« profile & posts archive

This author has written 619 posts for Larvatus Prodeo.

Return to: Homepage | Blog Index

49 responses to “Spotlight the Spin”

  1. Lloyd

    2 headlines same story.

    “NBN a conspiracy against taxpayers, warns Turnbull”

    “I could support NBN, says Turnbull”

    1st is that excellent shill for whoever his master happens to be Matthew Franklin.

    http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/but-stephen-conroy-says-the-opposition-will-axe-the-network/story-fn59niix-1225942959693

    2nd is Peter Martin who despite having a bee in his bonnet re the NBN is never less than a professional journalist.

    http://www.smh.com.au/technology/technology-news/i-could-support-nbn-says-turnbull-20101024-16z94.html

  2. Chookie

    Page 9 of the SMH last Friday: the NSW State Ombudsman has a go at the Game Council.

    If Robert Borsak sounds familiar, he was in Zimbabwe last year shooting elephants.

  3. spooky

    Not the media spinning, but Brendan O’Connor’s “silent majority” in the video game R18+ debate.

    http://au.gamespot.com/news/6282460.html

    One would have thought that the apathy of the silent majority would be enough? o.O

  4. paul walter

    Accretions, accretions…
    “Merak”?
    ” Protracted South African strike” ( no longer our preoccupation, we live in a “nice” part of the global neighbour hood, nowadays).
    ” Cholera breaks out in neglected Port Au Prince” ( on an island, so they can’t escape and give decent yanks this fearful ‘lergy, as well.
    “Piracy”, as fishermen in Africa try to make up the deficit inflicted on their subsistence form of fishing, by offshore fleets.

  5. Helen

    I’ve also noticed that word “swingeing”, TT, seems to be the journo adjective du jour.

  6. joe2

    “….one has to wonder just how cynical and manipulative his PR team might be.”

    Harpercollins will now be able to use the word “controversial” in publicity for his crappy book. I bet they wished they had included it on the dust jacket.

  7. paul walter

    The trouble is, he did see it coming, from I can gather.
    “Swingeing”?
    Pwwhhooaahhhh!!
    Post scriptum, the guy that chucked his Raoul Merton’s at Bush got a hiding, but got a payout. Talk about poor man’s Brecht.
    Hicks, Habib, Alvarez; Dr Haneef. Four names, for this current strain of McCarthyism.

  8. joe2

    “I preferred the woman who just walked out while chanting that Howard had blood on his hands.”

    I hear that was his girl friend. Even though the bloke was a lousy shot by intention and by comparison, I gather, I quite liked the obvious symbolism of shoe throwing. It took a lot of gutse.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_reqFXSKq0s

  9. Paul Burns

    Also liked the symbolism of shoe-throwing. The act of it being done demeans Howard, as it is a highest form of insuly, once restricted to the Muslim world but now international.
    Somebody, btw, should tell the ABC that since John Howard is now no longer running the show, there is no need to be afraid of him.

  10. joe2

    “Somebody, btw, should tell the ABC that since John Howard is now no longer running the show, there is no need to be afraid of him.”

    Ya reckon?

    http://www.abc.net.au/corp/board/board_members.htm

  11. Paul Burns

    Good point, joes2,
    but there is no point being obsequious to him etc, etc. Some ex PMs deserve our respect – Whitlam, Fraser, Keating, even Hawke. (Since Rudd’s still in parliament I don’t include him.) But not mean-spirited lying little worms like Howard. As quite a few people in last night’s audience pointed out, despite all his spin, he made and makes one ashamed of being an Austraian. In comparison, Abbott just makes one feel stupid being an Australian.

  12. Ken Lovell

    Would have been nice if the audience had stood and turned its collective back on Howard. Much more effective than throwing stuff.

  13. Chris

    I can understand the anger and frustration of the reporter and why he threw his shoes at Bush. But to me those two just seemed like a couple of rather unoriginal attention seekers. When you do have the opportunity for some open discussion and debate why attempt to escalate the situation to violence and overt rudeness?

  14. Steve at the Pub

    Would have been nice if the audience had stood & pummelled the living daylights out of the (now barefoot) half-wit.

  15. joe2

    “When you do have the opportunity for some open discussion and debate why attempt to escalate the situation to violence and overt rudeness?”

    Howard does not debate and rudely made no attempt to answer questions relating to his war crimes. Throwing shoes badly is completely insignificant compared the violence he waged on our behalf without our consent.

  16. Steve at the Pub

    Tell us joe2, did you manage to convince the ABC to return your shoes?

  17. Paul Burns

    SATP,
    In the interests of accuracy the she-thrower went to ABC reception and asked them for his shoes back. The ABC refused. Wonder if they’re still so short of cash they might be forced to auction them off to raise money. They’s look good in a display case in the National Museum alongside photographs of murdered Iraqi children.

  18. Steve at the Pub

    The tosser doesn’t deserve their shoes back.
    The shoes belong in the rubbish bin.

  19. Diogenes

    Last night on Q&A, John Howard was up to his old tricks of twisting the truth to cover his disingenuous tracks. He tried to give the impression he was almost 100% right in all matters during his term as prime minister.

    David Hicks was captured in December 2001 and in 2007 he pleaded guilty to a single newly codified charge of “providing material support for terrorism” and Howard used this as the excuse why his government could do nothing for Hicks. The truth is that Hicks was detained without charge for six years and Howard & Co sat on their hands twiddling their thumbs during the whole length of this period.

    Czeslaw Milosz, winner of the Nobel Prize for Literature, in his book The Captive Mind has the following introductory quote from an old Jew of Galacia:

    When someone is honesly 55% right, that’s very good and there’s no use wrangling. And if someone is 60% right, it’s wonderful, it’s great luck, and let him thank God. But what’s to be said about 75% right? Wise people say this is suspicious. Well, and what about 100% right? Whoever says he’s 100% right is a fanatic, a thug, and the worst kind of rascal.

  20. joe2

    At least Steve can make a reasonable pun…”tosser”,ha,ha, I like it.

  21. mediatracker

    Mission accomplished!

  22. akn

    I’d say the tosser is now a shoe-in for Australian of the Year. But seriously, it really goes to how well we do multiculturalism in Australia that we’ve adopted an Arabic insult. This is an example of the globalisation of culture that stands in distinct contrast to the proliferation of Maccas. There was a time when we would say to the threat of open hostilities “Alright, alright, keep your shirt on” but it will soon be “keep your shoes on”.

  23. Fran Barlow

    Last year, when campaigning against the Carbon Polluters Reward Scheme passing, I emailed a bunch of Liberal senators urging them to vote it down. I chose my words carefully so as to not let on why I was doing it, but I wouind up on a number of email lists, including from WA Senator Chris Back. I just received an email from him on the “true colours” of the Greens.

    It recycles a post from Costello [Read the fine print on the Greens tin] making a false amalgam between Green positions on population on the one hand and abortion & euthanasia on the other.

    It is an odd priority. When the Greens leader, Bob Brown, was asked to name his first legislative priority for the new Parliament he had no hesitation – euthanasia. Brown wants to repeal the federal statute that outlawed euthanasia in the Northern Territory. “This will restore the rights of territorians to be able to legislate for euthanasia,” he told Network Ten.

    I wonder if all those who voted for the Greens in August expected that? […]

    The Greens have a funny attitude to people. They care about them, of course, but they worry there are too many of them and that this will choke the environment. They say we need a “sustainable relationship between humans and the environment”, which involves a lot more birth control and a lot less use of natural resources.

    The Greens are the only party committed to abortion on demand. The others leave it to each MP to decide how to vote on abortion. Labor has members with differing views, as do the Liberals. Not the Greens. They have a party position spelt out in their platform.

