Our weekly (mostly) look at media spin tactics: let’s dissect the PR and propaganda that aims to blow one’s own horn, bury one’s errors, resurrect the shambling zombie corpses of well-flogged deceased equines, and ooh look! A Big Distracting Thing!
The first question is always cui bono? The second question is what’s really going on?
Please note – this thread’s just for the analysis of media manoeuvres and their intended effects – discussion of other aspects of issues of interest belongs elsewhere. e.g. browse the archives | roundtables | open thread
Associated Press reporters told off for tweeting
Troy Bramston is thinking with his nether member in today’s OO.
[Cut, paste ang google the title to see the full column.]
“the Greens menace”! Complete hyperbole from the OO, which, as we haven’t forgotten, editorialised that they were going to “destroy the Greens at the Ballot box”. Fair, balanced, unbiased, yeah OK.
Its rather odd for news.com.au to go on about people illegally staying in Australia when they are from the US/UK and arrived by plane. I wonder why they’re doing it now?
http://www.news.com.au/national/taxpayers-wear-burden-of-60000-illegal-immigrants/story-e6frfkvr-1226200664868
Peter Fray in a letter to the readers of the SMH today says,
He writes:
And he also suggests:
I suppose these assertions counts as spin. Perhaps Mr Fray does not critically read his own newspaper or go to the website. It seems one person’s signal is another’s noise. Nothing changed there, except the newspaper business model and modus operandi is now critically challenged. Perhaps what is really going on here is a failure to adapt, innovate and recognize that the filtered perceptions framed, for example, by wire services can be challenged by direct observations sourced by video live streaming.
@4 I reckon this is a follow up from the Greek story where as much as 10% of the population may be illegal
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2011-11-09/immigration-the-other-greek-crisis/3652092?section=business
It’s a “see, we’ve got problems, too” story. Whingers.
Roger Jones @ 6 – yes, perhaps that’s it. I would not have expected these people to be a drain on public money though – they wouldn’t quality for medicare or welfare payments and its likely they’re spending their savings or earning money doing jobs other people don’t want to do.
On May 4 this year I reported on an interview with John Howard on Fran Kelly’s Breakfast show. The interview was conducted in the wake of the apparent execution of Osama Bin Laden in Pakistan at Abbottabad the day before. Kelly was her usual sloppy, brown-nosing self, but she did ask Howard to reflect on his remarks of february 2007 regarding Osama, reported inter alia by Sandra O’Malley in the Murdochracy:
It seems that everyone’s favourite conservative legend in his own mind, Gerard henderson has got himself into a snit about Bruce Hawker reminding us of it all and declared that Howard never made the remarks.
While the form of words attributed to Hawker might not have been right, the thrust of the claim is well-attested.
If you are interested in a GetUp campaign to have the ABC return to its Charter, please vote and comment at here:
http://bit.ly/gN4RHI
oh dear oh dear oh dear – one poorly thought out social media campaign, one unfolding PR disaster #QantasLuxury
eta: and the first Downfall parody video is out now http://youtu.be/QTCwPlWzZnQ
I heard about this one on radio, so decided to google it. A smirk shared by Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy when quizzed about Silvio Berlusconi at their Brussels press conference recently was not appreciated by the Italians.
I can’t speak French or understand the German, but here’s a longer youtube version.
The suggestion was if that’s what Merkel and Sarkozy think of him the markets would never have confidence, so the body language effectively finished him off.
@TT that is just beautiful. FTR I have a couple of pairs of Qantas jammies and quite a few amenity packs courtesy of a jet setting hubby. They are nice enough, but really to win back your customers you need to do better than that.
Ok … I’ve defended Bruce Hawker from Henderson above, so just to be even handed, he goes into the naughty column for this effort:
http://brucehawker.com/2011/11/21/minority-tyranny-the-greens-and-the-mining-tax/
No prizes for guessing which familiar territory this is heading into …
Interestingly, his party’s prior deal with Wilkie to cut the revenue (and with Windsor and Oakeshoot over CSG) gets no mention. I wonder why?
I posted a response on his blog which is currently in moderation. (I’ve corrected a number of the typos in the text below.)
