1 Tygojora

Quarterly Essay 58

  • Gederts Skerstens :

    05 Sep 2011 10:31:20pm

    Mr. Manne had a plan.
    Like all Lefties. Close down other points of view. That's it. There's nothing else.
    To see if it works, check the Internet to see how many guys on Coconut rafts risk their lives getting Into Cuba. Or North Korea, or Sudan, or bust a gut getting Into Russia, Saudi Arabia or Sudan.
    If you can't think of a reason, STFU.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Adam Dutkiewicz :

        05 Sep 2011 11:05:51pm

        The problem with many "Rightists" is they are often wrong or ill-informed. They choose ignorance and error over truth and facts. Having a valid point of view is not about closing down others, it's about arguing a case that shows the factual and wilful errors in the wrong points of view. It has nothing to do with who wants to live where, it's about making society better for everyone, not just a select elite.






        ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        06 Sep 2011 11:43:10am

        What a performance! The usual deranged Rightwing claim that criticising the real, existing and undeniable bias of Murdoch's Evil Empire amounts to a 'Leftist plot' to impose control over our vital bodily essences..oops..wrong conspiracy! To control our thoughts. Those poor devils are News Corpse with only 70% of the local media to push their absolute bigotry, bias and partiality on any subject, surrounded by Robert Manne and Fabulous Phil, who qualify as 'Leftists' only in a society moved as far to the Right as this one has been. And I really enjoy the ranting about Russia (where the press is certainly more wide-ranging than in Murdoch's Empire)Sudan, Cuba, North Korea and Saudi Arabia (my God! Are they 'Leftists', too?). But that's the essence of the Right's understanding of 'freedom'. It means the freedom for the Right to totally dominate society, politics and the media (the 'natural order of things'), and even the barest criticism is met with hysterical hyperbole. In fact I believe this is a good sign, signifying that the Right, seeing the evil, destructive and sadistically cruel world system that they imposed on humanity crumbling before their eyes, are beginning to feel really fearful. And, as ever, when threatened they react with increased paranoia, bellicosity and belligerence.

        ReplyAlert moderator

      • Daniel :

        07 Sep 2011 1:30:32pm

        Gederts - now that's a lovely way of simplifying complex issues - very 'right' of you. The problem is the role of the media - not politics - and the views that they 'realise' i.e. present as 'fact'. The list in Australia is long: boat people? children overboard? haneef? etc...The argument is often simplifed to us vs them, lefties vs righties, etc. While this makes it easier to attack, it rarely solves anything, let alone the issue at hand...Australia still believes in this crap, and as a result, we have a two-party country with puppets up front being expertly manipulated by the masters who hold the 'real' power - those who have reached a position of power and authority and who, under no circumstances, will let that go...
        We can all agree that there should be balanced reporting not one-sided propaganda, however, easy to say, not so easy to enact... Although we have the internet, this does not bring 'facts' and eternal 'truths' into our houses. Your quote of mass generalisations about issues in other countries is a bit off the mark - made obvious by your passionate judgement of something you probably have little knowledge OR experience of...The internet is only exacerbating this disturbing trend (see all the social media etc. in which any voice can present their point of view, and it's acknowledged while there may be little knowledge or experience to support the views - and this is often at the expense of those who DO know what they're talking about e.g. Robert Manne). As Adam rightly points out, a valid point of view is not about closing down others, it's about challenging the views of the dominant class who often claim to be doing things in everyone's interest rather than their own.
        Australia is a country which propounds democracy and freedom - which means that we are 'free' to say and do what we choose...well, as long as it's the right opinion - otherwise you get shot down instantly (we've even got our own aussie terms for this - wowser, tall poppy syndrome etc.)...and those doing the shooting don't like others rocking the boat and trying to take control, so they'll brainwash everyone until we believe that things are 'for our benefit"...

        ReplyAlert moderator

          • Gederts Skerstens :

            08 Sep 2011 10:18:15am

            Daniel declared: "... made obvious by your passionate judgement of something you probably have little knowledge OR experience of..."

            The "probably" based on what information, from where?

            Pretty much the type of slanting you seem opposed to.

            You write well, so I'll make it a similarly civilised comment, or question.

            ReplyAlert moderator

              • Daniel :

                08 Sep 2011 4:34:55pm

                ...as I don't know you, the 'probably' is in fact a statement of possibility, and as such, keeps open the dialogic space for discussion rather than shutting it down to a dichotomoy...Unfortunately, something that seems to escape many...

                ReplyAlert moderator

              • Gederts Skerstens :

                08 Sep 2011 5:11:00pm

                Daniel debated: "..the 'probably' is in fact a statement of possibility, and as such, keeps open the dialogic space for discussion rather than shutting it down..."

                Hardly. 'Probably' knowing little implies there's little value in a comment or any time spent listening to it.

                Still, a fairly sophisticated try.

