In the wee hours, after watching the Murdoch testimony on the teev, I was listening to BBC World Service on the wireless. During the postmortem, they interviewed some independent blogger with a keen interest in the subject. I didn't catch his name unfortunately but he was clearly a Murdoch-hater from way back. Among other things he suggested that "he wouldn't be surprised" if the shaving cream attack on Rupert was staged to gain sympathy for the elderly mogul. To this the interviewer almost indignantly retorted: "Oh, surely not!"
Good to know that while the organization is obviously reveling in the troubles the Dark Lord Murdoch is experiencing, they still retain some common sense.
Meanwhile, across the internet this "I wouldn't be surprised if the foam attack was staged to gain sympathy" line is gaining popularity. Frankly, I'm not surprised.
Wednesday, July 20, 2011
Tuesday, July 19, 2011
Monckton may not be a lord but Gillard is certainly no prime minister
Interesting that so much of the meeja coverage of Christopher Monckton's debate today with Richard Denniss focuses on the question of whether he is a dinkum member of the House of Lords. Even the climate change denying, phone hacking, News Ltd hate media is taking this angle.
But this is yet more playing the man, not the ball. For anyone who saw the debate, the story should be how thoroughly he trounced Denniss and made fools of the climate change "bed wetters" in the National Press Club audience.
If journos must focus on the official titles of prominent players in this carbon tax stoush, why not ask whether Julia Gillard deserves to be called "Prime Minister"? She was twice selected, never elected, after all. If Monckton is twisting the truth a tad, then the sin is nothing compared to the ginormous porkie that got Joolya into the Lodge.
Even if you think she does deserve the title it's looking increasingly like she won't be hanging onto it for very much longer. And if she does get the chop (along with her stupid carbon tax) in coming weeks there's no doubt that many in Labor will be just as relieved as most of the country. The woman is a complete embarrassment on so many levels and they should just get rid of her now!
Hell, they didn't waste any time offing Kevin Rudd, and that was when he was still ahead in the polls. They did it mainly because they hated his guts. Now most of the nation feels that level of hatred towards Gillard, yet they continue to support her! Eh?
What a strange, sad state that party is in ...
But this is yet more playing the man, not the ball. For anyone who saw the debate, the story should be how thoroughly he trounced Denniss and made fools of the climate change "bed wetters" in the National Press Club audience.
If journos must focus on the official titles of prominent players in this carbon tax stoush, why not ask whether Julia Gillard deserves to be called "Prime Minister"? She was twice selected, never elected, after all. If Monckton is twisting the truth a tad, then the sin is nothing compared to the ginormous porkie that got Joolya into the Lodge.
Even if you think she does deserve the title it's looking increasingly like she won't be hanging onto it for very much longer. And if she does get the chop (along with her stupid carbon tax) in coming weeks there's no doubt that many in Labor will be just as relieved as most of the country. The woman is a complete embarrassment on so many levels and they should just get rid of her now!
Hell, they didn't waste any time offing Kevin Rudd, and that was when he was still ahead in the polls. They did it mainly because they hated his guts. Now most of the nation feels that level of hatred towards Gillard, yet they continue to support her! Eh?
What a strange, sad state that party is in ...
NOTW phone hacking scandal not unlike Princess Diana's death
Bloody hell! The News of the World seems to be the only news in the world at the moment. The phone hacking scandal is devouring all before it like some kind of meeja black hole. So far it's claimed the jobs of Rebekah Brooks and two top cops, and (seemingly) the life of some poor journo. Many are saying it could result in the toppling of Murdoch himself and possibly even the destruction of his empire. Then there's the pressure on Cameron and his government. I wouldn't be surprised if it eventually makes the Houses of Parliament just crumble into the Thames ...
All seems to be getting way out of hand to me. Sure, my views are biased. I read The Australian, which is part of Murdoch's hate media, and of course anything associated with him is inherently eeevil. But while what NOTW did was truly disgraceful, it's comparatively minor in the grand scheme of things. There are far worse scandals that sections of the meeja have been complicit in -- for example the concerted attempts to demonize global warming skeptics. That's not nearly as ghoulish, but it's hugely more significant, surely.
