While it’s reasonable to ask, as Lyn at Public Opinion does, whether tracing every twist and turn of the opposition’s twisted trajectory towards some sort of agreed position on an emissions trading scheme, is to pay too much attention to a “policy cycle of sometimes less than 24 hours [which stretches] the notion of novelty a little far.” However, it could also be suggested that the interest lies in watching the moment that a “media narrative” switches, and as with the Costello crud, observing the process of constructing one, as a few bits and pieces of disconnected nonsense get tied together by assorted columnists and reporters and woven into a new thread that will then become – hey presto! – conventional wisdom, dignified as such on Sundays by the usual Insider suspects. You can shine a light on the way the press gallery mob do “the wisdom of crowds each other” by building a story arc, which then shapes the way the story is moved on.
So the headline of the latest “blog” at the Opposition Organ works like a performative invocation – “Hold your fire, Nelson”! Suddenly the focus is supposed to switch back to the government, and it’s perfectly reasonable for the Coalition to use every opportunistic trick in the political book to manipulate climate change for populist politics. “There’s no hurry”. It’s almost as if the News Limited punditariat could only stand a few days of writing stories about Liberal disarray, and they have to train their sights back on Labor. And in lockstep, lots of deadhead backbench MPs and Senators come out of the woodwork and start saying they’re “not convinced” by the science.
Oh, and if you’ve ever wondered what the actual audience for the smoke and mirrors tricks Andrew Bolt does with his graphs and his repetitive day in day old “skepticism” – Lord knows how many hundreds (thousands?) of posts this dude has written on it this year – I suspect it’s not the public at all. I think it’s probably the right wing MPs and Senators within the Coalition ranks. Bolt’s probably smarter than most of them. They probably think he knows what he’s on about. There’s a worrying thought.
Another worrying thought is that it might take something of a miracle if any sort of response to climate change in Australia emerges with the sort of degraded, dumb and partisan public sphere we have in this nation. Let’s see if I’m right about the new new narrative on climate change politics. I hope I’m not. We’ll see.
Reason and evidence will not convince the likes of Andrew Bolt because he is not interested in the truth, only in preserving his own elevated position in the media-constructed “debate” on climate change, as one of the best paid and widely broadcast “sceptics” in this country. And this man has children.
An old professor once told me, when I complained that public policy makers were not listening to the science, that “it has to get worse before it gets better”. By that he meant that the political class will not take the really hard decisions until they are forced to by catastrophic circumstances, sometimes of their own making, and when it is almost always too late.
Bolt and his fellow-travellers should be repeatedly named and shamed publicly for what they are, the enemies of reason, and in the case of global warming, the enemies of our children. I want to see these men and women shot at dawn when they are finally forced to confront and explain their miserable behaviour. They are the ultimate freeloaders.
Soon enough, the catastrophic consequences of climate change will be undeniable, even for those “sceptics” who refuse to look out the window. For example, the melting of the artic ice-cap is currently being looked at with what appears to be benign amusement – hey ho, the northwest passage is finally open for trade. But negative feedback will then kick in as the exposed darker ocean surface absorbs even more heat, and the ocean currents inevitably change course. What then?
It is not enough to dismiss Bolt as some kind of stupid crank. He is paid and nurtured by one of the most powerful media organisations in the world. He has influence, and he persuades the ignorant, the unimaginative, and the fearful amongst us.
I salute the blogosphere and LP for fighting the good fight, and continuing to chip away at the garbage that continues to pollute our public discourse, particularly from Andrew Bolt and News Ltd. Keep up the good work, for the sake of our children if nothing else.
Apparently Costello has let be known that he supports the opposition hardening its stance against the ETS. i.e. do nothing and do it later. I expect full-blown denialism to be official COALition policy by the end of the year.
I wonder if Greg Hunt will resign?
I disagree. Bolt is evil.
TheOz Luncay isn’t restricted to Brendan & Lib re-election strategies (not that their latest up-date on Lib lunacy in Qld indicates that their pet political party’s dummy-spits are improving Lib electability (or Brendan’s continuing leadership) at state or federal levels http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24075042-601,00.html )
There is for example, a book-markable doozey of a loonie http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24073010-7583,00.html on Climate change as “cultural elitism”.
