When is an undisclosed advertorial, paid for by the fossil fuel industry and splashed across the front pages of all the Murdoch tabloids, not a breach of press standards?When the Australian Press Council rules there is nothing to see and finds no breach.This week the APC deliveredits surprising verdictfour months after a series of articles extolling the virtues of gas were published on page one of the Courier-Mail, the Advertiser, the Daily Telegraph and the Herald Sun.While the double-page spread inside the papers disclosed the sponsorship, the front-page articles did not. Those who read the main piece online saw no disclosure at all.Beneath headlines including “Dark ages” and “Step on the gas”, the articles urged an end to lengthy gas project approval delays to avoid “summer blackouts” or households “being plunged into darkness”.“Households face being plunged into darkness – while paying even more for power – without urgent action on Australia’s gas shortage,” a “special report” on page one said.The self-regulatory body investigated complaints that the front-page articles did notdisclose to readersthat they pointed to a series of sponsored content articles, paid for by the gas infrastructure business APA Group and the gas companies Tamboran, Santos and Jemena.Uhlmann and Bowen’s big debate night – plus News Corp left puzzled at audience verdict on Dutton | Weekly BeastRead moreGuardian Australia’s climate and environment editor, Adam Morton,argued at the timethat readers were “sold a lie – that the story was straight news coverage”.News Corp, which is the biggest funder of the council, said the front-page articles were “normal editorial content which is neither inaccurate nor misleading” and were written “independently of the sponsors”.The APC found no breach ofaccuracy or transparency standards.“The Council accepts on the information before it, the publications’ submissions that the front-page articles are editorial content and not undisclosed sponsored content,” the APC said.After the publication of the adjudication, the articles carry a note which tells readers the press council has “not upheld a complaint about this article”.It’s little wonder even News Corp’s own journalistsmock the council’s findings.Guardian Australia is not a member of the Australian Press Council but it has an independent readers’ editor that investigates complaints and publishes corrections and clarifications.News Corp goes to war against the ABCAn episode of Four Corners about the Australian War Memorial’s $500m expansion did not breach the ABC’s editorial standards on accuracy, impartiality or fair and honest dealing,the ABC ombudsman has found.InSacrifice, the Gold Walkley award-winning journalist Mark Willacy reported on links between the memorial and the global arms industry and examined conflicts of interest, corporate influence and the memorial’s future.Sign up to get Guardian Australia’s weekly media diary as a free newsletterUnsurprisingly, the War Memorial didn’t like it and shared its complaint with the Daily Telegraph, leading to extensive coverage this week across the News Corp tabloids as well as news.com.au, Sky News Australia, the West Australian and the Daily Mail.The complaint was based on a belief the ABC cut together the Last Post ceremony alongside vision of construction works, giving the false impression that construction work had occurred during the Last Post.“‘Cannot help themselves’: ABC’s Mark Willacy caught out in another doctored footage claim,” was Chris Kenny’s contribution on Sky News.The stories linked the complaint to an earlier accusation about the ABC “editing footage to vilify a military institution”, theDaily Mail reported.In that case anindependent reviewfound that five additional sounds of gunshots were “inadvertently but inaccurately” introduced into footage showing a commando firing from a helicopter in the Line of Fire stories, which investigated activities by Australian commandos during a 2012 deployment in Afghanistan.But this time around the ombudsman found no case to answer. Fiona Cameron said in her lengthy report that the episode did not suggest that construction noise from the development site had disrupted a Last Post ceremony.Ramping up the criticism on Wednesday, the Tele ran a story suggesting the ABC should be stripped of the rights to broadcastAnzac Daynext week.The former New South Wales veterans minister David Elliott told the Tele the ABC was “manipulating footage to create a sense of drama using innuendo”.“In my mind the ABC has now forfeited the right to cover the Anzac Day March” Elliott said.The live broadcast of the Anzac Day dawn service from theAustralian War Memorialand live coverage of dawn services, local marches and other key commemorative events in towns and cities around Australia is one of the largest events the ABC broadcasts.“It is regrettable thatNews Corporationin its reporting of the Council’s complaint has attempted to link this editorial issue with the Anzac Day coverage the ABC provides for Australians each year across our platforms,” an ABC spokesperson said.skip past newsletter promotionSign up toWeekly BeastFree weekly newsletterAmanda Meade's weekly diary on the latest in Australian media, free every FridayEnter your email addressSign upPrivacy Notice:Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see ourPrivacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the GooglePrivacy PolicyandTerms of Serviceapply.after newsletter promotionZelić joins the TeleThe Daily Telegraph wasquick to pile onthe then SBS broadcaster Lucy Zelić in 2018, calling her “pretentious” and a “show-off” for accurately pronouncing soccer players’ names during the World Cup tournament in Russia.The columnist Claire Harvey, now the editorial director at the Australian, agreed with critics on social media who didn’t like Zelić’s custom of pronouncing players’ names in the same way they would be in their home country, labelling her “spectacularly silly and flamboyant”.