|
|
Post by tewiremu on Jul 13, 2012 20:08:54 GMT 10
Two more attempts to post in Bolt's Thursday and Friday tips pages fail. And the state of the posts of his diehard slavering horde borders on the hysterical. If there isn't a change soon he might as well quit. ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jul 13, 2012 20:10:21 GMT 10
Bolt's criticism of Marr as a 'Manichean' is worse than it seems.
Its righty code for 'poofter'.
|
|
|
|
Post by jules on Jul 13, 2012 21:11:28 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by tewiremu on Jul 13, 2012 21:12:30 GMT 10
I googled Bolt's reference to Marr and Manichaeanism...they go back to 2007. Apparently Bolt uses it as a sort of cheap insult for people who have a conviction that their views are always right. /intense irony
|
|
|
|
Post by tewiremu on Jul 14, 2012 12:49:17 GMT 10
Bastille Day: Tell me what should be posted and what not.
This is the only thread today allowing comments and tips.
UPDATE
Apologies. The thread is not open. No comments will be moderated over the weekend.
But I will be reading tips. Let them eat cake.  |
|
|
|
Post by jack on Jul 15, 2012 21:29:37 GMT 10
Piers, Miranda, Timmeh... all those other News £td blogs are copping scores and even hundreds of comments.
Even Andy's fellow Herald Sun blogger Susie O'Brien seems to have functioning comments threads.
Why is News £td suppressing Andy's readers' comments? And his ravings rantings ratings?
|
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jul 17, 2012 9:30:55 GMT 10
There's something very fishy about Mr B's blog turning off comments. As Jack says, its doesn't seem to have affected other News blogs. And the explanation given is laughable.
And today we have this comment...
"It seems to me vested interests are desperately trying to retain their power.
(No comments. And you’ll see a lot more such closures of debate if you don’t fight back.) "
Is this a case of someone deliberately causing self-harm in order to draw attention to themselves?
|
|
|
|
Post by Matthew Of Canberra on Jul 17, 2012 21:01:27 GMT 10
"It seems to me vested interests are desperately trying to retain their power."
My golly, that's BRILLIANT. Yes, powerful interests try to retain power. It's what powerful interests do. Powerful interests like rupert murdoch, mining billionaires and herald sun opinionators. They are, without a doubt, desperately trying to retain their power.
Back on about the 26th of june, the AFR issued a dire warning about the ALP telling its MPs to start softening up their electorates about cracking down on the media.
That's three weeks ago, and I haven't seen a darn thing. Not one bit of softening up. Not that it's stopped the usual suspects from banging on about it. As near as I can tell, that was just wholesale bullshit, being retailed by the finest purveyors of bullshit to try to cover themselves (not WITH bullshit of course - they have junior staff for that).
There have been a number of rhetorical questions from the right (and the occasional rare one from fairfax and the odd murmur from the ABC) about what the left would be saying if john howard had tried "this".
But ... I can't see what "this" is. They're not DOING anything. I'll get upset about something when I see evidence that "something" is actually going to happen. And so far ... all I've seen is ideas. And it's surprising that ideas seem to be so utterly terrifying to certain wings of the press.
I actually think that a low-impact version of the finkelstein proposals would be a welcome change. Basically, it'd be media watch on steroids, with a broader range of contributors from inside and outside the press. All it could do would be to resolve disputes about accuracy more quickly than other existing mechanisms. The IPA bangs on about censorship, but it's just not there. At absolute worst, I'd make them print an apology when they get it wrong. Don't want to do it? Then don't get it wrong. In the meantime they could say what they like, within the existing law.
As far as I can see, one particular side of politics has made much hay out of spreading bullshit. Finkelstein, in the form I'd implement it, would just be an umpire that could call bullshit when somebody prints or broadcasts it. That alone would be enough to chill the herald sun and daily terror (and increasingly the australian) to its socks - because (apart from media watch) they've never really had anyone with any standing who's been able to call some of their crap for what it is. They've relied on having (more or less) no way for the targets of their attacks to answer back, short of legal suits - and as long as the press is more cashed up than the other guy, that hasn't been such a big problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jul 17, 2012 21:19:19 GMT 10
As I see it one of the basic problems is the arrogance of journalists and newspapers. They seem to think they are above criticism, therefore they can get away with anything.
But we can happily survive without them.
Journos - No, you are ordinary people with little education, many prejuduces and perversions, and subject to the same criticism as anyone. So get your fingers out of your bums and get real jobs.
You don't deserve a 'profession'.
|
|
|
|
Post by jack on Jul 17, 2012 21:22:44 GMT 10
|
|
|
|
Post by angra on Jul 17, 2012 21:31:08 GMT 10
jack - And "This is the only open thread. "
So the Master of Free Speech has closed down all comments.
I think Andrew has gone troppo.
|
|
|
|
Post by jack on Jul 17, 2012 22:09:11 GMT 10
Be nice, angra, that one open thread contains ALL the free speech in Australia. Er um... that's a pretty depressing thought when you glance through the comments; e.g., Albert replied to PaulG
Tue 17 Jul 12 (09:50am)
I stopped watching Q&A;a long time ago, it’s unbalanced and irrelevant.
I start my day with a visit to the Andrew Bolt site and why is this Government trying to shut down a voice that no one listens to? Apparently a lot of it's all about Andy. I'd imagine there must be some 'news' and 'mistake alerts' in all that lot, but... well, I guess all that's the price of laughing all the way to the bank. |
|
