Media sheet or propaganda, Latham, sex-obsessed jibberer, Lachlan and taxes

3. A Media section or a Murdoch propaganda sheet?



By Stephen Mayne and Glenn Dyer

The Australian's Media section has been coming out each week since the late 1990s, but today's effort is the most shameless edition of biased and spun articles to suit the Murdoch commercial interests that we've ever seen. So much for providing objective analysis of the media.

Check out the front page. The feature picture and interview is with News Ltd executive chairman John Hartigan by the recently installed media writer with no business experience, John Lehmann. Whilst you're never going to sledge your own boss, Lehmann could have probed more thoroughly on life after Lachlan, but it was still worth reading as Hartigan warned the Federal Government of his master's discontent with the planned changes to media laws.

Then we have the media writer, Amanda Meade, ripping into Aunty over the Latham interview squabble across the top of page one and Mark Day, who owns a farm with John Hartigan, doing likewise in his column on the back page. It was all thoroughly predictable News Ltd pap and now almost a week old. The paper ran the same slanted views in a piece by Nick Leys, who ironically used to work on the ABC's Media Watch, last Saturday. Nothing has really changed since then but News Ltd is still using its mastheads to bang the same drum after failing in their court bid to injunct the Denton interview.

Both today's pieces argue the indefensible, that somehow the ABC news and current affairs division is some sort of Mount Olympus of journalism in Australia and that it's somehow wrong for ABC management to make decisions that in anyway discriminate against the interests of ABC NewsCaf, even though Lateline had the chance to show its Latham interview last Thursday night around 11.15pm, a time when the program has been aired three times this year.

Meade skates over the fact that Lateline management made the decision not to air on Thursday night after Denton, and avoids the point that if they had done so, there would have been no argument. What seems to be at point here is the unspoken wish by Lateline to have aired its program at 10.30pm last Thursday night, when ABC management approved Denton's program.

Meade and Day both avoid the point that viewers have voted on this issue: Denton's audience doubled on Monday night when the Latham interview was repeated. The audience numbers total more than 1.4 million for Denton and 366,000 for Lateline, a good result.

The attacks on Denton, his producers and program verge on the juvenile: if anyone from a News Ltd publication is to mention conflict of interest and media in the same breath then they are just hypocrites. As the Media section shows, conflict of interest and News Ltd are not strange bedfellows.

For instance, the third story on page one today is another John Lehmann effort looking at Kerry Stokes' track record in pay TV and legal action in the SportsVision case from a decade ago. It portrays Stokes (who appears in the C7 case on Monday in Sydney) in a poor light and naturally bolsters the case for News Ltd, one of the respondents. No self interest there, of course.

Even parts of Amanda Meade's Diary is a joke. We're told that a News Ltd journalist has had a baby - put it in the staff newsletter. There's also an attempt to smooth over relations with Paul Kelly after The Latham Diaries outed him as a critic of John Hartigan and Lachlan Murdoch. After 52 years of paranoid unspoken rules requiring News Corp journalists to praise their dear leaders, suddenly we get the following from Hartigan:

We as a company really want people to take strong views about issues because that's an important part of journalism. The suggestion that Paul or someone else has said things that are critical of management frankly doesn't concern me in the least. I would be concerned if people all aligned behind me or someone else and all nodded their heads. Frankly I don't think he said that, but who cares.

What next? Terry McCrann saying Rupert's lost his touch and should retire!



7. Steketee breaks rank with some sensible Latham analysis



By Stephen Mayne

The Latham Diaries come in several forms. There were the original handwritten entries at the time events happened. Then came the version Latham transcribed into his computer after leaving Parliament. Then the version he submitted to Melbourne University Press. And the final version after the lawyers and editors presumably did a fair whack of tinkering.

But for all the huffing and puffing by the ALP and media establishment, there are still no signs of anyone suing. Paul Kelly started out okay in his original analysis of The Latham Diaries as he attempted to give a taste of what was to come, but by the time we got to last Saturday's feature he was writing him off, and by Tuesday he was telling ABC Sydney that Latham now despises the entire Australian community.