                ReplyAlert moderator

              • Mulga Mumblebrain :

                09 Sep 2011 10:23:04am

                Skerstens, your original 'contribution', in my opinion, was an incoherent rant, devoid of rational content. Have you tried applying to Chris Mitchell for a job?

                ReplyAlert moderator

              • Daniel :

                12 Sep 2011 9:40:47pm

                I guess at least you recognise sophistication when you see it,even if you write it off.
                You give hints that you're smarter than the average bear, even though you're only barely more literate and eloquent!

                ReplyAlert moderator

      • Geoff Saunders :

        07 Sep 2011 1:34:38pm

        So many straw men, so little time.

        Fact is that the Australian is notorious for its closing down of other points of view.

        Of course their columnists are overwhelmingly right-wing. But take a look at the comments sections of their articles, or the letters to the editor. Rarely is a voice tolerated that deviates from the News Ltd party line.

        Contrast that with the wide range of opinions featured on Fairfax articles, or right here on the ABC.

        The Oz is nothing but a right-wing echo chamber.

        ReplyAlert moderator

          • Mulga Mumblebrain :

            07 Sep 2011 8:36:17pm

            I know from commenting at 'The Fundament' that you soon begin to disappear if you are not, like the hacks and the pet commenters and letter-writers, 'on message'.

            ReplyAlert moderator

  • Al :

    06 Sep 2011 9:07:14am

    This is not about politics. This is about reporting the news in an ethical and factual manner.
    Sadly, The Australian has failed this test many times over the past decade putting politics before proper news gathering.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        06 Sep 2011 11:23:43am

        It failed that test long ago, certainly as early as the time of the disgraceful, malicious and vicious campaign to unseat Gough Whitlam. Murdoch's rags have been used as indoctrination weapons to push his far Right ideology and brainwash society for decades. It is simply the latter-day psychopathy of the approach, the result of an unnatural selective process and the visceral fear that the misanthropic and anti-life Right are feeling as their evil world system collapses, that is novel, nauseating, but, ultimately, the sign of an approaching catharsis, hopefully a healing one. A society where the media is like the News Corpse model is, in my opinion, sick to its very soul, and will not endure.

        ReplyAlert moderator

  • Robert Mitchell :

    06 Sep 2011 4:57:42pm

    So, it's okay when The Australian campaigns vigorously for issues Mr Manne approves of but not on when The Australian campaigns on issues Mr Manne disagrees with. As usual with the Left there is no room for compromise. The Left is right and no correspondence will - ever - allowed to be entered into.
    So, no surprises here except that it forced me to eventually change stations.

    ReplyAlert moderator

  • John Adelaide :

    06 Sep 2011 5:04:14pm

    I used to be a regular reader of The Australian but abandoned it a couple of years ago. Not because it was right wing but because it was no longer logical or factual, it had become merely a propoganda rag. I enjoy reading The Economist which is hardly left wing and I may disagree with it but at least I know they have applied some intellect to an issue and argue a case. The Australian has a shrill and hysterical tone that in the end I found uninformative and irritating so it was with relief I cancelled my subscription.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        09 Sep 2011 10:20:41am

        'The Fundament'(aka 'The Australian') these days is mostly driven by real hatred. Hatred that one often sees more in the editorials, motivated by a malignant Manicheanism that derives a great deal from Zionist discourse concerning Israel and Palestine. Many of 'The Fundament's] operatives make no pretense that their greatest allegiances are to Israel and its puppet hyper-power, the USA.

        ReplyAlert moderator

  • oldsailor :

    06 Sep 2011 6:16:41pm

    A very interesting perspective by Robert Mann; one which most thinking Australians have come to realise. The mindless pursuit of the 'football game' by New Ltd has had a very telling impact on the way democracy is practised in Australia, the UK and the USA. The comment that 'News Ltd' has become a 'player' rather than an 'accurate reporter' or a 'national enhancer' rings of a frightening realism that must put them in the enertainment arena and a long way from the idealism of journalism.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        09 Sep 2011 10:17:16am

        News Corpse, like all the Western MSM, is primarily about propaganda and thought control, to ensure that the public never questions the plutocratic rule of the mostly hereditary parasite elites. News Corpse is just more extreme and deranged in its work than others-the 'good cop, mad cop' scenario. After that absolute priority comes profit maximisation, the God of capitalism.

        ReplyAlert moderator

  • Jeremy Williams :

    06 Sep 2011 10:20:11pm

    The oz has been a political player well before it decided to oust rudd. I would be happy if the paper was a consistently right wing but it picks and chooses what suits and that seems to be more about vested interests. It was a big supporter of howard even though he was part of large taxing, big spending, middle class welfare government.

    There was all the dodgy medalling with Haneef dog whistling for howard - selective leaks to make him look more guilty.

    Even the way the oz presents news on climate change lacks impartiality like the surfer on bondi beach who hasn't noticed any sea level rise or action by david cameron on climate change buried in the text on page 40.

    Its quite vindicative with its cut and pastes section and more worringly selects quotes out of context to get at its critics.
    Watch it do so with Robert Manne now.