Hmmm apparently I failed to correct all the typos …
Brian … having listened both to Sarkozy and Merkel, they are both expressing their confidence that the Italian authorities now have the resolve and an appreiocation of the imperatives to meet their obligations.
The smirk really was the low point, but in context it seems to have arisen because there was an implicit invitation by the journalist to dump on the Italians, which everyone in the room knew full well they could not do, whatever they thought privately, much as there is a traditional game here in trying to get politicians to breach protocols pre-budget or during leadership speculation.
Returning to the subject of @2, there is an elephant in the room in the call by Labor Right boys for Labor to take a more antagonistic attitude towards the Greens. This is that the emergence and growth of the Greens, whilst not unproblematic for the ALP Left, has in certain key respects and for a variety of reasons, empowered and emboldened the ALP Left in the ALP’s internal struggles, and can be expected to continue to do so, and the ALP Right knows this and is not happy about it. This is something which I have been predicting since the 1980s would happen if a strong party emerged to the left of Labor, and is one of the reasons why I have supported various efforts to create such a party from 1984 onwards.
Piers Morgan on his Twitter spinning for news with concern trolliness.
Piers Akerman trolled:
Curiously, Piers doesn’t adopt the same approach with people on his blog complaining of “the Gillard social|st totalitar|an dictatorsh|p”. Apparently such things are fairly benign, at worst.
I had to laugh this morning. On Radio Liberal with Fran Kelly, Chris Pyne came on and declared that 87% of what the government passed this year was passed with LNP support. I was awaiting Ms Kelly asking whether Pyne thought that 87% of the legislative program was therefore worth doing and if that would not justify the government claiming to have had a pretty good year.
Still, if I were spinning for the regime I’d be saying — “Opposition gives government an A”. Certainly, it’s hard to reconcile this with “the worst government in history” tag the LNP tries to run.
Paul Norton@16 – can you not refer to the Labor Right as “boys” please? I’m from the Labor Right, and last time I was in a caucus room, there were quite a lot of other women in there with me.
By calling the Right “boys”, you erase us.
Hmmm Rebekka, given that you’re from the Labor Right, you’re in greater danger of being rubbed out by your factional buddies than by Paul Norton.
Just saying …
oops … disregard that last-but-one post. I just re-read tssk‘s post and it was Piers Morgan not Akerman. Apologies all …
Mind you, Mr Morgan might deserve to be confused with Akers but as I’m not prepared to make the case, I won’t …
Rebekka, I was referring to Labor Right boys, rather than the Labor Right generically, as “boys”. If you and other Labor Right women want to claim joint ownership of a political approach which has been proven time and again to preclude your party from developing and uniting around an appealing narrative on issues on which the Greens have developed and united around appealing narratives, far be it from me to stop you.
To give an example of what I mean, Bramston’s spray refers to “environmental evangelicals” in the Greens. Now both Labor and the Greens have their fair share of “environmental evangelicals”, i.e. people who understand and are deeply committed to the sustainability agenda, and these people have included some of Labor’s best and most successful politicians. The great advantage the Greens have over Labor on this score is that Labor also includes anti-environmental evangelicals, whereas the Greens don’t. This is why issues as diverse as the Franklin Dam dispute, native forest logging, climate policy, Fraser Island, the South Coast Motorway dispute, pulp mills, planning laws and approvals processes, etc., have so often been simultaneously a source of Green growth and Labor grief.
If we are talking about spin, the revolving Speakers chair in our Parliament has got to be a hot topic right now.
The unpaired Harry Jenkins has stepped down to take an active role in floor politics.
A liberal, unpaired, has taken the seat skewing the numbers in Labour’s favour. Very nicely played Julia.
What does it mean though. I am picking a bi-election in the unsafe seat of the guy embroiled in investigation over miss use of union funds as being a front row possibility. And the rearrangement is a safety factor.
There could well also be a cabinet reshuffle on the cards.
Julia Gillard is being every bit a considerable political force, and an impressive Prime Minister.
Watching Kyle Sandilands digging himself a deeper hole over his latest bullying spleen-vent reveals a neat example of spin-fail – trying to equate his extremely personal derogatory remarks as an answer-in-kind to a critical review of his TV show just won’t fly.
