Listen to the article
News Corp Executive Defends Climate Coverage, Rejects ‘Denial Machine’ Label
A senior News Corp Australia executive has mounted a defense of the company’s editorial stance on climate change, rejecting claims that its media outlets systematically promote climate science denial.
During a Senate inquiry into climate and energy misinformation, News Corp Australia’s executive chair Michael Miller insisted that featuring climate-skeptical voices was not evidence of coordinated misinformation but rather part of fostering healthy democratic debate.
“I hope you are not suggesting that we should censor them?” Miller responded when questioned by Greens senator Peter Whish-Wilson about why News Corp platforms climate skeptics. “This country has a great democracy and healthy debate, and to answer your question, there are people with differing opinions to your own, but that doesn’t mean they can’t have a voice.”
The inquiry, which has examined the role of media in shaping public understanding of climate science, specifically challenged News Corp’s editorial decisions. When Whish-Wilson cited submissions claiming the company formed part of a “climate denial machine” alongside PR firms, thinktanks and consultancies, Miller rejected the characterization.
“No. We are part of a debate machine maybe, but not a denial machine,” Miller stated.
The Senate hearings come amid ongoing scrutiny of News Corp’s climate coverage. In 2022, Sky News Australia, owned by News Corp, was identified by UK thinktank Institute for Strategic Dialogue as a “global hub for climate misinformation” – an analysis the company has disputed.
Several submissions to the inquiry highlighted concerns about News Corp’s reporting. Climate Action Against Disinformation, a coalition group, claimed that readers of News Corp publications were more likely to accept misinformation than consumers of other media outlets. Similarly, Climate Communications Australia analyzed 22 leading online news outlets and concluded that News Corp platforms, including The Australian and Sky News, contained the highest degree of climate misinformation.
Miller challenged these assessments, arguing, “How that report defines misinformation I would challenge. An opinion someone disagrees with is not misinformation.”
The company’s coverage of the devastating 2019-2020 Black Summer bushfires also came under scrutiny. Campbell Reid, News Corp’s group executive on corporate affairs, defended the organization’s reporting, particularly a controversial article in The Australian that suggested arson was a major factor behind the fires. While the Australian Press Council ultimately cleared the article of being misleading, climate experts have argued it helped fuel global misinformation that downplayed climate change’s role in the disaster.
During the bushfire crisis, News Corp faced internal criticism when commercial finance manager Emily Townsend sent an all-staff email accusing the company of “contributing to the spread of climate change denial and lies.” Miller rejected Townsend’s characterization, citing that News Corp outlets published 3,335 bushfire stories, with 12% mentioning climate change and 5% referencing arson.
When questioned about coordination across News Corp outlets to feature climate-skeptical voices from organizations like the Institute of Public Affairs – a right-wing think tank known for opposing climate action – Miller denied any such directive, stating each masthead makes independent editorial decisions.
The inquiry also raised the 2020 resignation of James Murdoch from News Corp’s board, reportedly due to frustrations about the company’s climate coverage and “ongoing denial” in its Australian outlets. Miller dismissed this characterization, stating, “Climate change is real, I have been on the record for that. So has Rupert Murdoch and so has Lachlan Murdoch.”
He suggested James Murdoch’s conclusions might have been influenced by social media rather than direct engagement with News Corp’s Australian publications, adding, “If he had picked up the phone and asked, I would have given him a more detailed answer.”
The Senate inquiry continues to examine the role of media organizations in shaping public discourse on climate change and energy policy in Australia.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
This is a complex issue and I appreciate News Corp’s defense of free speech. However, I would encourage the company to carefully consider the real-world impacts of platforming climate denial, which can undermine public understanding and derail crucial policy discussions.
This is a complex and sensitive issue. While I appreciate the need for diverse viewpoints, we must be careful not to amplify misinformation on critical issues like climate change. Responsible journalism should strive for balanced, factual reporting that reflects scientific consensus.
Healthy debate is important, but media outlets must also consider their ethical responsibilities. Platforming climate denial, even in the name of free speech, could contribute to public confusion and undermine efforts to address a critical global challenge.
I agree. While diverse views should be heard, media companies have a duty to the public to ensure their platforms are not being used to spread misinformation. Responsible reporting on complex issues like climate change is essential.
This is a tricky balance to strike. I appreciate News Corp’s desire to foster open debate, but I’m concerned that giving a platform to climate denial narratives could do more harm than good. Responsible journalism should strive for accuracy and balance, not false equivalence.
While I respect the desire for diverse views, I’m concerned that amplifying climate denial narratives could do more harm than good. As a major media company, News Corp has significant influence and should use that responsibly to inform the public, not confuse them.
Healthy debate is important, but media outlets also have a duty to the public. Platforming climate denial could sow confusion and undermine efforts to address a global crisis. I hope News Corp will consider its ethical responsibilities in this matter.
You raise a fair point. Striking the right balance between free speech and responsible reporting is not easy. However, I would encourage News Corp to err on the side of accuracy and focus on elevating credible voices and evidence-based perspectives.