Newspapers’ Ownership

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30478, 27 June 1964, Page 3

Newspapers’ Ownership

(N.Z. Press Association) AUCKLAND, June 26. “The Thomson bid for the ‘Dominion’ may have served a useful purpose by occasioning a controversy in which the public became more familiar with the issues involved,” said the chairman of directors of New Zealand Newspapers, Ltd. (Mr E. H. Rhodes), at the annual meeting of shareholders yesterday.

“The Thomson bid was the first attempt by an overseas company to acquire a major New Zealand newspaper but it is unlikely to be the last. “It may have served a useful purpose by occasioning a controversy in which the public became more familiar with the issues involved. The most important of these is whether or not it is contrary to the national interest for

an increasing number of New Zealand companies to be controlled from overseas. “I think public sentiment would be strongly opposed to the development of a 'Canada* situation in New Zealand. So far there is nothing to prevent such a development “The second issue is whether newspaper companies can rightly be distinguished from others. It is surprising that this should be doubted."

Mr Rhodes said newspaper companies, in one aspect were no different from others in that they were business enterprises and if they were to survive they had to make a profit. Regarded from this aspect they were indistinguishable from any other company. But as units of what was popularly called the press, they formed the country’s most important medium of public information, news and comment -

“As such, it is important not merely to their present owners, but to the public, that the full responsibility for their control should rest within the country,” he said.

“It would indeed be hard to name one country, even

those in which some newspapers are overseas-owned, in which the growth of such ownership would be tolerated.

, “It is a matter of common observation that governments and peoples everywhere recognise the importance of all media of public communication.

“Here in New Zealand, when a new medium developed, the Government used its power to ensure that radio, and later, television was controlled by the State, and private enterprise, even New Zealand private enterprise, was rigidly excluded. “In Australia, which did not go to this length, and where both national and private radio and television stations operate and compete, successive governments have insisted that overseas ownership of any private station shall be limited to a minority shareholding. This was done in the national interest.

“Obviously the national interest is not less involved when there is a risk of the ownership of the much older medium which is the free press, falling into overseas hands,” said Mr Rhodes.