Not to be outdone, Shanahan, in another book-markable salute to Lewis Carroll, Today the Vatican, tomorrow the world, has promoted Kev08 to World leader of an Interfaith Plot which – folks – we all missed!!
This, mind you, comes after his statement that Howard kept religious belief in the background
Or maybe TheOz is expanding “casual Friday” to “Fun Friday”.
PS: forgot to add “my emphasis” to italicised parts of the blockquote. Sorry.
The Liberals still don’t realise that they are the opposition. Quite a few others also have missed this rather important fsct.
It’s the government that decides policy, not the opposition. It matters a little bit what the Liberals think (sic), because of Senate numbers, but the government has multiple options there too.
Quite so, Spiros.
Labor has the great advantage of incumbency, from which position it can set the legislative agenda as it sees fit, and specifically tweak any proposal for an emissions trading scheme, and find pork for potentially aggrieved constituencies as they emerge, in such a way as to comfortably differentiate its position as a centrist one between the “extremes” of Coalition denialism and the Greens. In hard realpolitik terms it is to the mutual benefit of Labor and the Greens for a nice space to open up on Labor’s left from which my mob can belabour Ruddwong’s lack of policy rigour and environmental commitment. This leaves the Coalition with the options of: (a) capitulating to whatever Labor puts up; (b) being led to electoral perdition by the muffin puffers; or (c) continuing to disappear up its own fundament trying to work out a position.
Of course whether these political dynamics lead to a satisfactory climate change policy response is another question.
Bolt’s found a market and is milking it for all it is worth. It’s interesting the even he find his audience offensive.
Once they get something in place on climate change it will be old hat by election time and accepted in hearts and minds, though the scheme wont have effect until later. Too late for the medieval Vatican council to turn the clock back to the flat world.
AND we should not forget that if Obama wins the plans/rhetoric may ramp up in the USA, with a nice little ‘pay-back Howard’ visit or statement around election time. Al Gore may even make a timely visit to make sure the momentum isn’t lost. Gee even Arnie might pipe up with a comment just to make sure Australia doesn’t turn back down the track. I wonder if Kev can call on his Chinese mates for some positive comments at the right time as well.
The Libs don’t yet realise the cat they are now swinging is dead, killed on 24/11 and already we can smell it.
Yes, charles. The metaphor I have in mind for Bolt and his audience is someone crumbling stale, mouldy bread and distributing it to a flock of pigeons so that they can enjoy the spectacle of simple-minded creatures squawking and flapping over something the person knows to be worthless.
I am sorry if I am not in the right thread, but for those in Melbourne there may be a free lecture about Climate Change that may be interesting.
Titled, The birds and the bees (and trees) and climate change: Attributing observed changes in natural systems to anthropogenic climate influences it will be given by Professor David Karoly, School of Earth Sciences.
It will be on Monday 4 August 2008 @ 06:30 pm – 07:30 pm
Theatre A, Elisabeth Murdoch Building (bldg 134), Parkville
Professor Karoly, with 28 years of climate research experience under his
belt – was a lead author for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
which jointly won the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore.
Now he is back in Australia – a Federation Fellow at the University of
Melbourne – leading evidence-based research and debate on the critical issue
of climate change.
The blurb says:
“The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concluded in 2007 that warming of the climate system is unequivocal and most of this global-average warming since the mid-20th century is very likely due to increases in anthropogenic greenhouse gas concentrations. How has this warming affected natural systems, such as plants and animals?
Observed changes in many natural systems on all continents show the expected responses to warming, such as earlier spring events or poleward range shifts. A comprehensive assessment shows that anthropogenic climate change is having a significant impact on many physical and biological systems at continental and global scales.”
On the basis of his perfotmance last night on Q&A one wonders what strange place Nick Xenophon is coming from. He wants a model based on that of the Canadians, which, from my limited understanding of it, is an absolute dog which totally fails to reduce emissions. This wouldn’t matter except he’s in a balance of power position in the Senate and seems to have a monstrous ego. As for his self-appointed role as moral policeman and censor, well, we have far too many such RWDBs in our Parliament already. Thanks a lot, South Australia!
