Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein trav­els across Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea, the United States, Britain, Greece, and Australia to witness the reality of disaster capitalism. He discovers how companies such as G4S, Serco, and Halliburton cash in on or­ganized misery in a hidden world of privatized detention centers, militarized private security, aid profiteering, and destructive mining.

Disaster has become big business. Talking to immigrants stuck in limbo in Britain or visiting immigration centers in America, Loewenstein maps the secret networks formed to help cor­porations bleed what profits they can from economic crisis. He debates with Western contractors in Afghanistan, meets the locals in post-earthquake Haiti, and in Greece finds a country at the mercy of vulture profiteers. In Papua New Guinea, he sees a local commu­nity forced to rebel against predatory resource companies and NGOs.

What emerges through Loewenstein’s re­porting is a dark history of multinational corpo­rations that, with the aid of media and political elites, have grown more powerful than national governments. In the twenty-first century, the vulnerable have become the world’s most valu­able commodity. Disaster Capitalism is published by Verso in 2015 and in paperback in January 2017.

Profits_of_doom_cover_350Vulture capitalism has seen the corporation become more powerful than the state, and yet its work is often done by stealth, supported by political and media elites. The result is privatised wars and outsourced detention centres, mining companies pillaging precious land in developing countries and struggling nations invaded by NGOs and the corporate dollar. Best-selling journalist Antony Loewenstein travels to Afghanistan, Pakistan, Haiti, Papua New Guinea and across Australia to witness the reality of this largely hidden world of privatised detention centres, outsourced aid, destructive resource wars and militarized private security. Who is involved and why? Can it be stopped? What are the alternatives in a globalised world? Profits of Doom, published in 2013 and released in an updated edition in 2014, challenges the fundamentals of our unsustainable way of life and the money-making imperatives driving it. It is released in an updated edition in 2014.
forgodssakecover Four Australian thinkers come together to ask and answer the big questions, such as: What is the nature of the universe? Doesn't religion cause most of the conflict in the world? And Where do we find hope?   We are introduced to different belief systems – Judaism, Christianity, Islam – and to the argument that atheism, like organised religion, has its own compelling logic. And we gain insight into the life events that led each author to their current position.   Jane Caro flirted briefly with spiritual belief, inspired by 19th century literary heroines such as Elizabeth Gaskell and the Bronte sisters. Antony Loewenstein is proudly culturally, yet unconventionally, Jewish. Simon Smart is firmly and resolutely a Christian, but one who has had some of his most profound spiritual moments while surfing. Rachel Woodlock grew up in the alternative embrace of Baha'i belief but became entranced by its older parent religion, Islam.   Provocative, informative and passionately argued, For God's Sakepublished in 2013, encourages us to accept religious differences, but to also challenge more vigorously the beliefs that create discord.  
After Zionism, published in 2012 and 2013 with co-editor Ahmed Moor, brings together some of the world s leading thinkers on the Middle East question to dissect the century-long conflict between Zionism and the Palestinians, and to explore possible forms of a one-state solution. Time has run out for the two-state solution because of the unending and permanent Jewish colonization of Palestinian land. Although deep mistrust exists on both sides of the conflict, growing numbers of Palestinians and Israelis, Jews and Arabs are working together to forge a different, unified future. Progressive and realist ideas are at last gaining a foothold in the discourse, while those influenced by the colonial era have been discredited or abandoned. Whatever the political solution may be, Palestinian and Israeli lives are intertwined, enmeshed, irrevocably. This daring and timely collection includes essays by Omar Barghouti, Jonathan Cook, Joseph Dana, Jeremiah Haber, Jeff Halper, Ghada Karmi, Antony Loewenstein, Saree Makdisi, John Mearsheimer, Ahmed Moor, Ilan Pappe, Sara Roy and Phil Weiss.
The 2008 financial crisis opened the door for a bold, progressive social movement. But despite widespread revulsion at economic inequity and political opportunism, after the crash very little has changed. Has the Left failed? What agenda should progressives pursue? And what alternatives do they dare to imagine? Left Turn, published by Melbourne University Press in 2012 and co-edited with Jeff Sparrow, is aimed at the many Australians disillusioned with the political process. It includes passionate and challenging contributions by a diverse range of writers, thinkers and politicians, from Larissa Berendht and Christos Tsiolkas to Guy Rundle and Lee Rhiannon. These essays offer perspectives largely excluded from the mainstream. They offer possibilities for resistance and for a renewed struggle for change.
The Blogging Revolution, released by Melbourne University Press in 2008, is a colourful and revelatory account of bloggers around the globe why live and write under repressive regimes - many of them risking their lives in doing so. Antony Loewenstein's travels take him to private parties in Iran and Egypt, internet cafes in Saudi Arabia and Damascus, to the homes of Cuban dissidents and into newspaper offices in Beijing, where he discovers the ways in which the internet is threatening the ruld of governments. Through first-hand investigations, he reveals the complicity of Western multinationals in assisting the restriction of information in these countries and how bloggers are leading the charge for change. The blogging revolution is a superb examination about the nature of repression in the twenty-first century and the power of brave individuals to overcome it. It was released in an updated edition in 2011, post the Arab revolutions, and an updated Indian print version in 2011.
The best-selling book on the Israel/Palestine conflict, My Israel Question - on Jewish identity, the Zionist lobby, reporting from Palestine and future Middle East directions - was released by Melbourne University Press in 2006. A new, updated edition was released in 2007 (and reprinted again in 2008). The book was short-listed for the 2007 NSW Premier's Literary Award. Another fully updated, third edition was published in 2009. It was released in all e-book formats in 2011. An updated and translated edition was published in Arabic in 2012.

