Still not back, but need to comment on the “Cameron Affair”

As previously advised, Spartacus has hung up the keyboard and taken a seat. But sometimes it is important to stand up. And today is one of those days.

There have already been 2 posts and numerous comments on Catallaxy about the termination of Ross Cameron’s contact with SkyNews.  Herewith Spartacus’ view. But first, please allow Spartacus his standard throat clearing.

Spartacus knows Ross Cameron.  Not for that long but still Spartacus would consider Ross a friend. We have broken bread together. We have dined with our families together. Spartacus has even been a guest on Ross’ SkyNews shows. We don’t agree on everything, notably Donald Trump, Julian Assange and Russia. But we don’t have to agree on everything to have a conversation. It is the discussion, debate and dialogue that leads to the discovery of truth and knowledge (please note dear University Vice Chancellors and Human Rights Commissioners).

However, some additional context on what happened last week.  Unlike the majority of his critics, Ross does not make his living off the public payroll.  He has a day and he has a night job.  Ross’ general economic welfare is not tied to the toil of the tax payer.

Ross also has a young family. So while trying to spend time with his family, build a business during the day and seeking to inform and entertain people at night, he made a mistake. A mistake. Nobody died or suffered physical injury. Crimes against humanity were not committed.  Offence was not given.  Offence was taken, not by Chinese or Asian people but by a bunch of fragile, puerile, infantile whiners.

Rising early and working through the day and then having to perform for 4 nights a week from 11pm to 12am necessitates several hours of preparation prior and probably not getting home until after 1am, not to mention getting to sleep …. only to start again early the next day.

Now working long hours is probably a concept foreign to former Human Right’s Commissioners, ABC journalists and certain members of the University industrial complex, but it can take a toll. And it must be remembered that last week was week 2 of the new 4 night late night format of the Outsiders.

Perhaps he was tired. Could it be.  And he made a mistake.

But here is the rub. It is almost certain that Ross was terminated from Sky because of pressure exerted by Sky’s advertisers on Sky management, who were in turn pressured by activists. See comment from Andrew Bolt this morning:

The activists, Sleeping Giant, are of the Left and determined to destroy Sky by attacking its advertisers.

This is how the media marketplace is meant to work. No. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. It is a private business making a decision on how to use its private assets based on the feedback of the people who pay it.  However, how do people who disapprove of the opinions and content on ABC exert their view?

As a person with a Bachelors and Masters degree in Economics, Spartacus was grossly offended by Emma Alberici’s economic illiteracy. Who are the ABC’s advertisers that Spartacus can pressure for offending his intelligence?

As a citizen with some manners, Spartacus was grossly offended by Tom Ballard’s offensive language on Tonightly. Who are the ABC’s advertisers that Spartacus can pressure for Ballard’s conduct not consistent with community expectations?

How do the people who actually pay for the ABC get to influence the ABC?  If anyone dare exert any pressure on the ABC like is want to do to SkyNews, there are screams and squeals.  And they wonder why American’s voted for Donald Trump.

But for the most cowardly display all, look no further than the general media community. For a bunch of people who make a living, a generally comfortable living, from words and opinions, where are they? Where are these cowards?  Where are the Peter Van Onselen’s, the Laura Tingles, the Barrie Cassidy’s?  They don’t need to agree with him, but they need to defend Ross’ ability to speak.

Cowards.  The lot of them.

Just remember, first they came for the SkyNews after dark commentators.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

44 Responses to Still not back, but need to comment on the “Cameron Affair”

  1. Agen POSTAL

    Irony is now outlawed and it’s usage must be punished.

  2. stackja

    First they came for Bolt. Now Ross.
    I don’t subscribe to Sky.
    The rest of MSM don’t care about Ross. Speers newspaper columns show little value.

  3. Cassie of Sydney

    “stackja
    #2857162, posted on November 5, 2018 at 2:58 pm
    First they came for Bolt. Now Ross.
    I don’t subscribe to Sky.
    The rest of MSM don’t care about Ross. Speers newspaper columns show little value.”

    And then they’ll come for us.

  4. Shy Ted

    Fear not, Scott’s on the case. And Mitch.

  5. Old School Conservative

    I too thought that tiredness contributed to the minor error.
    However Spartacus has written far more eloquently in advancing that theory.
    More please.

  6. Mak Siccar

    Howls and screams from the hypocritical left who, if they didn’t have double standards, wouldn’t have any standards at all. Also, a gross over-reaction from Sky management.