    Costello continues, reiterating the out of touch inner city elites and watermelons memes and adds:

    Adam Bandt was an undergraduate and postgraduate scholar of Marxism. In another age he would have journeyed through the union movement to a Labor pre-selection. Now these activists turn “Green” and they are taking the inner cities with them.

    It’s all very amusing. Hubby decided to write a brief response:

    The article you have circulated by Mr Costello effects an appalling and dishonest amalgam between the issues of voluntary euthanasia and abortion on the one hand, and population on the other. It is scarcely conceivable that any thinking or reflective person will accept it and that you propose and promote it invites the conclusion that you think large numbers of your potential supporters are unthinking and unreflective.

    I also find it amusing and hypocritical of Costello to complain of Greens such as Bandt “taking the inner cities with them” and wondering out loud if Greens voters knew that the Greens stood for euthanasia or abortion. In many seats (including all inner city seats) your party preferenced the Greens above the ALP. Presumably, you knew what the Greens stood for but you advocated a vote to them by your supporters in preference to the ALP which is closer to your position on these and indeed on most matters. Adam Bandt could not have defeated Cath Bowtell in Melbourne if 80% of Liberal supporters had backed the ALP ahead of The Greens. Plainly, you failed to point to this despite the fact that you knew it to be so, and so, if there is any deception to it, your party was a decisive accessory before the fact to the deception and the promotion of policies you now decry. You have no standing to howl about it now, at least until you admit your prior agency and warrant it.

    It is all nonsense of course because the reality is that your preference direction was intended to weaken the government in favour of those pressing for a more radical set of policies. You hoped to wedge the ALP, and so tactics rather than matters of principle were most salient here. That you had to be deceptive and rely on the tribal loyalty of your supporters to carry it off troubled you not a jot, but the fact that Costello now speaks as if butter would scarcely melt in his mouth, and you circulate this hypocrisy is rather telling.

  24. joe2

    “I’d say the tosser is now a shoe-in for Australian of the Year.”

    It just shows us all what a wonderful, thong filled country we live in, that no one has socked him one, yet, the self-righteousness prat.

  25. David Irving (no relation)

    I only watched the first minute or so of Q’n’A before deciding I couldn’t bear another second of the smug, mendacious little prick. (Watched a recording I’d made a while ago of Daniel Lenois at the Basement instead.) However, the replay on RN this morning of his refusal to answer David Hicks’ quite reasonable question almost made me wish I’d persevered.

  26. adrian

    But Tony Eastley told us on in his introduction to this story on AM that Howard ‘deftly’ answered questions. You could feel the admiration in his voice.
    I hadn’t up until this point realised that ‘deftly’ means lying through your teeth and evading the question in a smug, self satified manner.

  27. joe2

    Maybe he meant “deafly”?

  28. adrian

    John Howard faced a live audience on the ABC’s Q&A programme last night, deftly answering questions about past and present politics and dodging the odd angry shoe.

    When you’re an inspiration to millions, and everyone at the ABC, dodging shoes and deftly answering questions just comes naturally.

    Maybe the script originally said deftly avoiding the shoes and dodging the questions.

  29. Don Wigan

    [email protected]

    Wonder if they’re still so short of cash they might be forced to auction them off to raise money.

    Sounds like a pretty good idea Paul. Even if the ABC doesn’t need the money, there might be a charity such as Iraqi orphans that might benefit.

  30. Katz

    Compared with the Iraqi shoe pitcher, whose two shots at Bush were centimeter-perfect, the Qanda tosser was pathetically errant in his aim.

    C’mon Aussie yez can do better than that!

    We have a shoe-tossing crisis here folks.

    This discipline must be improved by means of scholarships to the Australian Institute of Sport.

  31. Paul Burns

    Katz @ 33,
    The problem with this suggestion, Katz, is that for this exciting new sport to be truly effective Howard would have to make lots more public appearances. I don’t think I could stand that.

