Comments for Harry Clarke

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by hc

hc — Fri, 03 Feb 2012 20:24:51 +0000

I expressly state that 15% is not control but with the proposed liberalisatuon of media ownership laws her 15% stake will be used to determine who does exercise control when the inevitable scramble for control does occur. Ms. Reinhart is a very determined person – even in relation to her own family!

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by Uncle Milton

Uncle Milton — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:37:53 +0000

Let me also add that Fairfax is a pretty resilient organisation. It survived Warwick Fairfax; it survived Conrad Black; it survived Kerry Packer’s various attempts at control. It will most likely survive Gina Reinhart. Whether it survives the internet is the more difficult question.

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by Uncle Milton

Uncle Milton — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 23:33:53 +0000

I agree with ken n.

Having 15% and a board seat is not control; it’s not even financial and management control, let alone editorial control. And even if she did have editorial control, trying to turn the SMH and the Age into the Australian would be very difficult. For one thing, as ken says, they would lose readers in droves.

But more importantly, the cultures of the organisations would be extremely resistant to any such move. The Howard Government tried to change the culture of the ABC by stacking with board with ideological cronies and it failed miserably.

As it is, the Fairfax papers, which unlike the Australian, are not cross-subsidised by the profitable parts of a media empire, face a bleak future, as with most print media around the world. And that is with a fairly loyal readership and strong brands. It’s not all impossible that Reinhart, if she gets enough control, could wreck Fairfax completely and hasten its death. But successfully turn the Age and SMH into right wing rags like the Australian? Very unlikely.

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by ken n

ken n — Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:53:07 +0000

Getting a seat on the board is a long way from having any editorial influence. Look at the ABC board.
Even if Rinehart got control, what would happen? If she moved the editorial position towards those issues that are in her interest, the papers would lose readers fairly rapidly. Perhaps take a few from News, but almost certainly hasten the decline of print.
If she appointed good managers – it is quite possible she is interested in it as a business – and spent money she just might slow or stop the decline.
Though I am uncomfortable with the idea of Rinehart controlling such a big slice on print, I don’t think my discomfort is very rational.
Much much worse if the government tries to control the outcome and selects who can own a newspaper.

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by JB Cairns

JB Cairns — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 22:42:52 +0000

I agree on all counts

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by Jim

Jim — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 18:14:10 +0000

Would you be willing to take a bet that people will get most of their media from mainstream media organisations in 20 years?

Comment on Gina Rinehart & Fairfax by James

James — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:58:50 +0000

I can think of no examples from the 20th century when concentrated media owned by wealthy chums ended in tears… Not one.

Comment on Silly migration policies by dell studio xps 8300 review

dell studio xps 8300 review — Wed, 01 Feb 2012 11:18:59 +0000

I am not sure where you are getting your info, but great topic. I needs to spend some time learning more or understanding more. Thanks for great info I was looking for this information for my mission.

Comment on Catchy tune by Gotye by hc

hc — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 07:41:52 +0000

Good interview Liam and interesting research.

Comment on Catchy tune by Gotye by Liam Lenten

Liam Lenten — Mon, 30 Jan 2012 02:12:40 +0000

See this, Harry: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zjXLmxbsLi0

Watch from 3:48: Correct prediction for a change – the song won the poll the next day:)