On the newspaper discussion above, it is all a bit strange these days but 2 things: traditionally the tabloids massively outsold the broadsheets in Sydney and Melbourne, If The Age and the SMH are even close to the Hun and the Tele then they have massively lost market share. Also, the Australian has never had the market share in Melbourne it has in other capital cities so I doubt it is very big in Melbourne.
An observation on the recent history of our largest and most influential mastheads. News has actively steered the Daily Telegraph, Herald Sun and, to a lesser degree, The Australian, to an ever-greater conservatism (in both a political and social sense). Here in Melbourne, the old Sun was known as the working man's paper and was relatively apolitical.
I don't particularly care about that -- people are free to consume whatever content suits them (although I reckon getting your news from a range of sources is generally helpful; existing in an echo chamber where you struggle to entertain new ideas is a fast-track to a stunted intellect).
No, the most intriguing characteristic of these three News mastheads is they've become brazenly
partisan. It's one thing to put a political and/or social lens across your reportage; quite another to openly barrack for a narrow set of ideas.
Given my job (advertising), I'm purely interested in reaching the right market with the right message for the right sum of money, so the numbers drive my decision making. As a general comment, I find News's editorial position perplexing. It caters for an older demographic and a less progressive outlook, which seems out of step with our profile as a nation and is not where the advertising dollars are. But moreover, it is the 'you're either with us or you're not' parochialism that doesn't seem like it will unlock audience growth.
That said, appealing to peoples' biases with breathless zealotry is entirely up to News and good luck to them.
Disclosure: I subscribe to the Herald Sun, The Age and Foxtel.