And all this disgust from the public seems kind of hypocritical. They happily lapped up all the news that these dodgy practices uncovered for years, after all.
I can't help thinking it's all a bit like what happened to Princess Diana. The paparazzi hounded her to her death, and half the world went into collective shock and mourning. But those photographers were just "feeding the monster" too. Diana may well be alive today had the very people who were most in love with her not had such a voracious appetite for photos of her.
Not unlike the aftermath of that tragedy, the phone hacking scandal will result in a squillion pledges to clean up the tabloids. But they'll all be back to their old ways a decade or so hence. Just you wait and see.
All seems to be getting way out of hand to me. Sure, my views are biased. I read The Australian, which is part of Murdoch's hate media, and of course anything associated with him is inherently eeevil. But while what NOTW did was truly disgraceful, it's comparatively minor in the grand scheme of things. There are far worse scandals that sections of the meeja have been complicit in -- for example the concerted attempts to demonize global warming skeptics. That's not nearly as ghoulish, but it's hugely more significant, surely.
And all this disgust from the public seems kind of hypocritical. They happily lapped up all the news that these dodgy practices uncovered for years, after all.
I can't help thinking it's all a bit like what happened to Princess Diana. The paparazzi hounded her to her death, and half the world went into collective shock and mourning. But those photographers were just "feeding the monster" too. Diana may well be alive today had the very people who were most in love with her not had such a voracious appetite for photos of her.
Not unlike the aftermath of that tragedy, the phone hacking scandal will result in a squillion pledges to clean up the tabloids. But they'll all be back to their old ways a decade or so hence. Just you wait and see.
Sunday, July 17, 2011
Dennis Glover on The Bolt Report
Just watched The Bolt Report. One of Bolta's guests was the Labor speechwriter Dennis Glover. He's obviously an intelligent and articulate bloke but he kept making the classic Labor mistake: When confronted by working people's genuine frustration with the Government, Laborites never take it for what it is, but claim that it's only because the shock jokes have been winding 'em up. This is a condescending attitude that is deeply held in the party, and one of the main reasons they are in such deep, deep doo-doo. The more they express this contemptuous view of working class people, the worse their situation gets.
Really, they have to stop treating the electorate as utter nongs who can be "ginned up" by the Alan Joneses of the world and accept that Aussies can think for themselves and are bloody angry about they way they've been treated. Once Labor shows these people some respect and accepts responsibility for their own dire situation they may actually start to recover in the polls.
Really, they have to stop treating the electorate as utter nongs who can be "ginned up" by the Alan Joneses of the world and accept that Aussies can think for themselves and are bloody angry about they way they've been treated. Once Labor shows these people some respect and accepts responsibility for their own dire situation they may actually start to recover in the polls.
Friday, July 15, 2011
Murdoch-hater Stephen Mayne on ABC News Radio
I just heard Stephen Mayne being interviewed on ABC news Radio about the crisis engulfing News Corp (no link available). He was introduced as a shareholder activist and founder of Crikey. Not surprisingly, he got stuck into the embattled media baron big time!
I thought it was pretty ironic to ask his opinion, considering that Mayne's Crikey was never known as an examplar of media ethics. And that reputation continues. You would think that the interviewer might raise this issue at some stage -- you know, in the interests of the "balance" the ABC claims to uphold -- but of course he didn't.
Sure, the phone hacking scandal is a biggie, but some of the things Mayne said were laughably extreme. He said Murdoch resembled an ageing dictator like Mubarak and compared him to "Comical Ali", the Iraqi Information Minister.
He also got stuck into The Australian's push for "regime change", as if it was some kind of scary thing for democracy. But as everyone living in Oz knows only too well, the paper is merely articulating what most Australians feel. This government is probably the most dishonest and inept one we've ever had, led by the most embarrassingly vacuous numpty ever to disgrace The Lodge.
Mayne clearly hates Rupert's guts. And the interview with him was typical of the kind of meeja bias that is far more of a threat to democracy than Murdoch represents.
