‘(The Australian)…is merely a right-wing blog, a C

[richard]

‘(The Australian)…is merely a right-wing blog, a Catallaxy Files with more pictures and less intellectual rigour.’

Yeah, OK. The above quote is taken slightly out of context.
Bernard Keane in yesterday’s Crikey! (http://www.crikey.com.au/2012/11/16/keane-how-news-ltd-despairs-at-gillards-success/) prefaced the above sentence with:

‘All...(The Australian) has left is its status as an influential outlet, one that other journalists, producers and editors (particularly at the ABC) feel obliged to take seriously.’

PP Reffoes would do well to read Keane’s article.

Up until quite recently I would buy the printed Weekend Australian if only for its Review, Australian Magazine and A+ supplements. Hours of informative entertainment for under three dollars! But now I cannot bear to spring that cash for something that has become a blatantly Tory rag.

But this is not the point of this post. The Australian is a rich seam of partisan extremism for PP Reffoes to mine from. Greg Sheridan and Christopher Pearson give you Tony Abbott man love. Dennis Shanahan and Paul Kelly give you Liberal Party talking points. Nikki Savva gives you an indication of where the LP wants to direct the “narrative”. And then there is Janet Albrechtsen...

I resist the temptation to write ‘comedy gold!’ or variations of that. The Australian’s 100% commitment to regime change is not funny. It is a plutocrat subsisdised attempt to tip public opinion toward a more Murdoch amenable government.

Having a crack at Andrew Bolt is a relatively easy exercise. Having a crack at doyens of Australian journalism less so.

The Australian’s paywall is porous: have a read: sub editors tag the most partisan stories in a quasi tabloid fashion. The boot stapping of the Gilliard/ S+G ‘story’ is what’s turning on Liberal apparatchiks the most.

F-ck these people. Fight the Plutocracy.

[Matthew Of Canberra]

"Yeah, OK. The above quote is taken slightly out of context"

I think bernard was spot-on in that observation. If the ALP does somehow scrape over the line at the next federal election, the oz just becomes a loss-making political pamphlet, not worth the printing costs.

Still, it could be re-energised by running stories about alien autopsies, fluoride mind control plots, and claims about the UN wanting to take our guns away.

I've been wondering about something. The last political smear I can think of that even comes close to the crap they're running about gillard was the bush-national-guard-service-records claim. Now, I don't think anyone can REALLY deny that bush managed to avoid the draft by being connected and signing up for the air cadets, but it turned out that certain allegations were unfounded. And a very significant figure in american TV news had to resign over that.

So I'm wondering - could we start a petition to find out who it is at the australian who is going to have to resign when they utterly fail to back up their insinuations. And since the contagion has spread to the age, now - they can nominate somebody too. They keep claiming that very important questions need to be answered. Ok, sure - back it up with some skin, then. These are allegations designed to bring down an elected PM, and the oz has nailed its colours to this story. So what else is on the table? Show us that regulation ISN'T necessary - that there really are consequences for sailing just south of defamation for month after month.

Tell us the circumstances in which andrew bolt, peter van onselen, paul kelly and the rest are willing to accept that they are wrong - and what their price will be for that. When THAT happens, I will accept that they really believe they have a story, and they're not just running a gutless smear campaign in the knowledge that the press in australia is beyond consequences.

[jreidy]

The article is worth the read, and as MOC says the Aus is a more worthwhile target than Bolt.
I interpreted the article in terms of the next election, and how it the result - one way, or the other will change things.
The line will be stated as it is every election that this is the most important/critical/what-ever in a generation.
While I think this election will be important, I think that this is a reflection that things don't change as much as we would like, (or fear - depending which side your are on.
Back to the Aus, yes it would be good if there was some accountability for the journos for the partisan beatups they do.
GW Bush was a good example.

[richard]

Ralph Blewitt is quoted as being as an ‘imbecile’, an ‘idiot’, a ‘sexist pig’ and describes himself as a ‘useful idiot’ in an Australian article today bylined by Hedley Thomas and Paige Taylor. Is it possible that the Australian is a tad angry with Blewitt?

For those that came in late to this story: the Australian for about four months (as has the Bolter for about eighteen months) has been pushing the allegation that the PM ‘has questions to answer’ regarding a ‘slush fund’ she set up for her then boyfriend Bruce Wilson then of the AWU.

Acres of print have been squandered on this non story so it is not difficult for the non au fait to pick up the plot. Google up people!

Out of all the articles published on this subject, this particular article is interesting because it seems to indicate the end of the line for this tenuous smear on the PM. If the sponsoring media- i.e. The Australian- start getting all denigratory about their key ‘witness’ their narrative has become derailed.

Other choice quotes regarding Blewitt from the Thomas/Taylor article include:

‘Mr Blewitt was "an idiot and couldn't do the job’; and, in regard to Wilson:

"As far as I'm concerned, Bruce Wilson's a liar’

Have a read at www.theaustralian.com.au/news/investigations/slush-fund-official-was-a-stooge-say-documents/story-fn6tcs23-1226505674171

Tony Abbott and Julie Bishop have staked their credibility on this palaver. Whoops.

My observation is that the Australian wants to hold itself at arms length from the none too commendable Blewitt- if this means dropping the Bolter in the sh_t – he is after all a virtual sub contractor- as well as privateers Michael Smith and the loathsome Larry Pickering, well so be it.

[angra]

Pickering and Smith are all over Blewitt, but the MSM seem strangely silent. So far it's all tease, but no tell.

Blewitt himself admits to a 'colourful' past involving dodgy land deals in Indonesia, and personal involvement with several women. He also seems rather paranoid that the 'ALP dirt squad' are out to frame him.

Check Vexnews and Pickeringpost for two very different views about the man.