Showing that News Ltd hasn't collectively shut-down on the man who has unleashed a volley of attacks on the Murdochs and their spear carriers, Mike Steketee today produced a thoughtful analysis in The Australian which is well worth reading here. If only Laurie Oakes could have put his bruised ego to one side and managed something similar.

Steketee hones in on Latham's powerful critique against Beazley's politics, which are far more profound and well-based than all this overblown (by Latham and everyone else) dirt spreading stuff, because they go way back to 1996 before the two fell out. Beazley sounds like a waffling, unreconstructed Whitlamite who has no problems with big government, interventionist industry policy and budget deficits. There is also so much baggage from his Ministerial days that it is hard to imagine him ever becoming Prime Minister.

All these journalists who keep saying Latham's vitriol overshadows some good points should actually start focusing on those good points, of which there are many. The factional system, union power and Beazley's policy position over the last 10 years and small target strategy are all very genuine concerns and Latham has laid it all out on the table in a devastating fashion.

Compare the quality of that first Hawke Cabinet to the factional luddites and union duds who now populate the green and red benches for Labor in Canberra.

"The tragedy of The Latham Diaries is that they will poison the climate in which there can be a productive debate about such issues," Steketee concludes rather pessimistically.

Not so, the evidence presented by Latham is so powerful that Labor will simply have to act, unless they wish to stay out of power federally for another 10 years. For the first time, someone from inside the ALP has laid it out for all to see in a compelling argument, yet this has not yet been discussed anywhere in the aftermath of the book's release.



9. Which Latham denials stack up?



By Stephen Mayne

There are thousands of controversial new facts and insights about politics and the media placed on the table in The Latham Diaries and the man himself claims to be an absolute stickler for the truth. For instance, poor old Bernard Lagan copped a bollocking from Latham for supposedly making 133 errors in his first edition of Loner: Inside a Labor Tragedy.

However, Latham's own accuracy has been called into question, although many of the disputed events related to conversations involving two people that cannot be verified by a third party. It is worth considering that some of the claims are so explosive that they almost have to be denied - something that can be done when only two people were party to the conversation.

So, how is Latham's credibility holding up? Here is a sample of some of the more recent claims that have now been denied or remain a little unclear:

1. Beazley's a serial muckraker - definitely not true, Latham credibility dented. However, Beazley supporters and staff sound like they got up to some occasional mischief.

2. Gabrielle Gwyther: Latham claims she told him she was bisexual. She denies it. Hard to tell.

3. Kevin Rudd: Latham claims that Rudd was crying in a meeting after his mother's recent death and threatened to go to the backbench if he didn't get shadow treasury. Rudd denies the tears and said he never threatened to go to the backbench.

4. Mark Arbib: Latham wrote: "The focus group also showed that it's popular to bash blacks: 'You need to find new issues, like attacking land rights, get stuck into all that politically correct Aboriginal stuff – the punters love it'." - Arbib completely denies this, claimed Latham drank two bottles of red wine at the lunch and is getting legal advice.

5. Mark Riley: Latham claims he went through Helen Coonan's rubbish for a story and expanded this apparent exaggeration on ABC Adelaide to "a cadre of journalists who go through garbage bins to find their stories". Riley has denied this and explained that he simply picked up a copy of The Economist from Helen Coonan's footpath. Yes, but what did Riley tell Latham at the time? Was he big-noting himself to Latham?

6. Paul Kelly is outed for bagging Lachlan Murdoch and John Hartigan to Latham. Kelly has remained silent but Hartigan has come out and said "Frankly, I don't think he said that." How would he know?

7. Maxine McKew: the same boozy lunch with Mark Arbib where Latham claims she was offered the seat of Fowler in 2001 but "couldn't stand living in Cabramatta or Liverpool." McKew has corrected one error in today's Strewth column saying that it was 2004 and also denied the Cabramatta claim, but that could have just been Arbib's interpretation. Should McKew really have been hosting Lateline on Friday nights last year whilst negotiations were on foot with the ALP? We need some answers on who told what when on this one.

