Catryna Bilyk (Tasmania, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I present the report of the Select Committee on the Future of Public Interest Journalism together with the Hansard record of proceedings and documents presented to the committee.

Ordered that the report be printed.

by leave—As chair of the Senate Select Committee on the Future of Public Interest Journalism, I'd like to make a few comments on the report we're presenting to the Senate today.

A vibrant, diverse and free fourth estate is an essential component for any healthy democracy.

Australians rely on quality journalism to give them access to the information they need. This helps them to make informed decisions about how they participate in democracy, as well as enriching their lives more generally. In short, public interest journalism keeps the powerful accountable. It ensures that both the Commonwealth and parliament are transparent and accountable to the Australian people.

The evidence received by the committee was clear: the Australian and global news media sectors still face significant challenges, especially in dealing with the transition to web based news delivery.

A crash in revenues from traditional business models has led to the shutting down or restructuring of many news publications.

Until recently, newspaper classifieds and commercial ads underpinned the revenue of newspapers. This has shifted quickly, and now online aggregators—especially Google and Facebook—dominate advertising in a way that was unimaginable just a few years ago.

This has meant the loss of many journalist jobs. Fewer journalists mean less coverage of important areas of public interest, less scrutiny on public institutions and less coverage of other powerful vested interests in society.

This is especially concerning given the recent spread of fake news, and its obvious corrosive effects on democracies around the world.

As well as these clear challenges, the committee took evidence of the unprecedented opportunities offered by the digital age.

There are now larger audiences for news medias than ever before. Consumers can access information and news from devices they carry in their pockets, and this has led to the democratisation of information and communication. Perspectives that struggled to be recognised or reflected in mainstream media now can find a platform, a voice and an audience.

The committee was guided by three questions:

(1) What are the challenges and opportunities for public interest journalism?

(2) Where can the Commonwealth contribute positively to the health, diversity and financial stability of the sector, without compromising the principal of the freedom and independence of the press?

(3) If the Commonwealth can proactively support the industry, how could the costs of any initiatives be offset in the budget?

The committee received 75 submissions from individuals and organisations, and held seven hearings in Canberra, Sydney and Melbourne. The committee also sought information from relevant government departments on notice.

While there was a unanimous recognition of the challenges faced, there was no firm view on how these will play out in the future. But evidence did overwhelmingly support the Commonwealth looking to see how it can assist the sector.

This marks a change. Almost six years ago, the landmark Finkelstein review, commissioned by the previous Labor government, noted challenging trends for the industry, but found there was not a case for government support, on the basis that it was too early to reach firm conclusions on the changes that were occurring at the time. Nevertheless, Finkelstein noted that the situation was changing rapidly, and required careful and continuous monitoring and made a number of recommendations that trends in, and the health of, the industry be charted.

Evidence presented to our committee suggested there is now a more clear case for the Commonwealth to step in, at least in some limited areas. Indeed, even some witnesses who worked on Finkelstein, and felt there was no need for Commonwealth assistance at that time, told the committee that their opinions had changed.

The pace of change in the sector has meant that there have been significant developments even over the course of the inquiry.

Journalists have continued to be laid off, both from large masthead newspapers, as well as from the collapse of smaller new players. As this report was finalised we received the sad news that Crinkling News, Australia's only newspaper for kids, had closed down due to financial pressures.

2017 also saw parliament pass the government's broadcasting amendments. This legislation did not address the problem of Australia having one of the highest levels of media ownership concentration in the world. In fact it made the situation worse through the abolition of the two-out-of-three cross-media control rule which, until recently, prohibited a person from controlling all three regulated forms of media—commercial radio, commercial TV and associated newspapers—in the one licence area.

By repealing this rule, the Turnbull government handed unprecedented powers to a privileged few media operators—permitting them to consolidate even further in Australia's already highly concentrated media landscape.

In order to secure passage of the repeal of the two-out-of-three rule in the Senate, the government had to do a number of deals with the crossbench. Some of these are being considered by other Senate committees at the moment, including the Regional and Small Publishers Innovation Fund that was announced at the eleventh hour as a trade-off for Nick Xenophon's support for the repeal of the two-out-of-three media diversity safeguard.

Alas, for outfits like Crinkling News, this short-term fund is a case of too little, too late. The deal done with One Nation is a blatant attack on our national broadcasters, the ABC and SBS, who were used as bargaining chips in the media ownership changes. It is obvious that the measures secured by One Nation, which include three bills to tamper with the ABC and SBS acts and charters and a 'competitive neutrality inquiry', are not motivated by any good policy rationale or public good but, rather, a political vendetta by one party uncomfortable with being scrutinised by investigative journalists.

Other developments that have occurred over the course of the inquiry include significant policy announcements by digital platforms on matters which impact the news media, as well as indications that the level of cooperation and partnership between digital platforms and the news media has deepened and will continue to evolve. For example, Google announced the end of its 'first click free' policy in October 2017, Google and Fairfax Media announced an advertising partnership in December 2017 and, in January 2018, Facebook announced changes to News Feed. Most significantly, last year the Commonwealth directed the ACCC to inquire into the market powers of aggregators, and the challenge this poses to public interest journalism. Given the expertise and the resources of the ACCC, this committee has made no recommendations in this area for the Commonwealth, but looks forward to the ACCC's report in 2019.

Given the ongoing pace of change, the committee's recommendations have focused on some practical measures for the Commonwealth to bolster public interest journalism.

There was compelling evidence that the not-for-profit sector has led a revival in journalism in the US. In particular, private philanthropy has allowed many new or existing organisations to invest more heavily in quality journalism.

Given this, the committee has recommended the Commonwealth develop a framework for extending 'deductible gift recipient'—or 'DGR'—status to not-for-profit news organisations that adhere to standards of public interest journalism.

The committee has also recommended that the government should investigate the value of offering every Australian the ability to claim subscriptions to trustworthy news providers as a tax deduction.

The capacity of the ABC and SBS for public interest journalism has no doubt been impacted by hundreds of millions of dollars in budget cuts under the government.

The committee recommended that the ABC and SBS, bastions of trusted, public interest journalism in Australia, be funded adequately. This means resourcing for its service delivery in regional and rural areas, and for its fact-checking capacity.

Additionally, evidence suggested that the community media sector should be given some surety for its future funding. This would allow it to plan effectively, especially considering the ongoing rollout of digital services across Australia.

The committee also heard that the Commonwealth should consider where legal frameworks could be reformed or harmonised—in association with states and territories—so that journalists can get on with their important work without undue restriction.

Where there is a lack of clarity in these laws, there should be more information. Where there is injustice, there should be reform. Any review of defamation laws should look at whether they strike an appropriate balance between promoting public interest journalism and the right of individuals to protection from reputational harm. This would allow journalists to get on with the important job of covering issues that are in the public interest.

As the chair for the final stage of the committee, I acknowledge the work of the senators who served on this committee, as well as the committee secretariat.

I would like to thank the many witnesses who gave evidence—either through submissions or public hearings. These included, but were not limited to, journalists, academics and representatives of media and technology companies.

It's with great pleasure that I commend the report to the Senate.

Sarah Hanson-Young (SA, Australian Greens) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'd also like to speak on this report. This was an important inquiry. It was far-reaching and looked at the current state and future of public interest journalism in Australia at a time when we know that trust and public belief in politics, in our politicians, in our public institutions—indeed in big business and even our major banks—is so low. We need, more than ever, a robust and well-supported public interest journalism sector.

What is very clear from this inquiry is that journalism in this country is under immense pressure. Some of the figures that we got as a committee were very stark. In March last year the committee was told that at least 2,500 journalist jobs had been lost across the country in the past six years. That is, of course, a number that has got worse in the last 12 months. We know that there have been job losses at Fairfax. There have been job losses at News Corp and a myriad of other media outfits and organisations. Senator Bilyk mentioned that Australia's only children's newspaper, Crinkling News, is having to close its doors because it just can't manage to pay the bills and produce good quality journalism for Australia's children.

We're at a crisis point in Australia when it comes to public interest journalism. We need it more than ever, and yet it has less support. This report and this inquiry tried to outline a number of different things and looked at a number of different ways that we could support public interest journalism in Australia to recognise the crucial role that it plays in our community, our news and our democracy. If the public are disillusioned with politicians and politics, if they don't believe that we are acting in their best interests and if they don't have access to information about what their democratic rights are, what their parliament is doing and what their elected officials are doing, that discontent is only going to grow. I would put to you that, at this moment, when trust and belief in politics is so low, the best thing that we could all be doing is actually supporting one of those institutions that the public so desperately wants to be able to rely on. Our public broadcasters, ABC and the SBS, are by far the most trusted news services in the country. Time and time again they rate as the most trusted institutions and they rate well above the rest when it comes to trust in news.

As parliamentarians in this place and as responsible members of the government on the other side who tick off on their government's budgets year in, year out, I urge you to think about what needs to be done to support our public broadcasters to continue doing the good job of reporting the news, shedding light on democracy and our democratic institutions and ensuring that all of us are held to account to reinstate the trust of the public and the community in our public institutions.

Since this committee has been gathering evidence and seeking submissions, there have been a number of key changes. We've seen media reform laws pass this parliament. Some elements of those have been welcomed and others have fallen way short of what is needed to support public interest journalism across the country.

One of the most concerning things that has happened since this inquiry has been underway was the tabling of the new espionage legislation announced by the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, in December. It is meant to be about looking at foreign donations but in fact is going to put a spear through the heart of journalism in this country because it is effectively going to outlaw particular parts of investigative journalism and the ability of journalists in this country to inquire into and expose what our governments are doing, what our parliament is doing. In fact, under these new proposed laws, those journalists involved in the extraordinary story of the cabinet files discovered last week would have risked 15 years jail. That is what this current legislation, tabled by the Prime Minister, says.

I've heard a lot of the public commentary about this over the last few weeks and I urge the government to think very seriously about how they can amend this legislation to ensure that we allow journalists to keep doing their jobs. We need transparency in politics. We need transparency in the decisions made by the government in the name of the Australian people, and part of that is to ensure journalists can do their jobs without the fear of jail time, arrest and intimidation. In fact, in the inquiry that this report has come from, the suggestion was that the current laws are actually too harsh, that whistleblower protections need to be strengthened in order to allow journalists to do their jobs properly, to ensure that transparency is protected and that journalists are able to report on things without fear or favour. These new laws, as announced by the Prime Minister, currently being inquired by the Senate, will mean that those restrictions and that intimidation is only going to get worse.

Turkey, China and Egypt topped the list of countries last year for the worst conditions for journalists and the most jail time for journalists. I say to the government, and I see the Minister for Communications is sitting in the chamber here today, let's not make Australia part of that list in 2018. Let's make sure we protect the rights of journalists to continue to do their vital and important jobs.

There are a number of key recommendations that this report has highlighted that go to trying to find ways to support and protect public interest journalism and the very important role that it plays in our democracy. DGR status for non-profits is a good step forward, and I urge the government to think again about how this can be done. I know we've had conversations about this previously. Please consider that this is something that is not going to go away. The calls for proper support for our various journalism and media outlets, particularly those non-profits, are only going to grow louder as the public becomes more and more desperate for truth in politics and truth in our media. There are a number of other recommendations, whistleblower laws, and funding being supported and secured for our public broadcasters—crucial, I would say, in today's age. I urge the minister to look carefully at this report and to consider these issues going into the 2018 budget.

As I finish, I want to reflect on one of the saddest things that has happened in the past week. That of course is the passing of the veteran Age journalist Michael Gordon. When we talk about a contribution to public interest journalism, Michael was well ahead of the pack. He was a fantastic journalist, a beautiful storyteller and one of the nicest blokes any of us in this place has ever met. I say to Michael's family and to his friends and colleagues: we're all very sorry on Michael's passing. This place is going to be much poorer now that he's not around.

Mitch Fifield (Victoria, Liberal Party, Minister for Communications) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I was intending to rise to speak briefly to the report, but can I commence my comments by supporting those of Senator Hanson-Young in relation to Michael Gordon. He was, as those who knew him know, a wonderful man. He was a thoughtful and an elegant writer, and he was the finest of journalists. His passing is one that brings great sadness to this building and to those who knew him and worked with him. His like comes along very infrequently in journalism.

I also want to remember some former colleagues who are no longer with us in this place but who were part of the drive behind this report—namely, Sam Dastyari and Scott Ludlam. In particular, I acknowledge Scott Ludlam, whom I used to have as one of my shadows. He was a very positive, very constructive colleague to deal with in this space.

All colleagues would be aware that in parallel with this inquiry work we had the media reform package, which the government believes does some practical and concrete things to help improve the viability of Australian media organisations. We need good, strong Australia media organisations to ensure that we have vibrant journalism. As often as we may be frustrated by what they blog and post and print and broadcast, what they do is nevertheless one of the important underpinnings of our democracy and ensures that we have robust, vigorous and accountable public discourse. For our part, we on the government benches do believe we made some positive contributions. I think that is reflected in the fact that essentially all major Australian media organisations supported the package. It enjoyed the support of this chamber and a number of crossbench senators. I know that we weren't able to get colleagues from the opposition and colleagues from the Greens to join with us in supporting that package, but I acknowledge that there are elements of the package that were supported by colleagues opposite and in the corner. Again, I take the opportunity to say that all of the dealings that I had with colleagues in this place on the package, whether they ended up voting for it or not, were positive and constructive. This area of public interest journalism is one that I'm sure we, as a parliament, will continue to discuss. It is important. I do hope that we can continue to work together to ensure that we have good, strong, journalism in Australia.

Sue Lines (WA, Deputy-President) Share this | Link to this | Hansard source

I'm going to take it that Senator Bilyk moved to take note of the report and I'm also going to ask if it is peoples' wish that we seek leave to continue those remarks. There being no opposition to that, it is so moved. Thank you.