I’ve come to the firm conclusion that the “honeymoon is over” proclamation issued by the media en masse a few weeks ago with reference to the Rudd government and Kevin Rudd himself means nothing more than the media decided to report everything the government did with some spin about “symbolism over substance” and “lacking a narrative” - most recently exemplified in another complete waste of newsprint from Glenn Milne whose Sunday column this week lacks anything but rumour, gossip and speculation to support a series of fanciful contentions. Milne does include the most bizarre bit of all this verbiage - praise for the unlikely figure of Martin Ferguson as representing some sort of policy rigour, something we’ve had a bit to say about here at LP. In the wake of all this, we’ve got yet another poll today - on petrol and the Liberal leadership - which as Tim Dunlop points out at Blogocracy, is basically meaningless, but has enabled Emo Man Brendan Nelson to get some traction and air time to repeat his constant catchcry for a petrol excise cut.
I’ve been a bit of a citizen journalism skeptic in the past, but in light of all the complete rubbish that’s been dominating the media ever since the budget, should we start thinking - as Tyro Rex suggests in comments on another thread - about how to sack them and get a new one?
Elsewhere: Lyn Calcutt at Public Opinion.
Remember, as always, that a contest is better news than the absence of a contest. The media don’t want to admit that K-Rudd is still miles ahead on TPP, because it means that if an election was held now, it wouldn’t be a serious contest. They have to talk up the opposition’s position, and seem to be taking great delight in talking down Rudd’s, highlighting the fact that only two out of every three prefer Rudd as Prime Minister.
Yes, but the same principle didn’t seem to be in place when man of steel, Mr Invincible, AKA Budget Bouncer was in power. Funny about that.
I don’t think it’s completely meaningless Kim. I think petrol prices was a missed opportunity for a teaching moment, myself.
Well, I agree, Rob, but I don’t see that making the questions asked in that poll any less confused and contradictory.
Some time ago on another thread I likened the MSM attacks on the Rudd Government with the NSM destabilisation of the Whitlam Government. Nothing has happened that changes my mind. Attacks on personal lives of Federal pollies - okay, Belins Neale’s probably a bit obnoxious, but its been beat up out of all proportion. The idea that having an idea (thought-bubble)is somehow wrong. Give me any of Rudd’s ‘thought bubbles’ in preference to Ratty’s attempts to take us back to a fantasy political stone age. Lies that Rudd has abandoned the court option to deal with Japanese whaling in Oz waters. He has not. If he had, you would have heard me screaming on LP well before he got back from Japan.
As an historian I’m not prone to conspiracy theories - Patricks and Children Overboard aside -I nearly always go for the stuff-up (which is what I Think WMDs in Iraq was)but, at the moment, I do have the impression there is a concerted effort occurring in the MSM to destabilize the Federal Labor Government, similar to what occured with Whitlam.Please note the qualifying phrase ‘at the moment’.
I don’t know about “sacking” the media (and I am told we should guard against such hyperbole when making responsible comments at LP, in case anyone takes it too seriously).
The best we ordinary plebs can do is boycott the worst offenders, like Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp, which set the standard for trashing tabloid journalism.
As far as “internet activism”, you have to wonder whether linking to News Ltd stories in order to criticise them serves much purpose, given that any publicity oxygen inflames the “controversy” on which they feed.
Howard C: “…A contest is better than… the absence of.”.
But that’s Kim’s whole point. There is no contest, in a substantative way on substantial issues.
OK, so we have a long and noisy media beat up over alcopops and fuel prices, aimed at wedging the mortgage belt by appealing to baser instincts. After all the marginal seats are the best hope for the next election.
But as Robert Merkel virtually said, a missed opportunity in the way of boundary-stting and good communication from an inexperienced government.
But from the opposition, not opposition in a meaningful sense, involving objetive analysis of issues on their merits. just surly obstructionism, regardless of the damage done the country.
Pity the poor Journos, they spent 11 years hooking themselves up to drip feeds to get leaks from government departments and ministers, and now they’re gone.
Glenn has had years of treasury documents, then BAM! Cold Turkey.
And it’s not coming back. The government’s strategists now practice what they knew all along; that swinging voters don’t read the newspaper, and print journalism is impotent in terms of influencing elections.
Just like the NSW government finally woke up to the fact Alan Jones was preaching to a choir, and stopped granting him influence, the newspapers only had the power that government gave them.
What gets me about the meeja is the self righteousness that pervades an ever growing element. Yet when one of their own behaves in a less than edifying manner in public (er Mr Milne) the whole think is buried and forgotten as quickly as possible.
Glenn Milne’s column today is actually quite good, he has noticed an obvious contradiction in policy positions of two shadow ministers (and I’m not just saying that because it beats up on Nelson), its just a lot better the skuttlebut and innuendo of unsourced comments that in many circumstances added nothing to any policy discussion.
The media can’t really work that way can it? Such a comment suggests that journos will get together and make this decision about how they’ll spin the Rudd govt. Certainly there’d be a ‘group-think’ at play but one of the media’s jobs is to criticize govt. The question you’ve got to ask is if this ’style over substance’ schtick has currency. Thing is the govt’s honeymoon is over when the media stop swooning and start booting. They have, it is.
I’m not sure it was a complete waste of newsprint Kim. Even if it lacked anything but gossipy, rumour and speculation (it is a column after all).
.
Milne outlines an episode in Japan that, whilst electorally irrellevant, does bely a confused strategy. The $35 million subsidy to Toyota might be good politics (pleasing the blue-collars and the ‘luvvies’) but it’s bad economics. There’s been a general agreement on this. I’m not sure that Milne’s ‘one term’ speculation is justified. In fact I think it’s codswallop. But the essential message that Rudd’s been running into rough waters and hasn’t exactly performed spectacularly is sound.
Adrien, you’ve got it in one with the group-think angle. It’s not a conspiracy, it’s just laziness and a fear of going against the pack.
Milne may have a point about the Toyota thing, but that’s hardly his central concern, and the opposition don’t actually know what their position is. Let me say this - there is a big difference between scrutiny of government decisions on their policy merits and subsuming them all under a narrative that “there’s no narrative” and that it’s all spin. That’s what they do on the whole - in lockstep with the opposition.
If you can point me to a serious policy critique from one of these columnists, I’d be very surprised indeed.
And it’s not just the punditariat - it’s the headlines, the selection of news, etc.
Elsewhere: Lyn Calcutt at Public Opinion.
Hence the dubious nature of the one-term assertion.
I’d be hard-pressed these days to point out a serious anything from any columnist anywhere. They’re all shite. They need to get a job.
Well, that’s my point, isn’t it?
Paul Walter writes:
Fuel prices = beat-up, precipitated by poor opposition policy
Alcopops = precipitated by poor government policy, so not a beat-up
Yes, the media needs something to write about, and as what many on this site would call “substantive issues” does little to sell newspapers and turn over people meters, they have to write about issues like fuel prices and alcopops.
The Coalition are not built for opposition, and therefore are not very good at it, as displayed above. That is also a story, but not a deep one.