Meanwhile, in another media universe

 

 
Geo Gina’: Iron Woman Robs Australians Blind
The Australian, June 2, 2011 
Outrage is growing in the Australian community at the involvement of multi-billionaire Gina Rinehart in campaigns protesting against action on climate change and efforts for citizens to earn a fairer share from the sale of our natural resources.
Rinehart, the nation’s richest person with a fortune of more than $10 billion, has used her massive wealth to stymie reforms aimed at reducing Australia’s carbon footprint and ensuring an enduring national legacy from the commodities boom.
“Our regional infrastructure is falling apart,” said Opposition spokesman for regional development, Senator Farmably Choice. “Meanwhile, this spoiled heiress sits in her 50-room Peppermint Grove mansion, telling us she’ll be ruined if we take modest action on climate change and tax resource depletion more fairly.”
Family groups also expressed outrage at Rinehart’s self-indulgence and plan a rally for equity in the nation’s capitals this weekend.
“People can’t pay their electricity bills and it’s only going to get worse; we need to start investing in alternatives,” said Graham Straightlace of the Christian Family Association. “In the parable of the loaves and fishes, Jesus taught us the principle of community-mindedness. Ms Rinehart obviously does not read her Bible.”
The iron ore magnate has received a remarkable return on the modest $20 million outlay she and other miners spent to derail the government’s super profits resource tax. The subsequent compromise deprived taxpayers of $60 billion in revenues that could have been spent on schools, hospitals and badly need infrastructure.
“The bush is already bleeding and Rinehart is just opening the wound further,” Senator Choice told 2GB talkshow host Tim Dunlop.
Rinehart is known to have spent $70,000 on security measures around her compound in Perth’s salubrious western suburbs and recently hired tattooed pub rocker Angry Anderson as her personal bodyguard.
The pearls she wore in a protest in Perth last year against the super profits tax are reportedly worth $20 million on their own – enough to feed, house and clothe 200 families comfortably for one year.
Not content with carving up the resource tax and jettison the carbon tax, Rinehart is now buying up swathes of the Australian media to press her selfish cause even further. Stakes in the Ten Network and Fairfax Media are seen as her bulwark against policy measures that might otherwise protect the interests of tradies, small business people, teachers and nurses against the ruinously high interest rates brought about by an unsustainable commodities boom.
“We’re used to be a nation that looked after the little bloke and blokette,” Senator Choice mused. “Not any more. It’s a nation for billionaires and fly-by-nighters, robbing us blind and taking the cash.”
Next in our ‘Billionaires’ series:
‘After Murdoch: Warring Children Tear the News Empire Apart’

See also:
How Media and Mining Distort Australia’s Climate Debate: The Guardian
Role Reversal as Liberals Belt Labor with Class War Rhetoric: David McKnight, SMH


13 Comments

Anonymous · June 1, 2011 at 8:07 am

the ironic thing is mr.D,articles such as this would find a large audience and sell newspapers by the truck load.

Anonymous · June 1, 2011 at 8:28 am

She is a leach – done nothing, just Old Lang's kid. Fade away Gina!!

kuke · June 1, 2011 at 8:48 am

At least the Guardian's taking notice:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2011/may/31/mining-media-australia-carbon-tax

Sue · June 1, 2011 at 10:19 am

Thanks to Mr D and great link kuke.

Anonymous · June 1, 2011 at 10:27 am

The Mining Tax as proposed by Kevin Rudd meant thousands of dollars extra in every Australian's super.

We won't forget who stopped that…

Notus · June 1, 2011 at 8:11 pm

Social media and mainstream metropolitan newspaper merge as the Sydney Morning Herald becomes de facto Gina Rinehart Facebook page.

Tim · June 1, 2011 at 9:29 pm

Thanks for the job!

On the article, it is really interesting to consider why it would be nigh-on impossible for a journalist to write something like this.

Frames are stubborn things…

Sue · June 2, 2011 at 2:16 am

This non-journalist I would be interested to hear you expand a little on that, Tim.

Mr D · June 2, 2011 at 3:48 am

I think what Tim means, Sue, is that the media constructs an accepted narrative around a set of events (eg: a handful of accidental deaths from roofing insulations = Peter Garrett is killing people with the Pink Batts program).

Once that narrative is set it is very hard for anyone to construct an alternative version of those events (eg: the rate of insulation deaths after the Pink Batts program was no different than it was before – see Possum's analysis).

http://blogs.crikey.com.au/pollytics/2011/04/24/the-csiro-gets-hip-to-debunking-media-hysteria/

You just cannot do it as a journalist because it means upending the whole construct.

Sue · June 2, 2011 at 3:52 am

Okay, thanks.

How thirsty we are for narrative that we'll drink any old thing, eh.

Thanks for your blog, really enjoying it.

Dan · June 2, 2011 at 6:48 am

Now, Mr D, see if you can get a mainstream newspaper to run this story – even as a satirical piece. I'm not holding my breath.

Anonymous · June 2, 2011 at 8:49 am

Mr D,

Have you thought of submitting some of your pieces to ABC's The Drum. They might as well publish your work as some of the fillers from right-wingers.

DaveMcRae · June 3, 2011 at 4:37 am

Wonderful Mr D

Anon@1 I believe you hypothesis regarding newspapers being viable by being fair dinkum is true and evident by the Yes Men's fake New York Times that was meet mostly with enthusiasm from the street. (Although I note that the Yes Men was reporting on events that should happen, Mr D is reporting that should happen on actual events)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: