Radio ratings: 6PR slumps as 96FM triumphs with midday listeners
New GFK radio ratings released on Tuesday for the March to May period show 6PR hosts Simon Beaumont and Oliver Peterson both lost 1.2 per cent in their ratings.
Overall, the station's weekday audience dropped 0.9 per cent to 6.6 per cent, after a turbulent year, including losing 4.3 per cent of listeners aged 55 to 64 — a key demographic for the station,
Both Beaumont and Peterson were shifted as part of a programming overhaul late last year, with Nine's east coast bosses dumping the afternoon's show, forcing the pair to cover the space.
Peterson's ratings of 4.5 per cent are now lower than when Nine dumped former host Julie-anne Sprague's show.
Once a Drive host from 3pm to 6pm, Peterson was relegated to a 1pm to 5pm shift — now missing out crucial listeners after 5pm.
Instead, 6PR now runs sports talkback into the early evening.
Across town, ABC Perth saw a rise of 0.6 per cent — lead by new Drive host Gary Adshead, who defected from 6PR late last year, who saw ratings grow to 5.7 per cent, up 1.2 per cent.
It follows new ABC managing director Hugh Marks visiting the ABC Perth offices last week, telling staff of a renewed importance of traditional broadcast — such as radio and TV.
On the FM dial, after reaching stratospheric highs last survey, Nova dropped 2.3 per cent as a station, while breakfast crew Nat Locke and Shaun McManus were hit with a 2.2 per cent drop, as speculation continues over the absence of the pair's partner Nathan Morris.
96FM maintained a solid midday audience between 9am and 4pm, winning a fifth of the Perth market.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Sky News AU
2 days ago
- Sky News AU
Outrage over rumoured The Block/MAFS crossover
The Block is set to get a lot more glamorous, with the Nine Network reportedly eyeing the Married At First Sight cast to participate in an upcoming celebrity edition of the hit renovation series. Nine has floated the idea of a forthcoming season featuring some of TV's famous faces as new Blockheads, including MAFS' Martha Kalifatidis and Michael Brunelli, according to the Daily Mail on Monday. The publication reported other MAFS alums Dave Hand and Al Perkins, comedy duo Hamish Blake and Andy Lee, and Olympic legend Cathy Freeman are some more familiar faces at the top of Nine's long wishlist. The idea of the reality TV crossover comes as production insiders say executives at Cavalier Productions, which produces The Block, are in search of Australia's most loved TV talent to pack a punch into the show. "They're seeking instantly recognisable personalities who will bring charisma and energy to the build," a production insider told Daily Mail. "It's not just about picking up a hammer - it's about giving viewers the kind of moments they'll still be talking about the next day." Another source said this goes beyond merely chasing influencers for their follower count, and the chosen cast will have well earned their reputation. "They want Australians who've earned their place in the spotlight, who are respected, and who'll roll up their sleeves and have fun with it." What's more, Nine has reportedly secured a major property deal for just under $11 million at the Victoria suburb of Mount Eliza on the Mornington Peninsula for the 2026 season of The Block to take place. Mount Eliza is an affluent bayside suburb mostly home to older families. It's known for its beaches, leafy atmosphere, and village feel where diners flock to bustling restaurants, humming cafes, and boutique shops. The location was purchased from former Aussie racing driver Rusty French and spans 1.35 hectares, and is subdivided into 10 premium lots. About six of those lots have been secured for the upcoming reno series, with the remaining four either available for short-term lease or sale. It's unclear whether the celebrity edition will take place at Mount Eliza in 2026 or whether Nine has reserved the idea for a later season. Nevertheless, viewers aren't happy about it. "Nooooo," said one person on Instagram, as another person declared the crossover, which emulates the likes of Australian Survivor: All Star and I'm a Me Out of Here! Has been "overdone" on Aussie TV. "Boring," they said. Others are brimming with excitement. "Oh wow, a celeb edition of The Block? Would lose it if Martha and Michael brought their MAFS drama to the build site!" one person said.
