It’s on. Brendan Nelson’s thrown down the gauntlet. The Liberal Party will determine its leadership tomorrow morning after Nelson called on a spill. Perhaps his capital E emo man performance in Parliament today was his audition - or maybe he’d eaten some of those baked beans. At any rate, he’s got one night of that “clear air” that is/was the new cliche/talking point de jour.
You have to wonder if there’s not some level at which this is a bit of subconscious revenge on Peter Costello, whose book launch tomorrow will now surely be “overshadowed”, as the meejah like to say.
Let’s see if the Turnbull boosters’ claims that they already have the numbers are right. Or will Malcolm Turnbull even put his hand up? What happens if he loses? Surely he couldn’t stay on the front bench. Nelson must be dreaming if he thinks this will end the thing. If he marginalises Turnbull to curry favour with the hard right, he’s still got a divided party. If he keeps Turnbull on the front bench, he looks weak. But at least it might kill off the Costellology.
Update: Michael Brissenden reported on the 7 30 Report that Nelson had been more angry than ever seen before (is that possible?) at a party room meeting and had promised to “clean out” his office and the front bench if he wins. He could lose endless commentator Tony Abbott for a start, and the promise regarding the office presumably refers to his habit of going off the reservation and making policy unilaterally - for instance with the $30 a week pension increase. Presumably the implication that Nelson will be clearing out his desk is unintended, but maybe interesting in a Freudian slippy sorta way.
More strange is a reported promise to “toughen up” the line on climate change while simultaneously walking away from the carping opposition to same sex rights in the Senate. This sounds like a typical Nelson left/right straddle to me, but apparently he’s going to show a “different” side to his leadership. More props? No more truck trekking? Who knows?
Turnbull is standing by the way.
More: Possum has posted Nelson’s press release.
Update: Bruce Billson, the Shadow Minister for Communications (who knew?), duly communicated on Lateline tonight. It wasn’t 100% clear, but he seemed to be suggesting that Malcolm Turnbull might remain on the front bench if Nelson wins. Yeah, right, that’d be smart. But it does show that Nelson’s inclusive or something. Oh, and “strong action on climate change without wrecking the economy” may or may not be a different stance from their most recent unintelligible confusion. But communications expert Billson appeared pleased that it was a nifty soundbite. Who thinks that somehow all this isn’t going to be over tomorrow morning?
Decided [by Kim]: It’s Turnbull by 45-41. New open thread here.
Update [by Kim]: I’ve put up a post with some analysis of what Turnbull needs to do here.
Continue reading ‘Nelson brings on leadership spill for tomorrow’
The Future of Journalism - reflections
As noted here and here, I attended the Walkley Foundation’s Future of Journalism event in Brisbane yesterday. Courtesy of the lovely folks at the ABC, the sessions were all recorded and will be viewable online, so that absolves me from the difficult task of trying to reconstruct a session in which I was a panelist after the fact. So what I wanted to do in this post is thank the organisers of the day - particularly Jonathan Este of the MEAA - and of my session - particularly Cristen Tilley from the ABC as Chair and my co-panelists Axel Bruns from QUT’s Creative Industries Faculty and blogger/journalist Marian Edmunds - for what I found was a stimulating and enjoyable experience. I also wanted to note some reflections which were prompted by many of the discussions.
The caveat I want to enter before proceeding further is that there’s a real sense in which I don’t have a dog in this fight. I’m not a journalist or a journalism educator, and I don’t think “citizen journalism” is the best way of conceptualising what I do in my online writing, even when it most closely approaches reportage. My stake in all this is really that of a citizen and that of a media participant, and precisely because participation is a better model for engament in/with the media now than “audience” or “reader”, I don’t regard myself as being a privileged participant in these conversations, let alone in some way representative of the figure of “the blogger” which is in a real way a mythical one. A lot of what I bring to all this is probably more to do with my background and worldview as a sociologist.
That takes me to the first point I want to make - as I argued previously, I think the “bloggers v. journos” stoush is badly framed and misses most of what’s actually going on. It’s also worth noting, as I did at the outset of the session yesterday, that the debate as it plays out in the opinion columns and (ironically) the “blogs” at The Australian is more accurately seen as a subset of the culture wars and a struggle for hegemony and control over information and analysis than anything much to do with either the conditions of media work or the “fourth estate” role that the media supposedly plays. But more on that later. A lot of actually existing journos aside from columnists and right wing editors aren’t actually suffused with antagonism for blogs. It’s also interesting, and here I’d refer to the paragraph above, that some bloggers or “web evangelists” have an equal stake in continuing the “journos v. blogger wars”. (But for those interested in the latest series of “blogs are no longer the future of journalism” pronunciatos from the “fact and balance” crew, see this post from Stilgherrian, and my previous post.)
Continue reading ‘The Future of Journalism - reflections’