Media Bias

[HiredGoon]

A few people here think the media is full of Doom & Gloom. But if there is a media bias, is it likely to be for or against their largest customer?

Here is a story from NZ:

http://tvnz.co.nz/view/page/411749/1843300

Real estate industry leaders have allegedly warned media chiefs they would pull millions of dollars in advertising unless they gave more favourable coverage to the property market.

Associate Justice Minister Clayton Cosgrove says he has been told by real estate and media sources of the threats, allegedly made to Fairfax newspaper bosses at a meeting with property chiefs last month.

The Real Estate Institute of New Zealand (REINZ) denied threats had been made but a spokeswoman said media companies, including Fairfax and APN, had been asked to provide more balanced coverage of the property market.

APM manager fired for criticizing Real Estate information distortions:

http://www.crikey.com.au/Media-Arts...p-on-Fairfax-cost-a-commentator-his-job-.html

As a rule, real estate agents are not to be trifled with. So it was always going to be risky for property commentator Louis Christopher when he decided to publicly attack the all-powerful membership body Real Estate Institute of Victoria (REIV). So risky that it may have cost him his job.

Last Thursday, in the Fairfax-owned Australian Property Monitor's Home Price Guide newsletter, Christopher accused the REIV and "some of its inner circle of crooked agents" of "grossly unethical behaviour". But the commentator may have underestimated the wrath of real estate agents and their influence on Fairfax as huge advertisers.

Christopher accused the REIV of reducing the "level of bad news in the market place by controlling the information provided to the media" and making "a profit out of the data by reselling it back to real estate agents." He went on:

In my opinion, this is grossly unethical behaviour. Real estate news and information should be freely available, independent and not subject to a conflict of interest. And agents should be free (and obligated) to give data back to anyone and not be a pawn of anticompetitive behaviour.

Christopher then promised that in the interests of disclosure APM intended to publish in full "all Melbourne auction results as one report on domain.com.au and on homepriceguide.com.au AHEAD of the print publications."

The pledge most likely sent Fairfax into a panic – Sydney and Melbourne real estate ad revenue combined is estimated to be worth more than $100 million annually to the newspaper giant, so it doesn't pay to make them angry.

Which might explain why Fairfax have gone into apology overdrive. Enzo Raimondo, CEO of the REIV, told Crikey this morning that the REIV is "disappointed by the statements of that individual" but "we understand that they are not reflective of the APM parent company Fairfax.”

Crikey was told by APM that Louis Christopher is "on leave for a week". As for the commentator himself, Christopher summed up his position to Crikey in two words: "no comment".

Ballarat Courier newspaper story on woman buying a house, not mentioning that she is a real estate agent that advertises in the very same newspaper!

Story:
http://forum.globalhousepricecrash.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=3879

Real estate ad with same girl:
http://forum.globalhousepricecrash.com/index.php?act=attach&type=post&id=3880

Media watch on "Rents through the roof" scare renters into buying a house propaganda campaign. Bulls favourite economists-for-sale BIS Shrapnel is there, providing data that the Residential Development Council commissioned them to provide....

http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s1857566.htm

 

[Perp]

I think the media makes its living out of being sensationalist. Every market has pockets that are doing better than average (though the "average" varies), and pockets that are doing not as well as average. The media visits one of the star performers one week, and exaggerates how well it's doing, then next week visit an under-performing area, and exaggerate how poorly it's doing. (This latter is particularly effective if it's in a socio-economically disadvantaged area and you can highlight how people are living it up in Double Bay whilst the "battlers" are struggling. )

Though I totally agree that overall the newspapers are more bullish on property, and I'm sure their enormous revenue from real estate advertising has an influence. Unfortunately, it's the "battlers" and first home buyers who are more likely to accept the misinformation in the newspapers than the property investors.

 

[DavidMc]

The media is biased towards what sells papers and therefore advertising. Sensationalism, as ozperp pointed out.

Nice bit of slueth work on the Ballarat story, although, isn't it just a just a chick buying a house? No big deal in my opinion.

Surely you can't say that article is 'pumping up the market' or 'fueling the maddness'?

To me it just read 'everything is going to poo, but this 20 year old buy a house anyway'. If it had a quote from her saying something like 'property always goes up!' then you'd have a point.