with this being australia, chances are the power will shift from google to murdoch owned companies. however, the monopoly power of google is there for everyone to see. no way, should one company be controlling both sides of an auction market
"PROPOSAL NO. 5: TRANSITION TO PUBLIC BENEFIT CORPORATION
Shareholders request our Board of Directors take steps necessary to amend our certificate of incorporation and, if necessary, bylaws [...] to become a public benefit corporation [...]. Shareholders request that one of the public benefits included in the amendment be provision of the Company’s viewers with an accurate understanding of current events through the exercise of journalistic integrity [...]"
I thought it was a pretty classy troll. Credit to Matt Levine for the pointer. And in all fairness, the insurgents do put a veneer of reasoning over why it would make sense:
"The vast majority of our diversified shareholders lose when companies harm the economy, because the value of diversified portfolios rises and falls with GDP. While a concentrated holder may profit when the Company inflicts costs on society by emphasizing viewership over accuracy, diversified shareholders internalize those costs."
Just the facts on the matter:
Murdoch owns zero (yes zero) of the 5 major public TV channels and 23% of newspapers in Australia. Hardly a monopoly.
The truth behind the matter is that Australian's elites are constantly trying to force their point of view on to the Australian people by my monopolizing all the public channels, and using government money to push out private organization. Unfortunately for them, no one is interested in listening to them. Instead of admitting they are out of touch and that their ideas are not based in reality, they make these crazy claims that the whole country is under some kind of magic spell cast by Rupert Murdoch which makes it impossible for them to hear anything but those 23% of Newspapers that Murdoch owns.
News Corp earns 40% of total Australian television revenues — combining free-to-air television advertising and subscriptions — almost double that of second- place holder Nine.
News Corp owns a 59% share of the metropolitan and national print media markets by readership.
News Corp has 23% of total radio market by revenue.
As for your other points. If you try to stand back and be objective, the fact that 60% of newspaper readers are forced to read 23% of newspapers should indicate that Newscorp is the only company offering them the choice of media they desire. This would indicate it is the other media companies that are attempting to corner the market and push their views onto people.
The situation becomes even clearer when you look at who is being targeted by whom. Newscorp media online is all paid for and pay walled. They target mature audiences and the rich. Their competition on the other hand offers free products, and they advertise relentlessly on Facebook and other social media. They intentionally target young and groups who are more vulnerable to manipulation.
Finally, a conversation with someone who reads the ABC, or other government products is enough to close the case. These people are always full of extremely hateful, emotional, and even sometimes violent rhetoric (just look at some of the comments on here). Meanwhile if you have a conversation with someone who reads a Newscorp product it will always be fact based and unemotional, and they will almost always be older and more mature.