I do not see happy times ahead for Labor or the Greens, what with the combination of Xenophon, Foetus First, and a pack of Coalition nutters, the latter willing to doom the planet just to score a few political points.
In breaking news, the OO website tells us about teh aliens http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,24072558-2703,00.html
We certainly are well-served by our organs of public record, are we not??
Well said Grace. A concise & articulate argument for full bore CHANGE in SPEAKERS/WRITERS/REPORTERS when it comes to the Aussie media. The FOCUS needs to shift away from the war-mongers & ‘clean energy revolution’ blockers.
Exactly my sentiments. The more DIVERSITY in the media the better.
“On the basis of his perfotmance last night on Q&A one wonders what strange place Nick Xenophon is coming from.”
I’m not sure about the Canadian project…but I found many of Nick Xenophon’s comments to be well considered and he displayed compassion & insight. Particularly compared to much that came out of ‘bully boy’ Barnaby Joyce who showed his true colours last night. He demonstrated his lack of respect for women last night, particularly those who differ w/ him ideologically.
The Laborite made sense when he actually piped up. Lindsay Tanner, the previous week, demonstrated how Labor can grab attention gracefully & clearly get their points across. Thought his speech at the Relationships Foundation was illuminating & good humoured…but also delivered w/ an appropriate tone of gravitas.
It seems to me that Q&A is often biased towards the RIGHT of politics & has focused on bashing Rudd & Labor, promoted the potential lineup for an upcoming Coalition front bench & their Senators…& put the SPOTLIGHT on News Limited characters (bloggers, journos, related writers) at the expense of alternative media.
You FOCUS on specific News Ltd. characters & related topics a fair bit too Kim.
Imo Tony Jones is a lousy moderator.
N’
Yes, you are right as usual nasking.;-) The amount of air time given to coalition spokesthings usually far exceeds their government counterparts, either because Jones lacks the ability to shut them up, or through deliberate policy.
Joyce is a borish bully boy all right.
I notice today’s Oz op ed theme suggests that Brendan knows exactly what he’s doing, but the ALP has been painting him as confused.
While I’d agree that News Ltd appears to be setting the Lib’s agenda for them, and that assorted narratives do tend to culminate in a hey presto, I can’t see it happening for Brendan. If they were all united behind the same figurehead, yes, but News Ltd media are as divided over the Lib leadership as the party is.
Lyn, he’s not that good at heeding his master’s voice, to be sure, nor is the voice a coherent one.
Critically, nasking!
“It is not enough to dismiss Bolt as some kind of stupid crank. He is paid and nurtured by one of the most powerful media organisations in the world. He has influence, and he persuades the ignorant, the unimaginative, and the fearful amongst us.”
Because he talks to anyone ,he at least isn’t an ablist , is he ?
Its a given, I would consensus with, that Bolt is a Dolt ( and probably a fucking CIA agent to boot) but…’Tony Jones is a lousy moderator.’ Hear fucking Hear!
And Jon fucking Faine is a fucking fascist and so is Ellen fucking Fanning and Virginia Triolo sucks fascist ass…and these ‘intelligent’ and ‘ enlightened’ dickheads are surely, SURELY, far more dangerous than all the knuckle-dragging Troglodytes from the Moloch press and the Lunar Right… imho, fwiw, etc.
Stop holding back Kim – start running dead pools* on some of these arseholes. ( My $2)
* Prediction pools on when person X permanently retires from politics.
Grace@1:
“Reason and evidence will not convince the likes of Andrew Bolt because he is not interested in the truth, only in preserving his own elevated position in the media-constructed “debate” on climate change, as one of the best paid and widely broadcast “sceptics” in this country. And this man has children.”
Quite so, Grace. Got it in a nutshell.
The hilarious thing is, though, is that whe he’s outside the element of his blog and actually has to engage real non-nutters in person, he falls flat on his face.
Witness his performance on Insiders last week. Not to mention the giant Hindenberg flambe that was his effort on the panel after the Great Global Warming Swindle.
Oh, the humanity!
But I forgot. It was all Tony Jones fault.
Oh. And that damnable media.