Perth Now
4 days ago
- Perth Now
Controversial vegan activist's strange plea
A controversial vegan activist who filed for bankruptcy after a court found she had defamed a Perth vet is attempting to raise money to leave Australia for 'the world's biggest vegan camp out' in the United Kingdom. Tash Peterson and boyfriend Jack Higgs had their passports confiscated when they filed for bankruptcy in May, after WA Supreme Court Chief Justice Peter Quinlan ordered they pay $280,000 in damages. Justice Quinlan found the pair had published defamatory claims that a Bicton vet was 'eating her own patients', with Ms Peterson claiming the court battled meant her 'personal accounts have been wiped'. The pair returned to social media on Friday to urge their supporters to donate to a GoFundMe campaign to help them acquire $30,000 demanded by their bankruptcy trustees 'because they're concerned we are going to flee Australia for good'. 'Because of this, we are trying to raise funds so that I can give my speech at the Vegan Camp Out,' Peterson said in a video. 'The only purpose of our trip is to speak up for non-human animals. Not to run away. 'We only have one week to raise the $30,000'. The pair said the funds, which will contribute to a bond, will be returned to them when they return to Australia and forfeit their passports once again, and will then go to the animal NGO, Farm Transparency Project. Ms Peterson is listed as a speaker for the vegan Camp Out, a four-day festival at Bygrave Woods in Hertfordshire which includes talks from vegan activists such as Paul McCartney's ex-wife, Heather Mills. Ms Peterson is most well-known for protests staged outside restaurants and agricultural shows. Facebook Credit: News Corp Australia The GoFundMe campaign is being run by Ms Peterson's mother, Sally, and as of Saturday morning had raised more than $2000 to a target of $5500, with donations ranging from $20 to as large as $300. The festival website describes Ms Peterson as a WA-based animal activist 'known for her bold and attention-grabbing approach' with a 'controversial style which often includes civil disobedience'. Ms Peterson is most well-known for protests staged outside restaurants and agricultural shows, and according to her own social media have resulted in 30 police move-on orders, three restraining orders, and 17 convictions.
Sydney Morning Herald
4 days ago
- Sydney Morning Herald
A picture of arrogance: Disgraced surgeon's battles with patients revealed
One of the first things Sharon Jones-Baldwin noticed when she entered Munjed Al Muderis' clinic was the large portrait of the star doctor hanging on the wall. It was the product of his interview on Anh's Brush with Fame, the iconic ABC show where comedian Anh Do profiles celebrities over casual conversations and art. 'Is that the one you had done on the ABC?' Jones-Baldwin asked the doctor, according to her affidavit. 'Yes,' he smiled, before leaving the room. This was the last cordial encounter between the doctor and patient, in what Jones-Baldwin described as a horror experience in February 2021 at Macquarie University Hospital that left her in excruciating pain, traumatised and sobbing. 'I would not return to Al Muderis for medical opinion or procedure even if you paid me,' she stated in her affidavit. 'Al Muderis states that he cares about his patients that was not my experience at all.' Jones-Baldwin was one of more than 30 patients who gave evidence during Al Muderis' failed defamation case against Nine, this masthead and 60 Minutes. In the landmark judgment handed down last Friday, Justice Wendy Abraham found the investigative series that revealed serious concerns with his practice, including that he downplayed risks and provided poor aftercare and negligent surgery, was true and in the public interest. 'The positive media coverage his practice had enjoyed needed correcting, and the investigation revealed another side of his practice,' Abraham ruled. 'Patients should be making their decisions with both sides of the story.' Abraham's 770-page judgment found that Al Muderis' practice was unethical and negligent for a significant cohort of his patients, treating some with neglect, callousness, disrespect and that he 'washed his hands' when they needed him. The case rested on whose account Abraham believed – the celebrity doctor or everyone he accused of lying. Ultimately, she found it was the patients who told the truth. 'All had suffered significant forms of personal hardship,' Abraham wrote. 'They stood to gain nothing by giving evidence, other than saying what happened to them.' Abraham's damning findings included that Al Muderis performed experimental surgeries, ignored red flags, failed to respond to patients' pleas for help, performed medical services in the United States without a licence, paid secret cash commissions to recruit patients, failed to obtain informed consent and prioritised fame and money above his patients. This week the medical regulators, HCCC and AHPRA, signalled they were reviewing the judgment but surgeons and experts have little faith action will be taken. 