“Because although we’d all agree it’s good manners to pronounce foreign words as carefully as you can, there’s a line beyond which you just sound like a show-off,” Harvey wrote.“And that’s what viewers bristle about with Lucy Zelic’s on-air persona. It’s not about pronunciation. It’s about pretension. People feel you’re hectoring them.”A lot has changed in seven years. This week Zelić wasappointed a regularDaily Telegraph columnist, focusing not on sport but on equality in sport.News Breakfast goes westJames Glenday has been on the ABC News Breakfast couch for three months now and says he is accustomed to rising at 3.30am. The former Europe and North America correspondent joined Bridget Brennanas co-host in Januaryand has no complaints about the early mornings or the 15 hours of live television a week.View image in fullscreenABC News Breakfast hosts James Glenday and Bridget Brennan broadcast live from Western AustraliaBut this week Glenday, Brennan and the meteorologist Nate Byrne had to throw out their usual gruelling schedules and get out of bed at 1.30am because the show was broadcast live fromWestern Australia. The crew did three outside election broadcasts: in central Perth, Cottesloe beach and York.After the local council announced on Facebook that ABC News Breakfast would be positioned on the main street of York from 4am, some locals turned up at 3.50am to welcome them.“You get adrenaline from being on the road that helps carry you through the early mornings, especially when you know people who have been watching come down and say hello,” Glenday told Weekly Beast. “It gives you a bit of extra energy.”Byrne said it was unusual for the weatherman to be on an election tour but since WA is his home state “I get to be tour guide”.Two more outside election broadcasts are planned, one from western Sydney and one from Queensland.BBC picks up where NYT left offBBC News has dramatically expanded its bureau in Australia, not long after the New York Times quietly withdrew as a major presence after opening with great fanfare in 2017.No playing favourites with ABC journalists as Dutton vows to slash broadcaster’s ‘waste’ | Weekly BeastRead moreThe BBC bureau has previously concentrated on writing content for the world about Australia rather than news for Australians, focusing on “down under” stereotypes like crocodile hunting and sharks.This is set to change after the broadcaster hired half a dozen new journalists led by the news editor, Jay Savage.“This change is aimed to enhance global breaking news content for UK BBC News online audiences, bolster 24-hour news coverage for all audiences globally, and increase BBC News’ editorial presence in Australia,” the BBC said.Jacko back in the spotlightThe former Spotlight producer Steve Jackson, whose text messages about securing an interview with Bruce Lehrmann were made public at the defamation trial, has been hired by the Australian as media diarist. The court heard that another Spotlight producer Taylor Auerbach had texted Jackson in 2022: “I’ve got the yarn. I’ve just been on the piss with Bruce Lehrmann.”Jackson has been writing forthe Daily Mailsince his appointment to the $320,000-a-year role as media adviser to the New South Wales police commissioner Karen Webbwas rescindedin the wake of the reports about his earlier work as a journalist.At Lehrmann’s trial last Aprilthe court heardthat Auerbach had fallen out with Jackson and left Seven after allegedly sustaining a psychiatric injury at the hands of his former friend and former Spotlight executive producer Mark Llewellyn.
Nothing to see here, Press Council says after News Corp tabloids’ front-page undisclosed advertorial gassing up fossil fuel | Weekly Beast
TruthLens AI Suggested Headline:
"Australian Press Council Finds No Breach in News Corp's Sponsored Gas Promotion"
The Guardian
6.2
TruthLens AI Summary
The Australian Press Council (APC) has recently concluded that there was no breach of press standards regarding a series of front-page articles published in News Corp's tabloids, which were funded by the fossil fuel industry. The articles, which appeared on the front pages of the Courier-Mail, the Advertiser, the Daily Telegraph, and the Herald Sun, promoted the benefits of gas and called for expediting gas project approvals to prevent electricity shortages. Although the articles contained a sponsorship disclosure within their inner pages, the front-page content lacked any such indication. Critics, including Guardian Australia's climate editor Adam Morton, argued that the articles misled readers into thinking they were straightforward news reports rather than sponsored content. Despite these complaints, the APC found that the articles were editorial content and did not violate accuracy or transparency standards, leading to a controversial ruling that has drawn skepticism even from News Corp’s own journalists.