BilB @24, the Daily Terror is referring to “DISGRACED Queensland Liberal MP Peter Slipper” [emphasis in original].
@Paul Norton, my point was that the Right as a whole is responsible for the Right’s approach to politics, not just some group of “boys”. Labor Right, as I have already said, includes a fair number of women. We don’t just shut up in the caucus room while the “boys” decide our approach.
PaulN,
I think that this is about buttressing Labour’s position until the next election. I have no knowledge, but would not be at all surprised if Craig Thompson quietly resigns for “family reasons” over the Christmas break, allowing Labour to contest his seat in the new year from a position of performance and strength.
Checking out some spin nuggets from the Harry Jenkins/Peter Slipper Speaker thread, the sheer acrobatics of the Coalition spin in response to this are thrilling to behold. First they claim that Labor is in disarray akin to 1975, then Labor is killing democracy, a speaker not from the government party is unconstitutional etc etc etc.
Also LOL at the media making it All About Blocking the Pokies Bill: wotta bunch of clowns. As if Labor is silly enough to burn their bridges with the cross-benchers just because they’ve gained an ever so slightly more robust numbers advantage.
On the ABC Radio National this morning it was all about “the questions the ALP has to answer” if there was a deal with Slipper before hand. So f**king what if they did? Of course there was. Are they stupid? What did they think Rudd was doing on Sunday? You simply just don’t talk about it and Albo last night on Lateline was very careful and methodical in answering the repeated questions from Tony Jones on this matter. Albo was brilliant in refusing to give Nappy-Boy a crack of light on the matter.
Nothing, NOTHING this morning about whether Abbott can answer any questions about his control over his party or whether he can ever display any negotiation skills. I mean the whole affair just shows up what what a total dunderhead Abbott must be – they’ve known since last year Slipper’s totally disaffected and what exactly did they think the result of trying to dynamite him out of his seat would be? Gillard, Albo, and Rudd played the LNP like a fiddle. The ABC just repeated Abbott’s useless assertions on the matter of the deal.
“Gotcha” journalism serving the public yet again … when the biggest “gotcha” of all time is sitting right in the leader of the opposition’s seat.
Perry & Romney crack up the lies …
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/nov/25/mitt-romney-rick-perry-accused-untruths
oops Perry & Romney
crack{crank} up the lies …http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/arts/nothing-to-be-shy-about/story-fn9n8gph-1226203959929
phew…that’s all alright then….
Behind the paywall Eric … which is probably just as well
Is David Penberthy a bloviating rightwing tosser? You be the judge: http://blogs.crikey.com.au/purepoison/2011/11/25/bob-brown-wants-your-smarties/ #handsoffmysmarties
Fran, I know a couple of blokes who were at Adelaide Uni with Penberthy – he was a bloviating right-wing tosser back then as well, apparently.
@Eric, @Fran – if you search on the article title, or author name, then going through a search engine will get you a link to the full article. Therefore linking to OO articles requires one or both of these so that folks can find the article.
For this one, the title is “Nothing to be shy about in ABC’s arts programming” and the author is Graeme Blundell, so running a search for “graeme blundell abc programming” gets one the goods.
Here’s some frantic anti-Islamic spin: Halal meat converting Aussies: MP – The West Australian
tigtog..that’s exactly what I did. Searched the article to navigate round the pay wall, went to the article, read it in full and the link up thread is the link I was reading in full from, copied and pasted? So…..?
@Eric, they’ll allow *you* to read the article at that link if you come from a search engine. They won’t allow anybody else to see the full article at that link unless they also arrive from a search engine. Following “naked” URLS for OO articles will get the abbreviated paywall version.
so…the link from the search is not transferable then, just did it again, got the same link…maybe everyone already knows this and I am just a dumbo..apologies.
Thanks TT but I’ve decided as a policy decision not to look at things I know to be behind the paywall. I want to avoid giving them extra traffic.
@Eric, the OO website will have created a cookie on your computer when you first went there from the search engine that will give you access to that article for a certain period – that cookie will probably expire in 12 or 24 hours from its creation.