'AHPRA is not in the business of punishing people,' Australian Law Alliance health expert Ngaire Watson said. 'While they're doing that, there is a tendency they will let people go on and on and on.' Loading Medibank, which jointly owns a short-stay hospital with Al Muderis at Macquarie University Hospital, said it was 'very concerned' about the judgment and 'are taking this extremely seriously'. Medibank asked Macquarie University Hospital, where Al Muderis continues to operate, to investigate the judgment and take 'all steps necessary' with the regulators. Al Muderis, represented by Sue Chrysanthou, SC, painted a picture during the trial of extensive charity work and links to prestigious institutions. In the wake of the judgment, though, this evidence has publicly unravelled. Major charities Amnesty International and Red Cross Australia have denied Al Muderis served as an ambassador, as stated in his affidavit, while smaller charities he claimed to represent either denied knowing him or said the relationships were historic and limited. The University of Sydney contradicted his evidence about having a position at the top university, stating there was no affiliation and hadn't been for years. During the trial launched by the millionaire surgeon to protect his 'carefully curated' public image, this masthead can reveal Al Muderis was fighting several battles at the same time, as six separate lawsuits were filed against him over the past three years, many by patients unrelated to the trial. 'Your leg's f---ed' In one case, detailed in Supreme Court of NSW documents released to this masthead, patient Joseph Gavin Harvey sued Al Muderis, surgeon Mustafa Alttahir and anaesthetist Craig Plambeck alleging medical negligence and a failure to uphold his duty of care. The amended statement of claim, filed in November 2023, repeats many allegations raised in the defamation case: that Al Muderis failed to explain risks, rushed into invasive surgery, failed to gain informed consent and performed negligent surgery resulting in serious injury and disability. During the pre-operative assessment, court documents allege Al Muderis rushed Harvey into surgery without providing adequate information about the risks. 'This is one of the worst cases I have seen,' Al Muderis allegedly told Harvey. 'You need the surgery because your leg's f---ed.' In his defence, Al Muderis states he provided Harvey with an 'information pack from the Australian Orthopaedic Association … which included information on risks' – a practice Abraham deemed was insufficient for informed consent. The court documents allege Al Muderis encouraged the patient to have both legs surgically straightened 'because total recovery time would be shorter' but ultimately agreed to operate only on one. Al Muderis allegedly told Harvey the hospital stay would be two to four days and did not discuss alternative treatments or provide any written information about the surgery or recovery time. The patient, who was a soccer player and wanted to return to the field as quickly as possible, was allegedly not informed that the surgery 'is likely to cause significant and persistent knee pain and lead to an accelerated need for knee replacement surgery'. After the surgery, Harvey claimed he suffered pain 'significantly greater than would be expected'. 'Because of the severe pain, the plaintiff was given a Ketamine infusion and then a femoral block … neither of which provided lasting pain relief,' the documents state. Despite the severe pain being reported, Al Muderis allegedly told Harvey he should start walking, exacerbating his pain. Instead of the expected hospital stay of between two and four days, Harvey languished in hospital for 2½ months and has ongoing injuries and disabilities, according to the documents. 'Prof Al Muderis breached his duty of care,' the claim says. Al Muderis allegedly told the patient his condition was 'so severe' it warranted expedited surgery 'when he knew this was not the case' and in doing so 'recommended treatment that was overly aggressive' for the patient's condition. The claim alleges Al Muderis subjected the patient to unnecessary harm and 'failed to determine that recovery time was a matter to which the plaintiff attached material significance', injured the patient and then failed to correct the injury. As a result, Harvey alleges a range of physical, pyschological and financial harms. Al Muderis, Plambeck and Alttahir dispute the allegations and the matter is next listed for directions in September. Alttahir was also a witness for Al Muderis in the defamation trial and gave evidence Abraham found was defensive, not impartial and showed he clearly had 'an interest in the outcome of the case'. In the case, documents show Al Muderis is represented by Eliza Faulk, formerly the head of practice claims at the country's largest medical insurer, Avant. This masthead is not suggesting these allegations are true, only that they have been made in court documents. Alttahir and Plambeck were contacted for comment. 