“Critically, nasking!”
Indeed.
There is a bit of an argument around that when you mention these creeps you just give them oxygen.
Stare ‘em in the eye an’ remind them how irrelvant they are i reckon.
Well joe2@22, it’s essentially the Boltchimp’s MO. Ridiculous, unsupportable arguements and lots of clickthroughs = $$$.
He of course links to Mad Mel (hugely entertaining) here: http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/
But for true, complete, batshit, wingnut insanity you really should visit Pam Atlas.
Barking mad crazy doesn’t even begin to cover it: http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/
Apologies for the slur on batshit.
“Critically, nasking!”
Sure, the occasional analysis & querying of their approach, assessments/defining of topics/issues is fine. Valuable. But it can end up like a manufactured Blur VS. Oasis type tit for tat…and you can end up spending far too much time focusing on their agenda?
And it’s the linking to them that particularly bothers me Kim. It creates income for them by way of advertising dollars. Doesn’t it? Aren’t the advertisers looking at how many visits they receive? (perhaps i’m wrong, feel free to correct me)
Can’t you just use a quote or such Kim? Or is Murdoch charging these days for that as well? I’m not bothered if you link to Tim Dunlop’s Blogocracy ’cause I’m hoping he’ll have a positive effect on their choice of topics/tone etc. But I’m buggered if I wanna assist Bolt & those other war-mongers by clicking on their articles/blogs.
Just sayin’. It’s your post, so do as you see fit.
agree w/ you adrian…& other interesting, insightful comments above. Altho, I must admit that sometimes I’m not good at picking up the sarcasm in comments. It’s difficult when you’re not seeing the paralinguistic & facial gestures…nor hearing the tone of voice & such. I’ve walked into a few cyber walls because of it…:) And there are some comments that need a translation tool.
Lyn, I reckon the Libs are trying to take as many positions as possible in order to have at least one high-profile character who is on the right side of the global warming, clean energy issue by the time the new US President has begun to set a course in tandem w/ the EU & such. Just in time for the election here. Leigh Sayles seemed to be thinking along those lines based on her questions to Julie Bishop on Lateline the other night. Lotta guesswork out there right now…depending on who wins the US election & how many energy sources are found to be easily obtainable. And corporate amalgamations & such based on the financial determinants (US mortgage/investment/market downturn), course of the War in Iraq, China’s stance post-Olympics etc.
N’
Thanks for the link Ambigulous, I’d missed that one. The good thing about it is that it undermines the “he’s a former astronaut so he must know what he is talking about” pitch in regard to the guy they ran a few weeks ago talking about a new ice age.
It’s interesting how many of the former Apollo astronauts have gone quite wacky in different ways. I think it was Aldrin who became a fundamentalist Christian, and I vaguely recall a few other nutty post-career moves to add to these two.
nasking, just in regard to your comments – I think it is important to highlight this stuff because it sets so much of the agenda for public discussion – and almost always for the worst. And no one has to click through if they don’t want to, but it’s a very old blogospheric practice to provide links so that people can reach their own view on another article, even if the poster has provided an interpretation and a quote.
“…but it’s a very old blogospheric practice to provide links…”
Kim is aware of all internet traditions.
“but it’s a very old blogospheric practice to provide links so that people can reach their own view on another article”
as one who has linked for years, as you well know Kim, I don’t make it a habit of linking to many News Ltd sites…;)
“I was bold in the pursuit of knowledge, never fearing to follow truth and reason to whatever results they led, and bearding every authority which stood in their way.”
Thomas Jefferson
Thomas Jefferson was, apparently, aware of all constitutional traditions.
CK, I get it.
professor rat, I always thought that a dead pool was a little bit more … umm … interactive than you suggest.
Not that I’d have a problem with that.
CK@20 and nasking@14.
Yes, I am a bit conflicted about watching Bolt in full flight denialism on Insiders, on my ABC, but on the other hand, the prospect of seeing a full-splatter head explosion keeps dragging me back.
Most of the other guests, like Annabelle, Brian and George (and surely Matt if he was still with us) have finally got his mark and with all the head-shaking and eyeball rolling are slowly but surely hoisting him on his own petard…