Carbon Price

Dec 2, 2011

News Limited papers ‘campaigned’ against carbon tax

A new report found that coverage of the carbon price legislation was overwhelming negative, with only 15% of the articles in Australian newspapers viewing the policy in a positive light.

Amber Jamieson

Freelance journalist in New York

A new academic report found that coverage of the carbon price legislation in Australian newspapers was overwhelming negative, with only 15% of the article viewing the policy in a positive light.

Tabloids Herald Sun and The Daily Telegraph were so biased in their coverage against the carbon tax “it is fair to say they ‘campaigned’ against the policy rather than covered it,” says the report from that the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism, led by director Wendy Bacon.

The report examined all the major daily newspapers in Australia; News Limited’s The AustralianHerald SunThe Daily TelegraphThe Courier-MailAdelaide Advertiser; Fairfax’sThe Age and The Sydney Morning Herald and Seven Media’s The West Australian to examine its coverage of climate change policy (specifically the carbon tax).

It found that News Limited papers were far more likely to run articles or opinion pieces against the tax than Fairfax, with 82% of News Limited’s articles deemed negative, compared to Fairfax’s 43%.

The Daily Telegraph was deemed the worst offender, with 58% of negative articles, 35% neutral and 7% positive. When the neutral stories were removed, the negative coverage was a whopping 89%. The Herald Sun was not far behind with its coverage, with 85% of its carbon tax stories deemed negative once the neutral stories were removed.

The ACIJ team analysed 3971 articles –including comment pieces, editorials, features and news stories to reach their findings.

Some key findings directly quoted from the report:

  • Overall, negative coverage of the Gillard government’s carbon policy across ten newspapers outweighed positive coverage across ten Australian newspapers by 73% to 27%. (Note: After neutral items were discounted).
  • All papers contained some positive and a substantial amount of neutral material. The highest level of neutral articles was found in The Age and The Hobart Mercury, the lowest level was found in The Northern Territory News and The Daily Telegraph.
  • After neutral items were discounted, negative coverage (82%) across News Ltd newspapers far outweighed positive (18%) articles. This indicates a very strong stance against the carbon policy adopted by the company that controls most Australian metropolitan newspapers, and the only general national daily.
  • By comparison, Fairfax was far more balanced in its coverage of the policy than News Ltd publications with 57% positive articles outweighing 43% negative articles.
  • The Age was more positive (67%) rather than negative towards the policy than any other newspaper. The Daily Telegraph was the most negative (89%) rather than positive of newspapers.
  • Headlines were less balanced than the actual content of articles.
  • Neutral articles were more likely to be headlined negative (41%) than positive (19%).
  • Readers relying on metropolitan newspapers living in Sydney, Melbourne and Brisbane received more coverage of carbon policy issues than readers in Perth, Adelaide and Darwin.
  • The Australian gave far more space to the coverage of climate change than any other newspaper. Its articles were coded 47% negative, 44% neutral and 9% positive. When neutrals were discounted, there were 84% negative articles compared to 17% positive.

How did the papers involved cover the ACIJ investigation? A fairly straight report appeared in Fairfax papers, although it clearly pointed out that the report had found its coverage much more balanced compared to its News Limited competition:

“An academic review of coverage of the federal government’s climate change policy has found it was overwhelmingly negative — particularly in News Limited publications.”

And News Limited? In an article in The Australian today Nick Leys refers to Bacon as a “former Fairfax journalist undertaking research funded by the Australian Conservation Foundation.”

It also included a quote from editor-in-chief Chris Mitchell with a personal attack against Bacon: “I cannot take anything that Wendy Bacon does seriously.” This echoed comments made by Greg Baxter, News Limited’s director of corporate affairs, to The Conversation (which first published the ACIJ report).

“Wendy Bacon has absolutely no credibility with this company,” said Baxter. “It is a matter of great regret that she teaches young people in this country who aspire to be journalists. The fact that Wendy Bacon produces a piece of research that is negative about this company is no surprise to anybody — she’s been doing it for 25 years.

Bacon is a Walkley-award winning investigate journalist. You can read more about her over at Crikey‘s quality journalism project.

A second ACIJ report (to launch in coming weeks) will cover climate science coverage in the Australian media.

(Visited 1 times, 1 visits today)


Leave a comment

12 thoughts on “News Limited papers ‘campaigned’ against carbon tax

  1. Ravenred

    Davies Ben, you do know that one exclamation mark is sufficient to show emphasis, right?

  2. Davies Ben

    Funny how everything thinks we live in a democracy let alone with conservative/liberal ideas when MURDOCH AND HIS ORGANISED CRIME GANG ARE LIBERTARIANS!!!!!!!


    Learn what the liberty lobby in America is learn what the heritage foundation is…

    Why do you think there is one big media blackout in this crisis because if your an economist and not part of the Cato institute you can not get published!!!!!!

  3. Davies Ben Murdoch joins board of the Cato Institute!!!! Working for other peoples slavery politicans and journalists!!!!!!

  4. Davies Ben

    Murdoch works for AIPAC!!!!!

    He is a total disgrace. How he runs his media empire needs an inquiry full stop!!!!!!

    Without reposting other links time to wake up people and do the world a favor and put this NEOFASCIST PROPAGANDIST BEHIND BARS!!!!!!!

    More interested in wars for Israel, hacking phones selling trash, writing trash…

    As I said yesterday to anyone who reads or works for News Ltd go and read your little read book and get a pay rise!!!!!!!!!

  5. ggm

    Yes, but what did anyone expect them to say?

    “oh my god: all this time we thought it was fair comment and now we see its bias” (slaps head).


  6. Adam Liddy

    “It found that News Limited papers were far more likely to run articles or opinion pieces against the tax than Fairfax,”

    You could just as easily say Fairfax were more likely to run pro-tax articles. Given the likelihood of international action is pretty much non-existent, and this tax won’t do anything to the environment on its own – the carbon tax in definitely not a 100% good news story for Aussies…

    “The Australian today Nick Leys refers to Bacon as a “former Fairfax journalist undertaking research funded by the Australian Conservation Foundation.”

    Which part of that statement isn’t true?

    If a study was sponsored by Mobil please don’t pretend that Crikey wouldn’t question its motivations and results. In this case you happen to agree with the results so you are giving the investigators a pass – you can hardly criticise another journalist for pointing out what you don’t want to.

  7. Jack Stepney

    Perhaps the saddest part of all this is that the once great news empire has halved its potential readership base by appealing to only half of the population. And at the same time it’s scratching its head about declining readership.

    The real problems are that (a) they don’t seem to have realized it yet and (b) the Australian reading public are increasingly aware of it and take it into account when reading the Oz, etc.

    I feel rather sorry for some of the worthier journalists there.

  8. Kristen Smith

    Shock, News Ltd reflects the views of the majority of Australians. Double shock, Fairfax sides with the fools at the bottom of the garden, who believe the sky is falling in claptrap.

  9. heavylambs

    The abusive response from News Ltd is an indication that they no longer have the skills to defend themselves,and don’t realize it.

  10. fredex

    Well that, of course, falls into the category of ‘bleeding obvious’.
    However it is good that someone took the time to actually measure and confirm the ‘bleeding obvious’.
    Valuable article.

  11. shepherdmarilyn

    It’s a matter of great regret that Newsltd. still think they have some credibility.

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details