'Hefty non-disclosure' The defamation trial heard Al Muderis' insurer paid out large settlement sums to two former patients, Kim Gollan ($1.2 million) and Leah Mooney ($1.75 million) after operations went wrong. The settlements were previously sealed under confidentiality agreements that Al Muderis waived in his pursuit of defamation litigation. While the Gollan matter was settled on a 'no admissions basis', the court ruled in Mooney's favour. Still, Al Muderis did not acknowledge any wrongdoing in Mooney's case under cross-examination. 'Ms Mooney's incidents have changed my life,' Al Muderis told the court. 'It did affect me deeply and to this day, every day I wake up, I think what would I have done different, and to this day, I think that I've done everything that I could do to help this woman.' Abraham found this answer reflected Al Muderis' preparedness to 'embellish his evidence' and criticised his inability to admit error 'even with the benefit of hindsight' and in the face of indisputable evidence. 'Even if the assertion is hyperbole, it is made (when not true) to emphasise his concern for the position Ms Mooney was in,' she said, which 'tells against his credit'. The cases of Gollan and Mooney take the known lawsuit tally against Al Muderis to nine. Nurse-turned-barrister Watson said more than half-a-dozen medical negligence cases being filed against Al Muderis 'indicates a serious problem': 'If I'm seeing them again and again and again, there is something seriously amiss.' Watson said there is a 'high bar' for medical negligence cases in Australia, that are often David-versus-Goliath battles between injured individuals and well-resourced doctors backed by large medical insurers and law firms. 'The power imbalance is stark,' she said, adding cases rarely make it to trial and often involve 'no admissions' settlements, with large sums being paid to avoid public scrutiny. 'I settle 95 per cent of my cases out of court, that come with hefty non-disclosure agreements.' Loading She said there is very limited transparency around the safety of Australian doctors and believes there needs to be greater transparency in error rates and disciplinary histories for all healthcare practitioners. Through her practice, Watson said she has observed 'frequent flyers' – doctors who face several medical negligence cases and regulatory complaints yet none of them are publicly disclosed – which she said indicates a 'serious problem'. 'It goes with a certain personality type,' she said. 'These people have enormous egos and they don't like being corrected.' She said the current healthcare regulation model is deliberately non-punitive and rarely holds doctors accountable for harming patients, leaving costly and risky litigation as the sole remaining option for justice. Watson said she had seen the HCCC dismiss complaints that later resulted in significant settlement sums being made through litigation. She has little faith in the current regulatory investigative processes. Patient advocate Dorothy Kamaker said private hospitals need to take greater accountability. 'They know what's going on. And they really need to look after the patients. Their duty of care is to the patients, not the surgeon,' she said. 'The surgeon might be the milk cow. They might be making a huge amount of money, but in my mind I feel the patients are being screwed.' Corporate governance expert Helen Bird said neither Medibank nor Macquarie University Hospital should be responsible for investigating the judgment's implications for Al Muderis' ongoing career. She argued the institutions were conflicted because of their financial links to Al Muderis. 'It's very hard to see Macquarie University Hospital setting up a robust inquiry,' Bird said. 'The hospital will say 'we do whatever is in the best interests of our patients'. The short answer is they also know who keeps them open and viable.' In a video uploaded to social media, Al Muderis, who has said he intends to appeal the judgment, promoted the doctor-shareholder joint ventures with health funds where he said he does 'hips and knees' and other surgeries. 'Patients recover very fast, normally,' he said. 