Skip Navigation

News Corp’s fossil fuel advertising dressed as news should be illegal

independentaustralia.net News Corp’s fossil fuel advertising dressed as news should be illegal

News Corp's unethical support for the fossil fuel industry is propaganda dressed as news and requires some kind of regulation.

News Corp’s fossil fuel advertising dressed as news should be illegal

LAST WEEK, News Corp’s newspapers The Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun, The Courier Mail and The Adelaide Advertiser caused controversy by publishing front page “exclusives” and “special reports” alleging that more gas is needed to avoid electricity blackouts in the future.

If readers turned the page and read the fine print, they would learn that this so-called “news” was actually not news. It was an advertorial (a fancy word for an advertisement), paid for by – you guessed it – the fossil fuel industry.

18
18 comments
  • @Joshi
    It cannot be made illegal, nor should it. What ought to occur is for a ‘universal’ education system to teach all kids (because we no longer go to school ourselves) how to spot dis-misinformation and uncover the ‘agenda’ behind them with ‘clear thinking’ skills (Foremost amongst other skills) IMHO.

    As with any issue of survival, the application of effective skills are worthy solutions to the problems we face.

    #fakenews #corporatemedia #education

    • This is deliberately misleading. I'm not sure why you think it can't be outlawed, numerous laws exist regarding false and misleading advertising which is exactly what this is.

      It is not reasonable to expect even a majority of people to pick up on this kind of deliberate deception.

      Making this kind of deliberate deception illegal would not be limiting freedom of speech, opinion pieces and clearly labelled advertising are one thing, a front page story with no indication that it is not news is another.

      • @Joshi
        You sound very angry. The first question you need to ask yourself is : What it the truth? And whether a journalist's opinion or perspective is - just as your toot is - truth or not. In fact, our own personal truths are a collage of what we have accepted as truth based on our experience and that of others we trust for one reason or another - nothing more.

        So your truth may very well be someone else's lie. What makes you, or anyone else, judge and jury? It might all boil down to the majority view in which case we're talking about the tyranny of the majority - is that kind of world you desire? Where would you draw the line on what is legal or not? And on what basis would you make that decision? Nothing is black & white.

        I think we should stop the thread here and agree to disagree my friend.

    • education system to teach all kids (because we no longer go to school ourselves)

      Why should we abandon the vast majority of our population, just because we're not forced to attend school? Education isn't limited to the classroom!

      As with any issue of survival, the application of effective skills are worthy solutions to the problems we face.

      It's less a solution and more a coping mechanism. I am in support of promoting these skills, but I'm also in strong support of mitigating the commecialisation of news media as much as possible. And that includes outlawing these kind of articles.

    • Why not both? The media should absolutely be forced to do their job properly, and people should absolutely be educated to spot bs.

      • @Moc
        ‘Forcing’ is akin to tyranny and would limit our ability to explore and debate perspectives other than our own thereby closing ourselves off from any possibility of ‘learning’, ‘growing’ and bettering ourselves.

18 comments