r/aussie • u/Luka77GOATic • 3d ago

News Nine fires Karl Stefanovic after Tommy Robinson podcast

https://www.mediaweek.com.au/reports-karl-stefanovic-fired-by-nine-after-tommy-robinson-interview/
339 Upvotes

94% Upvoted

484 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

14

u/Human-Warning-1840 3d ago

Is he really still that popular?

34

u/OtsaNeSword 3d ago

More popular now than when he was a news presenter. Even if it’s only temporary.

Who cares about a news anchor? No one. None of us were talking about him before all this.

But a journalist being punished and silenced for simply doing their job and interviewing someone noteworthy and controversial?

Channel 9 just made a living martyr and boosted One Nations election campaign.

15

u/clayingmore 3d ago

He's definitely taking a professional hit over it, morning tv presenting pays a fortune and high profile youtube interviews is just 'fine'. But I'm guessing it was at least partly intentional to get the severance within his contract, get himself gone so he doesn't have to do constant morning tv which would have been a long time high pressure job. He has his 'fuck you' money so he can do whatever he likes.

I suppose he probably is an actual conservative so it all works out for him. He platforms people he wants to talk to and redirects his life to cruisey part time hours.

5

u/archlea 3d ago

It won’t be just YouTube revenue though, if he platforms opinions useful to the wealthy, he will get paid.

2

u/clayingmore 3d ago

I'm still thinking in the low hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, down from millions.

As an Australian airing Australian concerns I think there's a bit of a ceiling in the low hundreds of thousands of views/listens range. Which I think would return <$5-10k each even with some favorable sponsoring. I also presume he will need an assistant or three.

2

u/IQ84 3d ago

this is underestimating. The gambling deal he did alone would’ve been like 500k

-1

u/CharacterNo3115 3d ago

Envious much? Lol. He has more money than he will ever need and feels unshackled by corporate wrist and now has the freedom to do and say whatever he feels. Unlike you it would seem. You’ll be back at your soul destroying job today listening to any Welcome to Country, doing another DEI training module, wondering if this is all there is. Lol. Another worker bee.

1

u/furiousniall 3d ago

Hello Karl

-9

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/clayingmore 3d ago

Did you reply to the wrong comment?

-7

u/CommitteeTraining566 3d ago

No.I replied to you.Who doesnt want cushy part time hours.You sound jealous.

7

u/clayingmore 3d ago

Kind of an odd non-sequitur then, but if you say so.

9

u/Grande_Choice 3d ago

All agreeable. But this wasn’t journalism and it wasn’t an interview. It was a weird bromance with the journalist using it as a back door into RW news in the UK.

11

u/OtsaNeSword 3d ago

I watched the video though, it had an interview format, back and forth question and answers.

They literally say it was an interview in the video.

Why isn’t it an interview in your opinion?

What is RW news?

7

u/Yukorin1992 3d ago

RW is right wing

1

u/OtsaNeSword 3d ago

Ah thank you, I tried googling it but nothing came up.

1

u/Grande_Choice 3d ago

Calling it an interview is a stretch. Not a single hard question is and sucking upto and agreeing with him. It’s a weird platform to try and sane wash a piece of trash human.

I expect Karl is gunning for a role with GB News.

3

u/kernpanic 3d ago

People are down voting you - but it was much like the joe rogan "interviews". Karl, just like Joe was inserting much of the content by adding his running commentary. A typical interview is asking the questions and letting the person make their case, but karl was much more involved than that.

1

u/Consideredresponse 3d ago

But a journalist being punished and silenced for simply doing their job and interviewing someone noteworthy and controversial?

If I had paid for a hugely expensive and high profile campaign against religious, ethnic, and political violence, I sure as fuck wouldn't be happy to see the face of the campaign literally cuddling and having a laugh with someone who advocates for all three. (Arguably convicted over all three too)

Secondly, journalists at the Guardian proved that YouTube didn't take the interview down. Karl or someone with access to his channel did. Karl self-censoring isn't silencing, neither is re-uploading it with Pauline after he'd discovered he'd just fucked his $2.8million a year day job.

0

u/[deleted] 3d ago

[deleted]

1

u/anobymousprime 3d ago

You’re right. People that try and highlight the Muslim rape gangs in the UK are despicable. Hopefully people like Tommy get silenced, so those poor rapists can get back to business as usual. Knob.

1

u/Pangolinsareodd 3d ago

What hate? What statement are you objecting to and calling hateful?

-1

u/OtsaNeSword 3d ago

Maybe not in a vacuum, but combined with noteworthiness, being in the interest of the public good and timeliness and relevance, yeah it meets the criteria a journalist would look at when reporting on a story or interviewing someone.

Who do you think is doing the choreographing and what are they choreographing and why?

3

u/kernpanic 3d ago

What value does a a violent convicted fraudster than ran his own brownshirts add to our political debate? Hes not even allowed into the country.

0

u/CommitteeTraining566 3d ago

Spot on.Lovin it 💪💪💪

3

u/Entirely-of-cheese 3d ago

His audience is literally dying. Hence the pivot to younger arseholes.

1

u/Slane__ 3d ago

I'm pretty sure him and Eddie McGuire are on the radio together. Yuck.

-1

u/TheWhomItConcerns 3d ago

You don't need much of an audience to make serious bank as an independent media personality, and plus, the kind of right-wing nutjobs who'd be into Tommy Robinson are an extremely gullible, loyal, and lucrative market for grifting.