‘Nine’s papers knocked us back’, says Crikey chairman as it looked to run ad in national titles
Nine’s publishing arm knocked back Crikey when approached to run its open letter to Lachlan Murdoch advertisement this week, chairman of Private Media Eric Beecher told Mumbrella on this week’s Mumbrellacast.
Asked about the bold strategy in taking out advertisements in The New York Times and The Canberra Times, and if there were any plans to opt for a domestic paper with higher circulation, Beecher said, “certainly there was a consideration, but the Nine papers, The Age, Sydney Morning Herald and Financial Review knocked us back and they wouldn’t run our ad, so we went to the Canberra Times.”
Beecher: ‘Nine’s papers knocked us back’
“We’ve had two explanations,” editor-in-chief of Crikey, Peter Fray added. “One is that Crikey is a competitor as a subscription news business to the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, which is lovely for them to acknowledge that, and therefore they wouldn’t run our ad because we’d be stealing thousands of subscribers from The Sydney Morning Herald and The Age.”
It emerged on Tuesday that Murdoch, co-chairman of News Corp, executive chairman of Fox Corp, and son of Rupert Murdoch has filed a defamation suit against the independent news site in the Federal Court.
“The other is that they didn’t want to upset Lachlan Murdoch or the Murdochs. Both are plausible as far as I’m concerned, but it depends on who we spoke to.”
Beecher added: “I’d just say both of those reasons don’t necessarily sit comfortably with the words under the mastheads of those newspapers, ‘Independent. Always.'”
“There must be a hidden bracket in there,” Fray jokes. “Except when it concerns Lachlan Murdoch, closed bracket.”
Nine’s managing director for publishing, James Chessell later rejected this claim in a comment to Mumbrella. “Crikey’s statement is incorrect and Eric Beecher’s claims are wrong. There is no ban on Crikey advertising in Nine’s newspapers. They were – and are – welcome to advertise in The Australian Financial Review.”
Lachlan Murdoch’s camp alleged Crikey is using this for ‘financial gain’
A statement from Murdoch’s camp yesterday said: “Crikey has continued to use the SMH article and their (false) allegations about Murdoch intimidating them, to promote the article and the Crikey website in order to increase its number of subscribers for financial gain.”
Beecher responded to this claim: “I thought it was an interesting comment to make by a publishing organisation that isn’t exactly renowned for not being commercial.”
Peter Fray: ‘Cynical to say it is a subs drive’
Fray added: “Some people may wish to subscribe to Crikey to support us, and good on them for doing it. We don’t make any secret of what our business model is for Crikey, but it’s a very cynical thing to say, and it’s disappointing that some media has repeated it without really questioning it – that all we’re doing it for is some sort of cynical drive to get subscribers.”
He continued: “Anyone who knows Crikey and has read Crikey over these last 20-odd years will know what Crikey stands for and will know that Crikey has always sought to take on big issues, big people and people of influence, and over the years Crikey has found itself in legal strife because of it. So it’s a highly cynical thing to suggest.”
Listen to the full interview below on this week’s Mumbrellacast from the 21:05 mark.
Got a tip?
Calum Jaspan was news editor at Mumbrella, based in Melbourne. He was also the producer and host of the Mumbrellacast. He left Mumbrella in May 2023.
Linkedin
Have your say