A GOVERNMENT-appointed enforcer would oversee press standards and have the power to apply sanctions, which critics said would stifle news reporting, under proposed draconian media changes.

Communications Minister Stephen Conroy yesterday announced a new proposed statutory position of Public Interest Media Advocate, among a raft of changes the government will attempt to ram through parliament by the end of next week.

The advocate would oversee the Press Council, the main vehicle for complaints about the print media, and could take back exemptions from privacy laws afforded to journalists to report valid news stories if the advocate deemed a breach of standards.

Power to determine if media mergers could proceed would be given to the government-appointed advocate, while the proposed scrapping of a key regional reach rule, which would assist Channel 9 in a proposed $4 billion merger with Southern Cross, was also announced yesterday.


Critics lined up to attack the proposed changes, which hang on whether the government can secure the Greens and the votes of four independents.

Former press council head David Flint compared the government's appointed advocate to Soviet regimes which he said "chose names which were completely contrary to what was the truth".

"It is dangerous ... it will give the government a power it should never have, the power to determine the content of the press. The press is there as a check and balance against the government," he said.

News Limited, publisher of The Daily Telegraph, and Fairfax lashed out at the proposals.

"This government will go down in history as the first Australian government outside of wartime to attack freedom of speech by seeking to introduce a regime which effectively institutes government sanctioned journalism," News Limited chief executive Kim Williams said.

Mr Williams added that the threat to take away privacy law exemptions "removes the capacity of journalists to do their job - it is a not-too-sophisticated endeavour to gag the media".

Fairfax Media CEO Greg Hywood said: "There's no evidence of a problem to solve in Australia. We can't see the purpose of further regulation of news publications."

The Coalition will oppose legislation, due to be introduced later this week.

"Freedom is at stake, liberty is at stake, democracy is at stake," communication spokesman Malcolm Turnbull said. "As Senator Conroy descends further and further into the pit of paranoia the ranks of the hate media in his mind get bigger and bigger.

"Anyone that disagrees with him is engaged in a vendetta."

Mr Conroy claimed a free press would still exist and said current media standards would apply under the new advocate and that the self-regulatory Press Council would continue to be funded by media companies .

"There is a community concern about media quality and how press complaints are handled," he said.

In an embarrassing moment at the end of his announcement of the changes, a potty-mouthed Mr Conroy realised he risked being late to the Senate and said: "Oh, shit."

Mr Conroy indicated a West Australian breakaway self-funded press council set up by Kerry Stokes' Seven West Media, which said the proposed regulation was "wholly inconsistent with the notion of a free press", could become a declared organisation under the new advocate.

Australian Press Council Chairman Julian Disney said the situation was concerning.

"The council, with the support of the media industry, has strengthened itself significantly. If other councils are not going to be required to meet the standards we have now and are working towards, this will be a race to the bottom," he said.

Nine chief David Gyngell was spotted leaving parliament yesterday, the latest TV executive seen in the building this week. While the free-to-air broadcasters applauded news there would be a permanent 50 per cent reduction in licensing fees, Ten Network boss Hamish McLennan condemned the review of the 75 per cent rule via a proposed one-day inquiry as being "ill-conceived".

"We are alarmed that this inquiry is being rushed and that the government thinks it can be done and dusted in just one day," he said.

Fairfax Media CEO Greg Hywood said: "There's no evidence of a problem to solve in Australia. We can't see the purpose of further regulation of news publications."

While some might not see this as a problem, the constant and incessant failures of the mainstream media to fact check (see The Australian re NBN), their constant attempts at the creation of 'narratives' that do not follow the truth, and skewed, biased ownership concentrated in the hands of a very few elites who push national discourse in favour of events or policies that line their own pockets is to me.

Very true, but no doubt Conroy is using this legislation as a personal vendetta against News Limited because of their criticism of him and the Labor government. Very scary situation and we should all cross our fingers that this doesn't get passed, because I don't see any government willing to rescind it.

You cannot control media anymore than u can control tastes...just reduce the potential for the majority of people....who are largely idiots...to lord over the rest. Folks get the media they deserve which is entirely fine...the only issue is when govt gets so big that the media can be warped to try and control the power wielded by govt.

I woud have said it was time for the relevant governing bodies and powers that be to re-write the Australian Media Standards and Practices with a 21st century society in mind - especially pertaining to social media practices and evolving definitions of 'good taste'.

It's never an attack on freedom if the left wing do it.

public interest equates to profits in the world of media. Tabloids sell crap because people buy crap. So there really isnt any reason to call this a body working "in the public interest". They should just say, "we've notice journalistic standards are going down the drain, what we want to do in punish journalists and editors who publish blatant lies. Newspapers should be held to account on the quality of their content, otherwise they have no right to call themselves a newspaper. Just as banks have to act appropriately to be able to call themselves a bank."

It's more like "We've noticed News Ltd content makes it harder for us to win the election so we'll try to force them to cooperate."

This exactly. This government can't stand criticism even when it has been generously warranted.

Sounds nice in theory...by whose measures do u re-write those arbitrary standards and practices by?

Fact is even with these unworkeable standards and measures the market will do what it will. Unless you're a fan of totalitarianism which is the only way to enforce such standards...remembering of course that the next bunch to take the reins may either interpret them differently or rewrite them completely once the precedent for regulated media has been set. Dangerous territory...

The standards were set arbitrarily to begin with. I don't see the issue with them being changed to accommodate modern social trends and social media. Basically what you're saying is that there shouldn't be any rules or laws because they can't be consistently enforced and because someone could come along and change them at will anyway.

What obtuse logic.

I think he's got a point. Maybe more time and effort should be spent on making libel claims a much cheaper process, the ACCC litigates on behalf of citizens surely a similar process could be in place for defamation. I certainly don't think current regulations are working, if you told me where to look I wouldn't know where to start.

Well for starties ...the rules are not enforced now...the press council is window dressing...

I'm preeeeeeeeeeety sure they are. That's why you don't get tits in your 6 o'clock news.

Oh no, that can't work. Because Blacka just said you can't change the rules because it won't be implemented fairly and consistently.

I really think the common law action for libel is sufficient enough to protect people from having their reputations damaged while allowing Fleet Street to have its free expression or publish news in the public interest.

Changes need to be made to common law actions to allow for social media and movement to electronic medium as primary means of communication.

I'd welcome a government owned newspaper/news site.
Do people on here choose 7, 9 & 10 over the ABC & SBS for their tv news and current affairs? :lol: :lol: :lol: