Mediaboss Marketing

The Australian Greens will introduce draft laws for a public interest test governing media ownership to keep editorial control out of the hands of people like mining magnate Gina Rinehart.

Party leader Christine Milne said she wanted Australians to benefit from a flourishing, independent, diverse media landscape.

The consolidation of media power in the hands of individuals was a clear threat to free speech and democracy, she said.

The Greens will introduce a private member's bill to the Senate later in the week that aims to implement a public interest test for changes in control of major media companies.

Greens communications spokesman Scott Ludlam said the bill would contain a combination of proposals from the Convergence Review and earlier work by the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission on applying a public interest test.

'Gina has triggered this debate,' he told reporters on in Canberra on Monday, adding the billionaire's bid for seats on the Fairfax media board had demonstrated to the whole country the urgency of 'these sorts of reforms'.

'She's intending to use a media platform as a political weapon to advance her other commercial interests.'

The bill will apply to broadcasters and newspapers with an Australian audience of at least 500,000 per month and with a revenue of at least $50 million per year.

The matters to be taken into account in applying the public interest test include the impact on editorial independence and free expression of opinion along with the likely impact on the fair and accurate presentation of news.

Original post:
Greens for public interest test on media

KERRY Stokes' Seven Group has upped the stakes in the battle for control of Consolidated Media, reportedly warning the competition regulator it wants to buy more shares in the company.

The Seven Group chairman signalled his intention to thwart Rupert Murdoch's $2 billion offer for ConsMedia when his company lodged a request with the competition regulator late on Friday for an informal review.

Seven already holds 24 per cent in the pay-TV takeover target, while James Packer owns just over 50 per cent and is friendly to offers from Murdoch's News Ltd.

Questions surround Mr Stokes' motivations and whether he actually wants full control of ConsMedia or is pressing News Ltd for a higher price.

Analysts also say the issue might bring Mr Stokes' conflicting media and mining services investments to a head.

Seven already carries as much as $1.8 billion of debt - a high level, even before he gets into a bidding war with Mr Murdoch, Fat Prophets media analyst Greg Fraser said.

Mr Stokes bought his way into pay TV through the ConsMedia stake after losing a $200 million legal battle against other media players in 2007 for control in the industry.

That case ended badly with him having to pay costs and might well be driving a possible bid for the rest of ConsMedia, Mr Fraser said.

ConsMedia's pay TV investments, including 25 per cent of Foxtel and 50 per cent of Fox Sports, are not as affected by the weak advertising market hitting other media because they rely on subscriptions.

Seven could sell some of its investments to finance the bid, including its diverse range of construction and mining equipment businesses and its shares in Telstra.

More:
Stokes eyes more of ConsMedia

Christine Milne

AAP Images

THE Greens have moved to introduce a public interest test bill to protect media ownership diversity in light of mining magnate Gina Rinehart's increased stake in Fairfax.

This news came as the Sydney Morning Herald's publisher and editor-in-chief Peter Fray, Sydney Morning Herald editor Amanda Wilson and The Age's editor-in-chief Paul Ramadge stepped down amid newsroom restructures.

Greens leader Senator Christine Milne said that the test was necessary as changes in ownership at Fairfax could be a potential threat to editorial independence and media diversity.

"If we want to ensure that all Australians benefit from a flourishing, independent, diverse media landscape now and into the future, we have an obligation to start acting to protect that landscape," Senator Milne said.

"The public interest test for changes in media control is a sensible place to start."

Greens spokesperson on communications Senator Scott Ludlam said that there was a "real urgency" for the public interest bill, which would target nationally significant media enterprises rather than bloggers or smaller media outlets.

"(Rinehart is) one individual buying a controlling stake in a media organisation with the clear purpose of shutting down dissent against her other corporate and financial interests and deliberately stifling debate about issues of science, of fairness, of great community interest," he said.

The test would apply to media enterprises with a monthly Australian audience of 500,000 that also derived more than $50 million in revenue annually from supplying media content in Australia.

Read more:
Greens bring media ownership bill

INDIANAPOLIS A national civil-rights group said Sunday it would appeal a federal judge's decision to uphold an Indiana law that bans registered sex offenders from accessing Facebook and other social-networking sites used by children.

On Friday, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt said in an 18-page order that the state has a strong interest in protecting children and that the rest of the Internet is open to those who have been convicted.

"Social networking, chat rooms, and instant messaging programs have effectively created a 'virtual playground' for sexual predators to lurk," Pratt wrote in the ruling, citing a 2006 report by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that found one in seven youths had received online sexual solicitations and one in three had been exposed to unwanted sexual material online.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed the class-action suit on behalf of a man who served three years for child exploitation, along with other sex offenders who are restricted by the ban even though they are no longer on probation.

Federal judges have barred similar laws in Nebraska and Louisiana.

"We will be appealing," ACLU legal director Ken Falk said in an email Sunday to The Associated Press.

Courts have long allowed states to place restrictions on convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences, controlling where many live and work and requiring them to register with police.

But the ACLU claimed Indiana's social-networking ban was far broader, restricting a wide swath of constitutionally protected activities.

The ACLU contended that even though the 2008 law is only intended to protect children from online sexual predators, social media are virtually indispensable and that the ban prevents sex offenders from using the websites for political, business and religious activities.

But Pratt found the ban is limited only to social-networking sites that allow access by children, and that such sites aren't the only forms of communication on the Internet.

Continued here:
Judge upholds Indiana's ban on Facebook for sex offenders

A national civil rights group said Sunday it would appeal a federal judge's decision to uphold an Indiana law that bans registered sex offenders from accessing Facebook and other social networking sites used by children.

On Friday, Judge Tanya Walton Pratt said in an 18-page order that the state has a strong interest in protecting children and that the rest of the Internet remains open to those who have been convicted.

"Social networking, chat rooms, and instant messaging programs have effectively created a 'virtual playground' for sexual predators to lurk," Pratt wrote in the ruling, citing a 2006 report by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children that found that one in seven youths had received online sexual solicitations and one in three had been exposed to unwanted sexual material online.

The American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana filed the class-action suit on behalf of a man who served three years for child exploitation, along with other sex offenders who are restricted by the ban even though they are no longer on probation. Federal judges have barred similar laws in Nebraska and Louisiana.

"We will be appealing," ACLU legal director Ken Falk said in an email Sunday to The Associated Press. Appeals from federal courts in Indiana go to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago.

Courts have long allowed states to place restrictions on convicted sex offenders who have completed their sentences, controlling where many live and work and requiring them to register with police. But the ACLU claimed that that Indiana's social networking ban was far broader, restricting a wide swath of constitutionally protected activities.

The ACLU contended that even though the 2008 law is only intended to protect children from online sexual predators, social media are virtually indispensable and the ban prevents sex offenders from using the websites for political, business and religious activities.

But Pratt found that the ban is limited only to social networking sites that allow access by children, and that such sites aren't the only forms of communication on the Internet.

"The Court readily concedes that social networking is a prominent feature of modern-day society; however, communication does not begin with a 'Facebook wall post' and end with a '140-character Tweet,' " she wrote.

Though the law doesn't list which websites are banned, court filings have indicated the law covers Facebook, MySpace, Twitter, Google Plus, chat rooms and instant messaging services. Earlier filings indicated LinkedIn was also covered by the ban, but Pratt's ruling said it wasn't because children under 18 can't sign up for it.

See more here:
Judge Upholds Sex Offenders Facebook Ban