In the wake of the APC's decision, News Corp defended its articles as independent editorial work, asserting that they were neither inaccurate nor misleading. This ruling has raised questions about the effectiveness of self-regulatory bodies like the APC in maintaining journalistic integrity, particularly when considering the substantial financial ties between News Corp and the council. Additionally, the APC's findings have been met with ridicule and disbelief, suggesting a disconnect between public perception and the council's assessments. The situation is further complicated by ongoing tensions between News Corp and the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), as seen in recent disputes over editorial standards and coverage of significant events. This complex media landscape highlights ongoing debates about transparency, accountability, and the influence of corporate interests in journalism, particularly in the context of reporting on critical issues such as climate change and energy policy.
TruthLens AI Analysis
The article highlights a significant concern regarding media ethics, particularly focusing on the relationship between sponsored content and journalistic integrity. The Australian Press Council's decision not to classify undisclosed advertorials in Murdoch tabloids as a breach of press standards raises questions about transparency and the influence of the fossil fuel industry on public discourse.
Media Integrity and Public Trust
The ruling from the Press Council suggests an erosion of trust in media institutions, especially when readers are misled into believing that sponsored content is independent news. This creates an impression that media outlets may prioritize financial interests over their responsibility to provide accurate information to the public. The concept of transparency is crucial here, as undisclosed sponsorship can lead to misinformation and manipulation of public perception regarding critical issues like energy sources and climate change.
Implications for the Public and Environment
This situation reflects a broader trend where corporate interests can shape public narratives, particularly in industries with significant environmental impacts. By failing to disclose sponsorship, the tabloids contribute to a narrative that may downplay the urgency of transitioning away from fossil fuels. This can have dire consequences for public policy and environmental advocacy, as it creates a climate where fossil fuel industries can operate with less scrutiny and accountability.
Reader Perception and Media Influence
The article suggests that readers may feel deceived, thinking they are receiving unbiased reporting when, in fact, they are engaging with content shaped by corporate sponsors. This can lead to apathy or mistrust among the public, further complicating the relationship between citizens and media. The mention of specific headlines that evoke urgency around energy shortages highlights a manipulative tactic to rally public support for fossil fuel projects without disclosing the financial motivations behind the coverage.
Comparative Analysis with Other Media
When compared to other media outlets that prioritize transparency and ethical reporting, these Murdoch tabloids create a contrasting image that may alienate certain audiences. Many news organizations strive to uphold journalistic standards that emphasize accountability, making this situation a critical point of discussion within the media landscape.
Potential Economic and Political Ramifications
The implications of this article extend beyond media ethics; they touch on economic and political spheres as well. As public opinion sways under the influence of undisclosed advertorials, policies regarding energy and climate could be affected, potentially stalling meaningful progress toward sustainable practices. This scenario poses questions about accountability for media outlets and their role in shaping public policy.
Target Audiences and Community Reaction
The news may resonate with communities concerned about climate change and energy independence, as well as those advocating for greater media accountability. It highlights the divide between those who support fossil fuel industries and those who champion renewable energy solutions.
Market and Investment Considerations
From a financial perspective, the implications of this narrative could affect stock prices of companies involved in fossil fuels, as public sentiment may shift in response to increased awareness of media manipulation. Investors may become more cautious regarding companies perceived as benefiting from biased media support.
Global Context and Power Dynamics
This situation reflects a broader global struggle between fossil fuel interests and the urgent need for climate action. As countries grapple with energy crises and climate change, the narratives shaped by media outlets will play a crucial role in influencing public perception and policy decisions. Regarding the writing of the article, while it is unclear if AI was directly involved, the language and structure suggest an intention to provoke thought and discussion on media ethics. The framing of issues, choice of language, and presentation of facts may indicate a bias towards highlighting corporate influence in media. The overall reliability of the article can be considered moderate. It accurately presents the facts regarding the Press Council's ruling and the nature of the content published by the tabloids, but the potential bias and implications may affect readers' interpretation of the information. As such, it serves as a valuable piece for examining the intersection of media, corporate influence, and public trust.