MEDIA SHAME FILE
Outlet: news.com.au
Headline: Anti-migration co-ordinator’s wealthy property family: A young Aussie who says migrants are to blame for the housing crisis has been revealed as the grandson of one of Australia’s richest property developers.
Summary: Rupert Murdoch’s flagship Australian news website (the most read commercial site in the country), news.com.au, tried to do a hit piece on Auspill today for daring to be involved with the anti-immigration March for Australia protests planned for August 31, but it has blown up in their faces – Auspill is now getting massive support and thousands of new followers.
That’s the quick summary, and there has been such an avalanche of excellent critiques on X, many pointing out the absurdity of a billionaire-owned corporate media attacking Auspill for acting against his own financial interests, that we don’t need to repeat them here:
One of the rally co-ordinators comes from one of the nation’s wealthiest property development families. Full story: https://t.co/AbxIuAYnP8 pic.twitter.com/n37k8M4MoD
— news.com.au (@newscomauHQ) August 16, 2025
Auspill has also addressed this himself by writing: “If sacrificing my family’s business is the price I must pay to end White replacement in Australia, it’s worth it.”
But there are two overlooked elements to this story that are worth examining, as they provide an insight into how the corporate media operates behind the scenes.
1) Auspill was banned from TikTok hours before the article was published, and when he was unbanned after an appeal his videos on the rallies were gone.
Clearly what has happened here is the journalist has gone to TikTok for comment, and they have deleted his account.
Journalists are supposed to go for comment, and if Sarah Keoghan went to TikTok for her article that’s fair enough and her intentions may well have been innocent, but we’ve written before about how activist journos use “going for comment” as an excuse to get people de-platformed, disavowed and fired.
The same applies to going to Auspill’s family for comment. Yes, she has to do it, but she also would have known that it would likely cause family dramas, and the fact that she did it anyway shows that she doesn’t care, and she ended up using their comments in the story as secondary line of attack.
2) The story is labelled exclusive, and repeatedly states “news.com.au can reveal”
Nothing in this story is exclusive, and no journalism was done, other than the aforementioned going for comment.
Videos have been circulating online for days mentioning Auspill’s family (and his real name has been out there for months if not years), and showing that he was a moderator of the March for Australia Facebook group.
The journalist just wrote it up and added some photos. This is the current state of the most popular website in the country – pure slop.
We should also note that the Daily Mail has done its own version of the story, with nothing new in it. Again, pure slop.
Not to mention that this is just the latest in a series of articles trying to smear what is a genuine grassroots protest movement against immigration, even though polls show most Australians agree with Auspill.
The corporate media, which has also played a major role in facilitating the replacement of White Australians and the silencing of dissent on the issue, is an absolute disgrace.
Just because this attack has backfired doesn’t make it any better – these journalists tried to destroy a man’s life because of his political opinions, and they would do the same to you.
Key quote: “One of the co-ordinators of a series of anti-immigration protests planned across Australia comes from one of the nation’s wealthiest property development families, it can be revealed.”
Subtext: “Being right-wing is bad, being anti-immigration is bad, and if you do this we will attack you and your family”
The post Media attack on March for Australia promoter Auspill backfires first appeared on The Noticer.
The Noticer
