https://www.theguardian.com/australia-n ... y-news-ban
Sky placed an FOI request with the Victorian Government, which played about as fair with Sky as Sky plays the game.
I am disturbed that the government is bound by such accountability while a player with similar power and influence remains almost completely unaccountable. Surely it is time to stop pretending that these are just "private companies" - these are powerful political blocs that act as unelected ersatz government policy makers.The Victorian government falsely claimed it held no internal records on its decision to ban Sky News from train stations to block a journalist’s freedom of information request.
The state Labor government found itself under immense scrutiny in August for banning Sky News from train station screens following the broadcaster’s interview with far-right extremist Blair Cottrell.
Soon after the decision, the independent researcher William Summers lodged a freedom of information request with the then transport minister, Jacinta Allan, asking for “all documents held by her office, including emails, regarding the decision”.
It is time for the public to be able to probe major media organisations to make them at least somewhat accountable, given the inordinate unelected power they grabbed.
I think the public deserve to know the decision making behind Sky's promotion of a known Nazi. Also I'd like confirmation that Sky only acted after the public outcry rather than via internal review. Alas, no one has the means means to find out without a being part of a legal case where a judge places an order to release information.
Would others agree that this is an imbalance in the system? Perhaps limits could be placed on such laws to prevent loss of source confidentiality or prevention of government authoritarianism?