    ReplyAlert moderator

  • jason :

    07 Sep 2011 6:15:41am

    Robert Manne missed the point when he said "no one elects them" concerning the editors of the paper. The public make their own choice whether to buy it or not. Thanks Jason Geelong

    ReplyAlert moderator

  • colleen enchelmaier :

    07 Sep 2011 8:58:36am

    I gave up buying The Australian and Courier Mail in the seventies and I often wondered why writers like Philip and Mike Steketee contributed to such a rabidly biased newspaper as The Australian and gave it some so-called balance. I used to be able to access these two columnists free on line but no longer. Philip's attitude to Julia Gillard is making me wonder if he isn't a Murdoch man after all.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        09 Sep 2011 10:14:02am

        Beware the dissembler. Adams adjusted to the Howardite putsch at the ABC like a fish to water.

        ReplyAlert moderator

  • Patria :

    08 Sep 2011 10:26:22am

    As pointed out in LNL, the Australian is still the only NATIONAL newspaper so if you live in S.E. Qld, we are stuck with the Courier Mail (yuuk! – now there’s a biased, hysterical rag if ever there was one!).
    I pick up the Weekend Oz for 8 neighbours every Saturday. Frankly, Saturday and Sunday wouldn’t be the same without it. However, we are all, without exception, fully aware of the anti-Labor, anti-Green, anti-everything of value political campaigns run by this newspaper. It’s a case of reading between the lines, getting to know who to avoid and choosing those correspondents, like Philip, who take a different perspective to the Murdoch line. Plus The Weekend Review has the best arts coverage – worth every cent of $2.60. The rest can go into the mulch pile! Thank God for the ABC reportage to keep us all sane.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        09 Sep 2011 10:13:08am

        Patria, I see no difference, these days, in ABC coverage and that of News Corpse. Indeed given the omnipresence on the ABC of News Corpse hacks and propagandists from the IPA, CIS and other Rightwing propaganda tanks, I see the ABC as every bit as pernicious, biased and in thrall to power as the rest of the Western MSM.

        ReplyAlert moderator

  • The Australian :

    10 Sep 2011 1:53:37pm

    What a conundrum. The Murdochs support climate change yet the editor of their most important paper does not. Does this suggest and editorial policy of laissez fare? How liberal of them to allow a different policy promoted through their press to that which they hold dearly. There is another explanation. To be taken seriously as a player in world politics you would appear an idiot not to accept the reality of climate change. However, to acknowledge this and promote this belief through his newspapers would cost advertising revenue and alienate powerful friends. The bulk of businesses opposed to climate change are not opposed to the science. They are opposed to the economics. As Ernest Everhard told his partner in the Iron Heel, nothing will touch them morality, feelings empathy or public responsibility. Nothing will touch them till we reach for their money.

    ReplyAlert moderator

      • Mulga Mumblebrain :

        10 Sep 2011 2:56:24pm

        Precisely! News Corpse protestations that they accept climate science are, in my opinion, pure bunkum and cynical hypocrisy raised to the level of some sort of quasi-religious ecstasy. If it were true, then the very near 100% support that their rags and the Fox News abomination gives to even the most obscurantist, ignorant and outright mendacious denialism would be a moral failing of hideous dimensions, given the implications of rapid climate destabilisation. However, while I remain convinced that the whole Murdoch Evil Empire's upper levels are morally insane( taking the phone-hacking horrors as but one example, and total support for the 'supreme crime' of aggression in Iraq as another)I remain convinced that their protestations of rationality in this regard are, in fact, a sinister subterfuge.

        ReplyAlert moderator

  • Last year was a 'blood year' in the Middle East – massacres and beheadings, fallen cities, collapsed and collapsing states, the unravelling of a decade of Western strategy. We saw the rise of ISIS, the splintering of government in Iraq, and foreign fighters – many from Europe, Australia and Africa – flowing into Syria at a rate ten times that during the height of the Iraq War. What went wrong?
    In Blood Year, David Kilcullen calls on twenty-five years' experience to answer that question. This is a vivid, urgent account of the War on Terror by someone who helped shape its strategy, as well as witnessing its evolution on the ground. Kilcullen looks to strategy and history to make sense of the crisis. What are the roots and causes of the global jihad movement? What is ISIS? What threats does it pose to Australia? What does its rise say about the effectiveness of the War on Terror since 9/11, and what does a coherent strategy look like after a disastrous year?
    'As things stand in mid-2015, Western countries . . . face a larger, more unified, capable, experienced and savage enemy, in a less stable, more fragmented region. It isn't just ISIS – al-Qaeda has emerged from its eclipse and is back in the game in Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Syria and Yemen. We're dealing with not one, but two global terrorist organisations, each with its own regional branches, plus a vastly larger radicalised population at home and a massive flow of foreign fighters.' David Kilcullen, Blood Year

    Leave a Comment

    (0 Comments)

    Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *