But then to my deep and lasting shame and embarrassment most anarchists don’t get the web either.

I don’t criticise him for continuing to earn a crust from it, though I would have been happier if he’d felt able to say something about what transpired.

Hmmn. Dare I suggest that perhaps you are personalizing it?

It might look like I am pursuing a personal grudge against Tim, but actually I have consistently acknowledged that he is a good writer and does a great job blogging against Howard. Tim is not the real problem, whatever his personal failings might be. It is Murdoch that is the real problem, and THI$$$$ is how he works.

What frustrates me is that a man with Tim’s obvious intelligence takes the bait, and that so many observers say, “Well, who can blame him?” Obviously he’s gotta feed his starving children, and pay for his Mum’s operation, right?

It’s that damned Gordon Gecko “business is business” mentality, which has done so much damage to our society. I’m sure Dick Cheney’s friends don’t blame him for invading Iraq either - after all, business is business, right?

zebbidies, I suspect you’d like Peter Martin, having read your explanation.

I read Quiggin most days, but he tends to the economic theory end and is rather too wonkish for my understandings. Gittins is better at describing what it means. He also keeps an humanistic eye on what it means to the production units at the pointy end of economic theories.

As to the others, I mean no disrepect to their statuses as economists, but for my purposes, with my (limited) understanding of economics, Gittins fits the bill the best.

So it IS just me, then.

Pity.

For understanding, I will almost always turn to blogs (except for economics where there are no bloggers that com close to Ross Gittins).

How about Quiggin?

There are some other economists who are good bloggers in Australia - Nick Gruen at Troppo, Joshua Gans, Andrew Leigh, etc., but they don’t tend to write commentary on current economic issues and trends to the same degree that JQ does.

Peter Martin who’s an MSM crossover - columnist for the Canberra Times - does the Gittins style thing at his blog regularly and well.

http://petermartin.blogspot.com/

And just point out that, once I started reading blogs, the quality of analysis and writing that I came across and the quality of the commenters opened my eyes as to just how shallow, blinkered and agenda-driven the opinionators in the press where (obviously not all blogs or all commenters).

If I want a new story (ie happening NOW) the media organisations are champion. For understanding, I will almost always turn to blogs (except for economics where there are no bloggers that com close to Ross Gittins). And very often I will turn to American or British blogs, where the standard of writing that is churned out is astonishing.

This is the sort of competition in the “marketplace of ideas” that the Oz is always blathering about. ‘Cept now that they’re being out-competed, they resort to the first response of all doomed businessmen: don’t improve what you do - try and drag your competition down to your level.

Makes you wonder how much exposure to actual capitalism these corporate warriors have ever actually had.

Gee heaps of shades of grey and complexity in your argument isnt there?

Let me tell you a story, its a true one, and it might, just might give you an idea of some of what went on between those eeevil staff and detainees.

I was placed in charge of activities for a few months at PH centre. The budget was crap and it was impossible to get approval for much in the way of outside activities, due in no small part to a couple of escape attempts.
I proposed a fishing trip each morning for 2 officers and 6 detainees out to a strech of beach called the spoil bank. I wrote in for approval and heard nothing back for 2 weeks. I had been prepared for this so re-submitted it to the 3 heads of the centre with the addition of “if i dont hear within 2 weeks I will take it as approved”.
2 weeks later i took the first group out for the couple of hours and continued to do so for the next 3 weeks regardless of if I was paid or not.
The centre manager only found out because DIMIA came and passed on compliments for the programme as it was a big boost for the long term detainees.
I was summonsed and sort of disciplined but the programme continued on and off for the next 3 years.
I might point out this couldn’t have gone on without the active collusion of both non-management staff, shift supervisors and detainees in order to get around Sydney based management.

I can give you any number of stories (once stopped a mosque burning to the ground) of other officers as well. Not quite the evil baby eaters you want us to be, but then again you probably got most of your info from activists and the ABC.
I might also point out it was rare to have a detainee cause any problems unless they received a knock-back on their visa application.
But I’m wasting my breath I’m sure you know much more than someone who was there for 4 years, testified against the assistant manager of PHIRPC when he saw him bash a detainee eh??? Be a bit to confusing for you to remember the same regime was in place during the Hawke/Keating years as well?

The ABC was an advocate, not a news organ. It was no less a hatchet job than A current affair covering “dole bludgers� or any other group they choose to villanize.

Annoyed you weren’t just left alone to carry out the will of the government as you saw fit?

Sorry mate, but your lot, your employers and the people who contracted them were and are not to be trusted sight unseen. There’s a lot of nasty stuff that thrives when nobody is looking and whether you liked it or not, the ABC kept the light on.

For instance you seem to be quite genuinely upset that the detainees would actually be trying things on to get attention so they could get out of there. You’ve totally forgotten that most of them shouldn’t have been there and were only there in order to get the Federal Liberal government elected.

You may have had the best of intentions, but you were captured by the system. You should have been wondering why the hell kids were locked up with these desperate and unpleasant adults at all.

I should have been clearer. The point was that he became a “cause” for a number of people based entirely on what was written about him.
Fortunately this support dried up very quickly when his supporters actually met him. He then retreated and let his kids do the talking.
That 1 in 1000 isnt just a bit bad, thats people who would kill, standover and rob/rape at the drop of a hat.
That was the point of saying “no worse than me or you”. Everyone makes some stuff ups and does a few things which, with hindsight, are wrong or hurt others. That’s the other 95% I was referring to.
The reason for bringing it up? The canonisation of ALL refugees is fairly silly, but it has been a tactic for their supporters from day 1. Its simplistic and rather silly, like bringing up high achievers of whatever group, or the low achievers, its just not realistic or sensible. At least 1 boat was deliberately sunk in view of the RAN, others were crippled and made unseaworthy. Its semantics to then say “but they didnt throw the kids in the water”.

The point,to bring it back to the media argument, was that much of the actions taken by detainees were instigated by a core group of thugs with a definite eye to favourable coverage from the ABC. I had detainees on many occasions explain what they were going to do and it wasnt “personal” but aimed at getting press coverage. It got to the stage where the first action in a riot was to cut the public phones, because sure as apples a detainee would be on the phone to the ABC.
Scrutiny on detention was and still is needed, however I can say without reservation that biased or agenda based reporting by the ABC was a catalyst for may of the incidents at Port Hedland.
The ABC sent up media crews to cover a protest by about 15 people on a bus. Not even the local news considered it worth covering.
The ABC was an advocate, not a news organ. It was no less a hatchet job than A current affair covering “dole bludgers” or any other group they choose to villanize.
A reporter or news organisation has a duty to report facts, on many occasions the media prints whatever juicy anecdote fits their agenda and the facts be damned.

I use the detention centres as an example of media “falling down� because the level of activism from the ABC was positively surreal. NONE of the media tried to show any of the complexity and actively sought out only stories that fitted their “spin�.

There ya go.

One in 1,000 abusers would be equal to, if not even lower than, the general population.

So, your point?