'Basically, the health fund shifts the money that they give to inpatient rehab to the surgeon, anaesthetist and the assistant and the physio to cover for that. And they still save money. It's a good program. We've been doing it [for] two years very successfully.' Two orthopaedic surgeons, speaking this week on the condition of anonymity due to fear of retaliation from Al Muderis, said these structures led by health funds like Medibank are 'trying to turn us into America and go with managed care', where profits drive surgical decision-making. Another surgeon said Al Muderis was now spending significant time overseas, in Abu Dhabi and elsewhere, where he performs surgeries. 'All the surgeons who invested in the short stay at Macquarie have been left high and dry. Munjed was the draw card on which the [doctor-shareholders] banked [to] make it a success.' Al Muderis did not respond to questions for this story by deadline, but a statement earlier this week said that he had been 'cleared of any wrongdoing by all relevant authorities, including AHPRA and the Medical Council of NSW, and there are no active complaints or investigations against him that he is aware of'. 'Vindicated' Patients who gave evidence in the trial stated they considered suing Al Muderis for medical negligence, but 'felt powerless when considering his wealth, fame and celebrity status'. Mooney has complained several times to the HCCC, and despite the damning evidence of Al Muderis' negligence, lies and dogged failure to investigate her bone infection and its devastating consequences, the regulator is not interested. 'How can that be the case?' The defamation trial involved subpoenaing medical records for each of the patients, and experts then assessing the quality of care they received. In Jones-Baldwin's case, expert and orthopaedic surgeon Stephen Ruff found that Al Muderis ordered scans and determined her hip joint had 'severely collapsed' as justification for rushing her into the emergency hip replacement. However, Ruff said there was a 'huge disconnect' between what Al Muderis said was wrong and the real position, where X-rays showed her hip was 'essentially normal' and there was 'no gross collapse' evidence. The judge accepted Ruff's opinion. Before her surgery with Al Muderis, Jones-Baldwin was recovering from leukemia, and praised the doctor who treated her as a 'walking talking angel'. 'I understand what professional medical care looks like.' When she was first referred to Al Muderis' clinic, she was thrilled to be treated by such a celebrated surgeon. 'I was shocked and excited that I could get to see a specialist of his reputed calibre,' she wrote in her affidavit, saying the waiting room was full of people. 'The best way to describe it is manic.' In Abraham's ruling, she was persuaded that Al Muderis equated being busy with being successful. 'Being busy has with it many consequences,' she said. Jones-Baldwin said Al Muderis never properly explained the surgery and visited her only once briefly at Macquarie University Hospital, where he treated her 'with contempt'. 'He did not acknowledge or greet me. As he left, I called out 'doctor' but he continued to leave,' she said. 'The only thing he was interested in was the actual operation'. Formerly a publicly listed company director and senior government bureaucrat, Jones-Baldwin said when she read and watched the investigation into Al Muderis by this masthead and 60 Minutes published in 2022, she felt vindicated. 'I cried for the other people who had a similar experience with Al Muderis.' Not all Al Muderis' patients feel this way. Some launched a petition this week pledging their support for the surgeon, which now has more than 1200 signatures. 'At a time when his contributions are being publicly questioned, it is vital that the voices of those who have benefited from this groundbreaking procedure are heard,' the petition stated. In the Federal Court judgment, Abraham found Al Muderis told patients they were 'family' and 'connected for life' and invited them on boats and to dinners and social events. She found this 'altered the patient-doctor relationship' and made some feel dependent on him and afraid to sever the therapeutic relationship. In the witness box, Jones-Baldwin was subjected to aggressive cross-examination by Chrysanthou, who accused her, in court and in closing submissions, of being a 'lying fantasist'. Justice Abraham did not agree, saying: 'That description is gratuitously disrespectful. I do not accept it.' This week, Jones-Baldwin said she was grateful for being able to 'speak the truth about Dr Al Muderis' through the trial but has now joined others in calling for the institutions with a duty to protect the public to step up. 'I hope the regulators will take this matter seriously and put things in place to stop this man from harming others,' she said. As for Al Muderis, this masthead asked the doctor this week, through his lawyers, if he would like to apologise to the patients in light of the Federal Court's judgment. He did not respond.
