lee wrote on Oct 4
th, 2018 at 2:15pm:
"Then there's Murdoch. Owning nearly 70 per cent of Australian print, in addition to Sky, it is now clear Murdoch used this power ruthlessly to run a campaign to depose Malcolm Turnbull in favour of Peter Dutton - only to end up with Morrison as the consolation prize."
"This statement is factually incorrect. According to the Finkelstein Review of Media and Media Regulation, in 2011 News Corp Australia (then News Limited) accounted for 23% of the newspaper titles in Australia. "
https://theconversation.com/factcheck-does-murdoch-own-70-of-newspapers-in-austr... Cherrypicking your facts
AGAIN? Quoting out of context
AGAIN? Do you EVER learn?
Here's what lee didn't want you to see with his selective quoting:
Quote:In a rebuttal of Kevin Rudd’s claim, Sally Jackson from The Australian observed that News Corp Australia accounts for 33% of the newspaper titles that have sales audited by the Audit Bureau of Circulation.
But Rudd’s claim has more validity if we focus on newspaper circulation. Many of the newspapers listed are highly localised and have small circulations.
News Corp Australia titles account for 59% of the sales of all daily newspapers, with sales of 17.3 million papers a week, making it Australia’s most influential newspaper publisher by a considerable margin.
Among capital city and national daily newspapers, which are by far the most influential in setting the news agenda, News Corporation titles accounted for 65% of circulation in 2011. Fairfax Media, the next biggest publisher, controlled just 25%. Those figures may have shifted slightly since then, but there is no doubt that News Corp Australia is our most dominant player - as academic Matthew Ricketson pointed out in The Conversation’s media panel blog, it owns 14 of our 21 metro daily and Sunday newspapers.
Note that this lee "person" only quoted the paragraph that had the smallest figure, omitting the rest so as to mislead by omission. He does this a lot and this is why he's not a trustworthy poster.