8. Paul Lennon: Latham quotes Lennon saying: "You were complaining about Butler's payout. But do you know why I had to sack him? Do you know what really happened? He got p*ssed at the wedding and carried on, that's why he had to go'." Crikey editor Misha Ketchell and Greg Barns may beg to differ but Lennon's refusal to deny the claim on several occasions in Parliament yesterday suggests there is something in it. Again, it is important not to confuse the claimed comment with what happened in real life. Lennon may have been under pressure from Latham at the time and was looking for exaggerated new positions to defend his claim. I'm on Latham's side with this one.

When you consider the huge number of claims which remain completely uncontested, Mark Latham's credibility isn't looking too bad at all after this week's assault. I've had several journalists decline to comment or refuse to engage when asked if the claims by Latham are true.

If anyone has any other errors to bring forward, send it to smayne@crikey.com.au, but so far Latham is doing pretty well.



13. Latham's Tele initiation – 5 hour p*ss-up at Lucio's



Stephen Mayne writes:

As someone who has also gone through the five-hour Col Allan lunch at Lucio's as the official initiation at the Daily Telegraph, it was most amusing to read the following extract from The Latham Diaries. The only difference is that our $500 booze-up, which finished with bottles of limoncello at about 5pm, included current News Ltd executive chairman John Hartigan and current Adelaide Advertiser editor Mel Mansell. Col even used the chauffeur to ferry us there and back:

Wednesday, 21 October, 1998

Lunch with The Daily Telegraph's Col Allan, Malcolm Farr and Piers Akerman at the swank Lucio's in Paddington. It's a marathon session – these guys can really hit the p*ss. They want me to write a weekly column for the paper and I'm happy to oblige. It's a good forum and, after the turgid prose of Civilising Global Capital, a chance to simplify my writing and message for a popular audience.

They have no problem with me also writing for The AFR at the rival Fairfax stable – the audiences are totally different. This way I'll have all bases covered: the pointy-head audience in the Fin and the mob who read the Tele. An ideal opportunity for political agitation from the backbench. Plus I'll be earning a few extra bob, much needed for the property settlement with the ex.

The lunch conversation is a long way from policy debate. Running the Tele is about good food, good wine and good hatchet jobs. These blokes have scores of public figures they hate, and the purpose of the paper is to do them in. I joined in the spirit, boasting that my first column would out Bob Carr as a Western Sydney hater. When I worked for him he would often say, 'You must feel stupid living in Western Sydney, so far from the coast.' I won't do it, of course, it was just the piss talking.

The lunch finished at 5.30pm and then it was back to News Ltd for an hour of work, blind as bats. Col wanted to kick on, but I bailed out. A five-hour lunch is about my limit these days.

CRIKEY: Taking Rupert's coin was poor form as it was all done on Parliamentary time. However, the column certainly provided Iron Mark with the perfect forum to build his reputation and they were usually lively, thought-provoking efforts. This extract also makes the point that many people are missing in The Latham Diaries - parts of it are very funny. I spent two hours in a cafe going through some of the earlier years yesterday and the bar staff kept looking over wondering why this bloke was laughing out loud so much. Don't believe all the media rubbish, just read the thing for yourself.



14. Is Matthew Abraham a sex-obsessed jibberer?



By Stephen Mayne

If you've got a spare 24 minutes, listen to Tuesday's hilarious exchange between Mark Latham and the man he regards as a "sex-obsessed jibberer," ABC Adelaide morning host Matthew Abraham.

Iron Mark this week knocked back shock jocks such as Alan Jones and John Laws because he only wants to do interviews with journalists prepared to seriously examine the many important issues that he raises. A slanging match with the Parrot may be entertaining, but Latham wants none of it.

For an ABC presenter, Matthew Abraham was remarkably tabloid and ended up copping all sorts of shots from Latham for focusing almost exclusively on the sexual or titillating aspects of the Diaries. He couldn't even get it right, at one point saying that Kate Fischer was in the book (it was her sister Penny) and then wasting valuable time on Pru Goward when, as Latham said, "I was clearing her, not smearing her."