I thought it was pretty ironic to ask his opinion, considering that Mayne's Crikey was never known as an examplar of media ethics. And that reputation continues. You would think that the interviewer might raise this issue at some stage -- you know, in the interests of the "balance" the ABC claims to uphold -- but of course he didn't.
Sure, the phone hacking scandal is a biggie, but some of the things Mayne said were laughably extreme. He said Murdoch resembled an ageing dictator like Mubarak and compared him to "Comical Ali", the Iraqi Information Minister.
He also got stuck into The Australian's push for "regime change", as if it was some kind of scary thing for democracy. But as everyone living in Oz knows only too well, the paper is merely articulating what most Australians feel. This government is probably the most dishonest and inept one we've ever had, led by the most embarrassingly vacuous numpty ever to disgrace The Lodge.
Mayne clearly hates Rupert's guts. And the interview with him was typical of the kind of meeja bias that is far more of a threat to democracy than Murdoch represents.
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Kristina Keneally on what ails Labor
Kristina Keneally reveals one of the attitudes that is afflicting today's Labor in her opinion of how best to fix the party. She says that it needs a "rebranding".
Ms Keneally said the Labor Party needed to develop a new brand, claiming most people did not know what it stood for.
She thinks it's all a marketing problem! No, most people know what Labor "stands" for: monumental incompetence, dysfunction, petty internal hatreds and utter disdain for the electorate, among other things.
The problem is that Labor politicians themselves don't believe in anything much. Mostly they just see the party as a way to further their own personal ambitions -- you know, have a great income with a load of perks, get to boss people around, hobnob with celebs ... that sort of thing.
She's kind of right when she says this:
"We speak very well to the unionised workforce and we speak very well to the educated progressive class, but we don't have a brand or a method of speaking to middle Australia."
Yeah, that's because they wrote off middle Australia a long time ago. And middle Australia has finally run out of patience with them.
Ms Keneally said the Labor Party needed to develop a new brand, claiming most people did not know what it stood for.
She thinks it's all a marketing problem! No, most people know what Labor "stands" for: monumental incompetence, dysfunction, petty internal hatreds and utter disdain for the electorate, among other things.
The problem is that Labor politicians themselves don't believe in anything much. Mostly they just see the party as a way to further their own personal ambitions -- you know, have a great income with a load of perks, get to boss people around, hobnob with celebs ... that sort of thing.
She's kind of right when she says this:
"We speak very well to the unionised workforce and we speak very well to the educated progressive class, but we don't have a brand or a method of speaking to middle Australia."
Yeah, that's because they wrote off middle Australia a long time ago. And middle Australia has finally run out of patience with them.
Thursday, March 17, 2011
Nuclear power and atomic bombs are not the same thing!
Anti-nuclear activists have been amazingly successful in their attempts to conflate nuclear power with nuclear explosions. But of course the two are not mutually inclusive. You just have to take a deep breath and think about it for a moment. Sure, a nuclear meltdown is a terrifying prospect but it's nothing compared to a bloody mushroom cloud!
But thinking calmly is the last thing the activists want people to do. Journalists cooperate with them in achieving this aim because many of them are greenies themselves. Also, constantly beating up the threat of a catastrophic outpouring of radioactive material sells a helluva lot more papers.
That's why there's been such a weird fixation on the potential nuclear threat over the actual quake disaster in Japan. It's also why you see articles like this one, the title of which is very revealing: "Why Japan embraced nuclear power after suffering the atomic bomb".
Short answer: Because they're not the same thing. And doing so made economic sense.
But thinking calmly is the last thing the activists want people to do. Journalists cooperate with them in achieving this aim because many of them are greenies themselves. Also, constantly beating up the threat of a catastrophic outpouring of radioactive material sells a helluva lot more papers.
That's why there's been such a weird fixation on the potential nuclear threat over the actual quake disaster in Japan. It's also why you see articles like this one, the title of which is very revealing: "Why Japan embraced nuclear power after suffering the atomic bomb".
Short answer: Because they're not the same thing. And doing so made economic sense.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)