Network Ten’s future is all about media power, not economics
The future of Network Ten is not primarily about business or economics. It is primarily about power. Yet the formal processes the network’s proposed sale has to go through take no account of this reality, argues Denis Muller in this cross-posting from The Conversation.
At present there is an offer on the table from Lachlan Murdoch and Bruce Gordon. Until recently they were on the Ten board as chair and director respectively. Then they, along with James Packer, pulled the plug on their guarantees underwriting the Commonwealth Bank’s A$200 million overdraft that keeps the company afloat.
When that happened, the board called in the administrators. Then, last week, the bank appointed receiver-managers, and it is they who are now formally presiding over the network’s future.
So far, two parties have emerged to express interest in buying it. One is from Murdoch-Gordon through their private companies Illyria and Birketu respectively, and the other is from a US investment management outfit, Oaktree Capital.
Fascinating stuff. When you consider the impact Foxs News has had in the US, it definitely is a cause for concern that an FTA network (other than the ABC) could potentially have an overt political agenda. Ironically it could actually be a commercially rewarding content strategy.
But somewhat ironically it could be the Murdoch owned NYT which takes Trump out.
Hi left,
I think you may be confusing the NYT with the Wall Street Journal, which is owned by News Corp.
Cheers,
Tim – Mumbrella
Fake news!
Or even the new york post
It really didn’t take a leap of logic to work this one out …
Ten ran Andrew Bolt’s program despite it having poor ratings, offending advertisers and motivating a boycott (advertisers and channel) mainly by young people who were until then reportedly the demographic Ten liked to target. It didn’t make economic sense then so it was obvious there was another goal.