The Australian has called for a “new civility” in public discourse. After making the point made by every single culture warrior (most recently Janet Albrechtsen who seems to want more rudeness all round - to help Indigenous people, of course) that the culture wars must continue because it’s all about reasoned debate and constructive ideas (oh, and the war bit was all the fault of teh left, anyway) - in another display of that sturdy independent mindedness so beloved of the conservative commentariat conga line, they go on to claim Rudd for the right, and then make a mea culpa:
Lastly, while the internet has democratised access to the public arena, it has also coarsened debate. We admit we have not been above the odd ad hominem attack ourselves. It’s time for a little more elegance, a return to the debating conventions of earlier times, to the rules obeyed by men and women of letters.
I won’t stop to parse this leader. Gary Sauer-Thompson’s already done an admirable job. Oh, and there’s more from Clive Hamilton in Crikey. Let’s instead, see how they’re doing.
First, Dennis Shanahan. Shanahan returns to the battles of 2007, attacking the “hypocricy” of his psephological opponents - Messrs. Bowe, Brent and Possum. OMG! Last year they were attacking Dennis for his reading of the Newspoll. Now they’re not! The horror!
Guess what, Dennis. After a whole year of massively inflating the importance of one poll and simultaneously spinning it, there was an election (and the one Newspoll outlier - 59% before the APEC meltdown - probably did more real damage via all the nongs who actually believed this stuff than all the various theories and “owners of polls declare polls probably wrong” nonsense that preceded it).
So - nobody much cares about the polls anymore! We just had an election.
And 9% doesn’t get much better for Brendan whatever the margin of error is.
Earth to Dennis - independent bloggers aren’t bound to follow whatever you think the news agenda is. Sorry, mate, your failure to realise that was probably 90% of the problem.
How this is gracious, civil, or about “the new civility” is beyond me.
Then there’s the leader writer her/himself (I bet it’s a he, although maybe it’s Janet). Tom Calma gets panned in the usual undergrad debating style - with all sorts of references to “real compassion” (which he apparently lacks), his income, and the usual false duality of “rights/symbols” vs. results. His sin appears to be not bowing down to the brilliant ideas of that Holy Trinity - Pearson, Mundine and Brough. It’s all about the kiddies. Look - he doesn’t care about child rape! Far be it for me to suggest that Mr Calma might actually be in good faith, and actually be doing his job by pointing out that aspects of the intervention contravene the Racial Discrimination Act. Because they do.
So “the new civility” doesn’t appear to be off to a good start.
I don’t know why I’ve wasted bandwidth on this mob. Absent their great patron, their ravings simply don’t matter that much any more. I should pay Planet the ultimate compliment of completely ignoring her from now on.
What, as they used to say, do you think?
Update: Graham Ring in New Matilda defends Tom Calma against what he correctly says is a “personal attack”.
Another update: The Poll Bludger responds to Shanahan.
And another update: Commentary from Lyn at Public Opinion.
EEK. Up skirts or daks as the case may be; onto table; it’s a rat; oh, it’s not, err…who ‘owns’ that thing? Hey janet, you know what…
Next. Fast news day.
That wasn’t particularly civil, codger you old c**t.
However “Fast news day” is not just a good one liner but a project inspiring title as well.
Do you mind if I steal it?
All’s fair in love and
culture warthe new civility.As a phrase, it reminds me a lot of Wild Palms. Without the palm trees. And Planet’s no Kim Cattrall.
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0106175/plotsummary
http://www.ibras.dk/comedy/marx.htm#MustGo
Of course, Planet and Dennis probably think Groucho Marx is a past president of the teachers’ union or something.
“Wild Palms”
Now there was a cult show that never quite found its cult.
I’ve given up on my local movie store getting it in stock. I guess I’m gonna have to bite the rhino and
bittorrentorder it in.You crazy kids and your new-fangled “Wild Palms”. Max Headroom was good enough for me in the 1990’s and he’s good enough for me now.
xkcd explains the internet.
Bloggers, bloggers, bloggers…it is obviously time for a good mea culpa all around.
How could we all have doubted that lovely man, Mr Shanahahaahananan?
How dared we criticise his incisive analysis of the polls?
Time, after all, has proven that he was correct, now that we live under the glorious reign of King John the Omnipotent and joy reigns throughout the land.
How dare we, after this vindication of everything he’s written over the last eighteen months or so, even look at a poll sideways?
You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
I suggest personal apologies (civil ones) to Mr S are in order.
(Tugs forelock and leaves the blog walking backwards)
Nab’s, just remember: Everything must go
A mate picked up a 2nd hand DVD copy of WP recently in Queenstown NZ of all places. Been fun watching it again, that damn rhino
Since you’re a Melb’ite, maybe I can bring you a… backup… during a melb grogblog session or something
All aboard the Irrelevance Express!
The “new civility” can very easily implemented, across the board, if these commentators on the right are truly serious about it.
All they have to do is stop their nonsensical ad hominem attacks, their peddling of lies, their gross distortions of facts, their criminally negligent suppression of stories deserving national attention, their tasteless appeals to nationalistic xenophobia, their dog whistling and kite flying, and all the rest.
If the media is really serious about this “new civility”, they can start by dumping all those journalists and commentators who are most guilty of the above sins over the past decade, including Albrechtrechtrechtsensen, Shanahahahan, Devine, Sheridan, Blair, Steyn, Milne, Henderson, and a dozen others.
Leftwing aggressiveness over the past decade has nearly always come in the form of backlash against these wankers and the B.S. they peddle. It has also been a backlash against the criminal or just plain immoral policies of the Howard government, but they are all now gone, or as good as gone. It’s time the media elites who propped them up for so long followed them out the door.
It won’t happen, of course. Certainly not till Rupert Murdoch lies dead.
I suspect these appeals for a “new civility” or even “a new silence” are really appeals for Kevin Rudd not to open too many embarrassing enquiries into the worst failings of Howard’s administration, including AWB, WMDs, Haneef, Hicks and other atrocities.
We don’t want to dig too far, do we? We might even find evidence of media collusion.
Just so, Mercurius. Their cultural hero gets comprehensively wallopped last November, the ugly spectre of Relevance Deprivation Syndrome looms large, years in the Influence Wilderness beckons, and the bastards want everybody to make nice.
Stuff that! I say the Think Tank Filters need to be changed.
Talking about civility, when, I wonder, is the dirty language going to be dropped from blog comments?
When are some people going to stop acting like adolescent fourteen year olds endeavoring to out-swear each other behind the school toilets?
Surely no argument or point is advanced by wrapping it in filthy language?
I say, EC, that’s some lovely Phrase Turning there.
Define”filthy” and “dirty”…according to objective criteria.
Does that mean we must now write
H*ward B**h or H**ard Bu**?
Which do you prefer?
The Australian of Enlightenment. The new black, pot that is.
I am enchanted by the return of “men and women of letters” to reasoned debate. I was drawn to the elegance of their analysis of what’s wrong with schools in NSW. The “biggest problem with government schools is the class warfare waged by those who control the teachers’ unions”. That would be teachers. Clearly not in the Letters business. “class warfare + control” = Marxist bullies! Ooops not ad hominem! Ooops not Latin! Ooops not numerate!
“It’s time for a battle waged with wit…” Why did we ever let political debate leave the club? No pun intended.
The Australian could do worse than replace Janet’s weekly column with one by Tony Abbott, whose Sydney Morning Herald gig seems to be over. Why read the monkey when we can read the organgrinder?
I prefer civilized discourse, sorcerer! Is that too much to ask?
The tone of any blog is greatly lowered by those who think that using infantile bad language is ‘clever’ or ’sophisticated’.
Paul, have you any idea of the truly alarming picture your comment brings up?
The thought of Janet having her organs ground by the The Anchorite made me fall off the chair….
I need an objective definition from you of “dirty” and “filthy” language.
Update: Graham Ring in New Matilda defends Tom Calma against what he correctly says is a “personal attack”.
Janet’s at it again today, saying the opposition needs to “grab the moral high ground“.
That’s pretty funny, coming from Janet. Her idea of the moral high ground is “an emotional overlay that addresse[s] non-material needs”. Window-dressing, in other words.
Despite her recent calls for civility, she is still talking about “the awesome hypocrisy of the ALP when confronted with election results it dislikes”. She wants Dr 9% to play political games with WorkChoice reforms, to show Australia how truly hypocritical the ALP is, while still allowing those reforms to go through, and thereby respecting the will of the electorate who rejected those IR laws. Brilliant stuff, innit?
I guess it’s easy to throw mud when you are covered in it. But even when it sticks, that’s not going to make YOU look good, is it?
So far the new Opposition has not stopped fighting the last election. Every comment they make seems designed to put dents in the new Government’s popularity. There is nothing constructive, idealistic or forward-thinking on offer. And certainly no evidence of genuine morality.
“The new civility” prompts me to a slightly wide-of-topic observation. Wonder if any journalists will broaden the concept and try to encourage it in those they interview. Wonder if any interviewees will heed the call.
Just heard Alexander Downer on news spluttering a ‘justification’ for foregoing his back bencher responsibilities by missing Question Time yesterday for lunch with Greg Sheridan. If I remember correctly his lengthy ‘excuse’ was that it was a better use of his time than sitting on the back bench having to listen to the “childish ranting” and “political point scoring” of Julia Gillard. Perhaps he might benefit from lessons in the ‘new civility’.
Four observations for his remaining time as a person in the public eye: Pot/kettle/black; arrogance and a sense of entitlement has never been a good look; professional treatment could help the poor fellow ‘get a life’ and get over his long-term bitterness; and if he could overcome an unseemly dependence on a dummy, there might be fewer exhibitions of dummy-spitting.
Rant over.
One other thing: in “New Silence” column Kim links to, Albrechtsen joined in the attack on ABC Radio’s Jon Faine.
Surely that is not the sort of thing an ABC Board member should be getting involved in?
Another update: The Poll Bludger responds to Shanahan.
There is an important point which needs to be remembered. This is that media pundits are not simply (or even primarily) participants in a more or less civil societal conversation. They are employed to produce a product for a market. In the case of pundits like Andrew Bolt, Piers Akerman, Janet and the rest, their market consists of people who largely aren’t interested in being prompted to rethink long-held and strongly held positions, or in reading nuanced commentary which invites engagement by people with different views. They want a daily or weekly ideological and emotional fix; they want their prejudices confirmed; they want more denialist talking points for front-bar arguments about global warming; they want reasons to be self-righteously angry about the apology to the Stolen Generations, and so on. In short, incivility sells!
Of course the existence of such a market and the economic dependence of a large part of the right-wing media and commentariat on this market is far from unproblematic for the future of right-of-centre politics in this country.
Zarquon at 6, that comic deserves a thread of its own!
Paul, yes, it’s immensely counterproductive. To the degree that this stuff has the influence over politicians which the Opposition Organ claims it does, then it leads the Libs up a garden path of marginalising themselves in a mire of right wing extremism.
These media Insiders calling for the new civility put me in mind of Mr Helpmann from that old move Brazil.
Mr. Helpmann: Bad sportsmanship. A ruthless minority of people seem to have forgotten good old-fashioned virtues. They just can’t stand seeing the other fellow win. If these people would just play the game…
And this is what’s disappointing them. The ALP and the Australian people seem to have abandoned the pitch to tuck into some tea and cucumber sandwiches leaving them still on the field.
Hey, guys and gals, we’ve up to comment 28 and, with the exception of comment2, it’s all been delightfully civilized and free from coarseness.
Will this thread be the first on L.P. to avoid deliberate vulgarity? Will it set the tone for the future? Stay tuned!
Paul at 25, another aspect of that market is the fabrication of controversy to help sell newspapers. Always easier to create a story than go out and find one…
DavidG, John Quiggin has a “no bad language” policy. We don’t because we think it’s unnecessarily restrictive, and we’d like these threads to approach the same sort of space that a conversation does - and sometimes people swear. We’re not happy if it’s in the form of abuse or personal attacks. But basically that’s our position.
It’s rather ironic, Kim, that on a thread which is about civility, LP appears to sanction the absence of civility!
Kim,
What’s needed really is a “Digression” policy a la Catcher In The Rye. I can live with coarse language, but it’s the endless digression into points of minor detail that always seem to destroy any potentially interesting threads.
But I digress…
Well, we do, on occasion try to rein that in, gandhi.
But, as you say, this is a digression!
DavidG, I’ve explained that swearing and incivility may be the same thing, but are not necessarily so.
You’d be being very civil if you did me the kindness of sticking to the topic.
Thanks!
I’ve been keeping an eye on Janet’s column today to see how long it would take comments to appear (half a day), and whether or not my own comment would make it through The Moderator (apparently it did not).
The 13 comments so far are very civil (no coarse language there!) but there seems to be an extraordinary balance of pro- and anti-Janet thoughts, almost lined up in alternating sequence. Is that called balanced reporting? Is it fair?
Again, you have to wonder whether by even commenting at such sites you are just feeding the monster. I once had a policy of not even visiting News Ltd sites, let alone linking to them, but found it impossible to implement during the election as so much of what passed for “news” was actually being fabricated by Murdoch hacks. Perhaps I should consider going back to it, now that the election is over (for most of us).
Related to that is the reduction of complex debates to fit what Lindsay Tanner calls the “Cowboys and Indians” style of coverage of issues, through the simplification of the spectrum of positions on an issue to just two polar opposites in a permanent state of rancorous disagreement.
Nabs @ 2 Go for it; but be aware that the old ca*t, and the new ca*t is well err…still just
David G.: “Will this thread be the first on L.P. to avoid deliberate vulgarity?”
Fuck, no.
[passes the hat]
“One other thing: in “New Silenceâ€? column Kim links to, Albrechtsen joined in the attack on ABC Radio’s Jon Faine. Surely that is not the sort of thing an ABC Board member should be getting involved in?”
It is most interesting to look at Ms Albrechtens words on becoming a board member of the ABC, Gandhi.
Monica Attard:
So you join the board of the ABC still believing the ABC is biased organisation?
Janet Albrechtsen:
Blah, blah, blah …..Now where the ABC goes in the future, there may be times when it’s appropriate to be raising those issues at board level and I’ll certainly be partaking in any conversations on those kinds of issues and on any other kinds of issues that we need to be speaking on, but at board level, not publicly.
http://www.abc.net.au/sundayprofile/stories/s1310801.htm
She has been exposed as a plagiarist before and quite clearly, now, unable to keep her word on taking up a very important position.
And another update: Commentary from Lyn at Public Opinion.
Fuck civility! What’s the point of a War moderated by wowsers. Culture is fought in the arena, which as well know. has NO law!
Go back to your Logan’s Run videos, JG.
That had more of a Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome feel to it, Kim, which you’d've picked up on if you hadn’t wasted your youth at the opera.
Kids these days with their long hair and Baroque music…