When does media coverage of our own industry threaten to tip into navel-gazing that can’t possibly interest a normal person?
Consider the story dominating the media pages this week: the news that the Seven-owned Colourpress, the only printer of major newspapers in Western Australia, intended to double the cost of printing for its client… the Nine owned Australian Financial Review.
Nine says the move has forced it to stop distributing the print version of the AFR in Western Australia after 70 years.
The AFR’s weekday print circulation in WA comes to approximately 2,000 copies.
For a circulation that’s equivalent to the humble Kyabram Free Press, it’s sparked one hell of a public feud.
Nine’s columnists have claimed the move is the result of critical coverage of billionaire Seven West Media chairman Kerry Stokes’ influence and Seven’s business decisions.
Seven claims it was simply a business decision, and any suggestion to the contrary is “inaccurate and disingenuous”. Notably, Seven also prints The Australian in WA, and reportedly the same terms were not forced upon Holt St.
It’s another stark reminder of just how concentrated our media market is, with readers treated to a spat between media proprietors in the pages of their own publications.
Stokes, who has remained relatively quiet throughout a four-year period in which his companies supported the likes of Ben Roberts-Smith and Bruce Lehrmann, even gave a rare quote to The Australian, which was all too happy to dine out on the war of words between its two rivals.
“Their strategy of charging $5 a day for the AFR has failed because they have not provided value for money and people can no longer afford the cover price of the print edition,” he told the Oz in a piece headlined “Paper tigers rip and snarl over $3,000 a day.”
“That can be the only reason for such a decline in sales. If they are that hard up, I am happy to lend them the money to carry on in printing the AFR in WA, as we care about the readers.”
Financial Review editor in chief Michael Stutchbury described Seven’s move as an “uncompetitive abuse of market power”, while independent MP for Curtin Kate Chaney called for an inquiry from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC), all featured in… you guessed it, The Australian Financial Review.
A Nine spokesman told Crikey there hadn’t been a complaint made to the ACCC, but did not respond when asked if the company intended to pursue one.
The AFR’s Rear Window column had a cheeky jab at interim editor of Seven-owned The Nightly Chris Dore, who was reportedly so keen to suggest Nine had abandoned the state that his remarks at a breakfast event last Friday preceded the Welcome to Country.
The AFR had by this point run an editorial on the matter, another Rear Window column that led with the dispute, an interview with a former ACCC chair that opined the move could breach competition law, and another story claiming Stokes had previously used his media assets to commercially retaliate against fellow WA billionaire Andrew Forrest.
Over in the red corner, the likes of Neale Prior opined that the “AFR [was] to blame for its own demise in the West”, while Mark Mallabone described Nine’s columnists as “feral”, conducting a “very personal and nasty campaign” against Stokes.
“This being the media industry, other factors aside from money are at play — namely, pride, ego, self-interest and payback. There’s always payback,” said The Australian yesterday.
They’re not wrong. The real question is: who cares?
No, really, that’s not a rhetorical question. Maybe you readers care deeply about Nine’s printing costs. Let us know in the comments or by writing to letters@crikey.com.au. Please include your full name to be considered for publication in a future instalment of Your Say. We reserve the right to edit letters for length and clarity.