John Howard himself has been more responsible than anyone for spreading the Pru Goward rumour. As Miranda Devine wrote in The Daily Telegraph on August 10, 1998: "Howard does volunteer, with twinkling eyes, that there have been rumours circulating Canberra he is having an affair with Pru Goward."

Abraham did get a slightly sheepish Latham to expand on what he meant by "quality box for Ross," but it really was a pathetic interview to devote so much time to the titillating trash when there are so many serious issues and insights to pursue.

We've published the interview in full on the site here and do have a read as there are laughs a plenty as Iron Mark called Abraham a "pervert" with a "tiny mind" and then says: "This is the Mad Hatter's tea party, as ever interviewed by you, you're just running around in circles. It's hilarious."

It finished as follows:

IRON MARK: Yeah, well Matthew, good to know that you haven't changed one iota mate, and I'm very surprised your program never made it into the diary because you and the other jibberer were quite legendary in our office. Things never change, hey.

SEX-OBSESSED JIBBERER: Well I was disappointed I wasn't in there.

IRON MARK: It's a miracle you weren't, my press secretary – you'll probably be in his diary – he had quite a thing for you and I'm seeing him tomorrow and I'll let him know that nothing's changed there at the ABC in Adelaide and one of the joys of putting you on the list and doing the interview was just to check out that fact. It's nice to have some consistency at the good old Adelaide ABC. You have a good day Matthew and I hope you can read the book in full and have a look at some of those public policy and bigger issues as well.



23. Where is Lachlan Murdoch paying tax these days?



By Stephen Mayne

What a cosy gathering it was to hear Peter Costello lay out his foreign policy credentials at the Lowy Institute in Sydney yesterday. The head table featured Lachlan Murdoch next to James Packer, Frank Lowy next to Peter Costello and Ian Macfarlane next to wannabe Fairfax chairman Roger Corbett. New Fairfax chairman Ron Walker also featured on the head table and was pictured walking outside with James Packer yesterday, in another example of his willlingness to consort with the enemy.

There was a time when Fairfax and Packer were arch enemies and bitter competitors. Now Fairfax have made what James Packer described as "an inspired choice" in choosing a mate in Ron Walker to run the show as we count down to what might well be Prime Minister Costello's vision for even bigger media conglomerates dominating power in Australia.

You only need to read The Latham Diaries to get a real insight into how paranoid the ALP is when it comes to sucking up to the Murdoch and Packer interests. Rupert shifts his News Corp shareholding to Bermuda to dud NSW taxpayers of $51 million in stamp duty revenue and no-one in Macquarie St says boo. Sad, isn't it?

Which brings us to Lachlan Murdoch's tax arrangements. Peter Costello might well have leant across the table and asked him yesterday: "Hey you with the buzz cut, I see you've just pocketed a $10 million payout from dad's company. Are you giving me $4.8 million of that or are you giving George Bush $3.5 million?"

It's an interesting question. Because Australia's punitive personal income tax regime makes it a lot more expensive for Lachlan to become an Australian resident for tax purposes, why wouldn't he delay this until the 2006-07 financial year?

Still, News Ltd executive chairman John Hartigan told The Australian today that Lachlan is in the Sydney office "pretty much every day," which would suggest he will owe Cossie a big whack. Then again, within days of his grand arrival in Sydney after a holiday on his yacht in Tahiti, Lachlan was back in New York enjoying the tennis with Nicole Kidman.

If any tax experts out there can explain how many months you need to be out of the country to avoid being a resident for tax purposes, drop smayne@crikey.com.au a line. Similarly, can Lachlan claim he was a US citizen at the time he received the payout, August 31, or is it based on overall income for a financial year?

Copyright © 2024 The Mayne Report. All rights reserved

• share
  Share
  • 
    Facebook
  • 
    Twitter
  • email
    Email
  • print
    Print
  • link
    Copy Link
  • cancel
    Cancel