Investigative journalism in the era of Wikileaks

Last year, in September, I appeared at Australia’s first conference (Back to the Source) for investigative journalists in Sydney alongside ABC TV’s Andrew Fowler, freelance journalist Philip Dorling and The Australian Financial Review’s Brian Toohey.

We had all in different ways reported on Wikileaks, mostly sympathetically, and the discussion revolved about what the organisation had done to journalism. The event was organised by the Australian Centre for Independent Journalism, where I’m a Research Associate.

My talk begins at 21.54:

  • rehmat1

    Personally I believe Wikileaks is a CIA-Mossad project. However, your views on journalism are good and reminds me of my favorite Canadaian journalist and former editor of editorial board at daily Toronto Star once called "jingoism".

  • examinator

    I have to agree with what you said as far as it went.
    I also very much agree with Toohey when he said we should always be sceptical of what we read…etc.
    My mantra is that objectivity is King, Context is Queen and spin is the Knave.
    What you didn't make clear is what you think the PRIME purpose of the Journalist….to inform or entertain . By the latter I mean what does the people NEED to know . …By that I mean there is no doubt that trashing someone's reputation is certainly what the public WANT to know but NEED?
    The furore over Mr Slipper …..particularly the countless words on analysing and the salacious allegations without a shred of court proven Fact . Even if he wins the contextual reality of all the publicity will be two fold, end his career or worse. Unleash, boulster, confirm(?) prejudices/ prejudices in the minds of the influential rump in his electorate.

    It is a sad fact Media rants/campaigns (power) create, entrench urban myths/' truths' (sic) ( read prejudices and Unfair biases) in the influential rump of society. e.g illegal boat people, and the raft of associated myths that are commonly associated with boat refugee seekers et al
    As I have also stated just because a person is a journalist that doesn't automatically make them either an expert or correct. Their increased access to the public and often their self inflation often contrives to influence the same public's opinions/ prejudices …
    It is a fact that those who read the Sydney telegraph are unlikely to also read the cables or the correction…. they will remember (because it agrees with their comfort thinking) the original statement.

    Surely it should be part of the Journalistic code (responsibility) not inflate stories beyond their proportional importance, not only for the above reasons but also the fact that it desensitised the public when a really important issue arises … e.g. the tinder box (flash point) that is the middle east (albeit USA power/ interests based, best evidenced by The Israel/ Palestinian issue.) This issue is WAY more important consequences and likelihood of a (Aussie lives at stake) crisis than say the posturing of political trolls over the “Slipper situation”.

    I contend that part of the Journalists' Responsibility test of the public's need to know should be based on both known facts and the probable out comes of their very Limited (myopic) “analysis”.
    For example making claims like 'the only way to go' needs to involve more substantive facts before such absolutist opinionated designation is made be that in the spin, snappy title etc.
    In truth Journalists' opinions are rarely any more valid that any well read/educated person's. That sadly isn't their general market place.
    In short if journalists want to be seen as more than mouthpieces (for their opinions or power) they need to be above spin or overt opinions. In my mind Journalists Should be the LINK between the public and the news. Not as now self appointed players influencers of the issue .. that's the job of advertising and PR companies.
    Stink tanks should be forced to a name that reflects what they do…
    The public should be clearly able to easily tell the facts and opinions by defining the labels they use. not hiding or disguising. i.e. a doctor MD is a doctor MD not a dentist