressed hard for me to drop our policy dedicated to their abolition, but I told him there was no chance of that.

Latham was never going to get support from the Murdoch press because of industrial relations, Iraq and the US alliance. Beazley can potentially neutralise the last two, but his IR policy will guarantee opposition from the Murdoch press, which has a massive conflict that thoroughly discredits any editorial stand they take.

Where’s the disclosure at the bottom of every IR story: “News Ltd employs more people on AWAs than any other Australian employer”.