This is a blog post by one writer. It's not reflective of what "most news" is about any more than any random blog post is, i.e., not representative at all.
Google for Australia google news tax, and click news to see actual news sites, and not one in the first several pages (actually, I can find exactly zero) have a title like the one you complain is "what most news has come to".
Are to cite any real news (as in a major news publication) source as an example of your claimed bias? I can't find any.
I think it is perfectly valid to call out Fox News in the title, because most readers would not know who News Corp is but do know Fox News, and for the intents of this article they are very similar.
Moreover the reason why this is called in particularly the Fox News tax is because News Corp are the main beneficiary by quite a margin, they have >50% market share in Australia [1].
Furthermore Murdoch has a strong history of influencing Australian politics in his favour and the ruling liberal party has a history of implementing policy directly to benefit him.
The National Broadband Network was widely popular in Australia, however it threatened Murdoch's payTV business. So he had meetings with liberal party leadership, who promised to hamstring (or roll-back) the NBN. They were essentially voted into power with headlines of "vote these suckers out" (Labour was in power) and similar in all Murdoch papers and no none of the "left-leaning" papers ever did something remotely close to that. As a non-Australian it was quite shocking to observe how blatantly partisan those headlines were.
News corp is not media it is a far-right billionaire propaganda organisation.
Quick update, it's also very clear why ABC was left out from Wikipedia "The Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC) is Australia's national broadcaster, founded in 1929. It is principally funded by the direct grants from the Australian government and is administered by a board appointed by the government of the day"