  32. Mindy

    for this exciting new sport to be truly effective Howard would have to make lots more public appearances. I don’t think I could stand that.

    Thanks Paul, that comment made my day.

  33. Fiona Reynolds

    I heard Peter Gray’s interview this morning with Jon Faine – here’s the link for anyone who can’t receive or missed ABC 774’s Morning program.

    Gray was, in my opinion, completely justified, and also well-aware of the symbolism of his form of protest.

    Next up after Gray, if you listen to the link, was Lord Fishnets of Baghdad – a man who never ever ever had, or would have had, anything to do with violence. I switched off before puking. Then, while I waited until I judged it safe to return to normal broadcast, I reflected upon the fact that nobody does petulance better than Mr Downer. Seriously, I mean, nobody.

    Christopher Pyne, eat ya heart out.

  34. Fiona Reynolds

    Rats. Dear tigtog, if you have the time/energy/inclination to fix my splinched link, I would be eternally grateful (splinching a couple of moods, I know, but it’s late and I’m tired…).

    [Fiona I think I’ve done it – Brian]

  35. paul walter

    FB,26, the wonder is not so much that liblab continue to push egregious furphies, but that there are members of the public who still take the illogical smears seriously.

  36. Katz

    The problem with this suggestion, Katz, is that for this exciting new sport to be truly effective Howard would have to make lots more public appearances. I don’t think I could stand that.

    I believe that Howard isn’t the only shoe-worthy public figure in Australia.

    Here is a short list of my preferred targets. No doubt others may be added:

    Alan Jones

    Stephen Conroy

    Sophie Mirabella

    Bruce Mathieson

    George Pell

  37. Paul Burns

    Katz @ 39,
    Geoerge Pell ! That’s sacrilege! 🙂
    Actually, my favourite Cardinal is King Henry IX of England.

    On another topic, the current beat up over who destroyed the Liberal Party, JWH or Tip, avoids the real question – who was responsible for perverting decent Australian values to values that are infinitely shameful.

  38. Brett

    Actually, my favourite Cardinal is King Henry IX of England.

    Who is entombed in the crypt beneath St Peter’s, along with many a pope. It’s a strange world.

  39. Katz

    Ah yes, Good King Henry IX.

    Did not believe in separation of Church and State.

    Did believe in separation of mind and reason.

    RIP, Majesty.

  40. akn

    Joe2 @27 raises the matter of thongs (rubber). I propose that this Arabic (Islamic?) insult be properly Australianised and that the thong (rubber please) should replace the shoe as the missile. That way no real damage could ever be done to the object of ire, the cost to the tosser is kept down and the aerodynamic quality of the thong (rubber), being akin to a frisbee, allows greater accuracy.

  41. FDB

    Agreed, AKN. The opportunity for minder-avoiding curve-balls would also be increased.

  42. Paul Burns

    Thongs it should be, of course, but what do you throw in winter? Ugh-boots?

  43. paul walter

    One agrees that Howard would not be the life and sole of the party, tongue in cheek. He must have felt like a right heel, for that on QA to happen.
    And, elsewhere, wot’s this about Sophie Mirabella and a rubber thong?
    Surely for support, lace(s)
    Miranda Kerr, eat your heart out…

  44. Paul Burns

    While I won’t, on principle link to anything Peter Costello writes, its very interesting that an internal Herald poll (which probably means absolutely nothingm indicates, last time I looked, that 90% of readers believe his claim that JWH is a self-glorifying bastard.
    (Where have they been all these years?)

  45. akn

    PB: I think an Ugh boot a very sound variant. Soft and malodorous. Call it the Kiwi option?

  46. dj

    Clearly the shoe thrower came under the powerful influence of the aura of physical ineptitude that emanates from John Howard.

    John Howard – Can’t bat, can’t bowl, can’t lie straight in bed.