  7. stackja

    Cassie – Sinc rules allow for Cats to comment.

  8. areff

    I just this minute called Foxtel — 131 999 — and reduced my package from $59 a month to $29, which retains Sky News but sheds sport. No a problem until footy season kicks off. Explained to the operator why I was doing it, and then had his supervisor come on the phone.

    Would suggest other Foxtel subscribers do likewise.

    Costing them money should get their attention.

  9. Stan

    It wasn’t racist, and it wasn’t even a mistake. It was calling out the anti-China lobby on their (in his view) hysterical “yellow peril” alarmism by ironically referring to “slanty-eyed” Chinese in the context of their embracing Western culture (Disneyland).

  10. LGS

    Commercial or private media (not funded by taxpayers) which leans to conservatism or the right – fair game for interference or pressure from left wing activism, often via advertisers.
    Entirely taxpayer-funded ABC – howls of outrage from these same leftists, when conservatives or right wingers merely call for the ABC to adhere to its charter (instead of the most flagrant bias to the far left).

  11. LGS

    Irony is now outlawed and it’s usage must be punished.

    The Left doesn’t understand the meaning of the word “irony.”
    Or hypocrisy.

  12. Up The Workers!

    Following the excellent example of Areff, above, I have also called Foxtel and roughly halved the value of my regular monthly charitable donation until such time as they get Peter Van Insolent and any other Leftard whose opinion I choose to dislike, off their station.

    After all, what do they think this is…freedom of speech? Or worse…democracy???

    If it works for totalitarian Leftard types, then surely it should work for intelligent, working, useful Australians too.

  13. duncanm

    Cowards. The lot of them.

    yup… and they’re digging their own graves.

    First they silenced the conservative commentators..

  14. Following the excellent example of Areff, above, I have also called Foxtel and roughly halved the value of my regular monthly charitable donation

    No, no, no. Do not suck the resources away from FoxTel. Increase your package and while there subscribe to the Australian.

    Get on to the ABC. Lodge a complaint. Lodge 20 complaints. Tell your friends. Let them redirect their resources from “content” to complaints handling. They can’t increase their advertising rates. They have a fixed budget. Every $10 spent on complaints handling is $10 less to spend on the Drum or Tom Ballard or Yassmin Abdel Magied. Let’s turn the ABC not into a broadcaster but into a letter processing agency. Tell your friends and their friends. And then write to the Minister and Prime Minister.

    But increase your FoxTel sub and your Australian sub.

  15. Terry

    “Offence was taken, not by Chinese or Asian people but by a bunch of fragile, puerile, infantile whiners.”

    This must be considered a service to the nation.

    If Australian of the Year still actually meant something, he’d surely be next year’s favourite.

    Admission to the Order of Australia maybe. Bring “Knights and Dames” temporarily out of retirement just for this occasion?

    Sir Ross Cameron? Now that’s some head-exploding triggering right there.

  16. Ben

    Stan
    #2857182, posted on November 5, 2018 at 3:31 pm
    “It wasn’t racist, and it wasn’t even a mistake. It was calling out the anti-China lobby on their (in his view) hysterical “yellow peril” alarmism by ironically referring to “slanty-eyed” Chinese in the context of their embracing Western culture (Disneyland).”
    Seriously? Was there a need to use extremely offensive and derogatory phrases like “slanty-eyed” and “yellow skin” (which by the way are only in the imagination of some people)?

  17. areff

    Sparty, you silly sausage.

    Increasing your Foxtel sub will only endorse the damage they did to your mate, Ross.

    I also reduced my mum’s sub, for which I pay, and that means $100 a month less flowing into News Corp’s coffers. Consider it a backbone-building exercise, as nothing fortifies the News Corp soul than the prospect of a growing black-ink bottom line. Likewise, nothing gets you fired quicker than costing Rupert money.

    For $29, you still gets Sky News. The other crap Foxtel oozes onto the screen is just that, crap. Have you ever seen so many ads repeated so often as on the entertainment channels? No, didn’t think so.

    What Foxtel stands for, apart from Boris’ cowardice, is an example of why governments should never get into the business of picking winners.

    In the US, cable started when folks in deep valleys couldn’t get over-the-air reception. So they stuck an aerial on a hill and piped the signals to the homes below. Cable grew as municipalities said, ‘Sure, dig all the holes you want so long as you fill them in, and if you go broke in the process so be it.’

    In Manhattan, as a result, I got 100 channels, most without ads, plus high-speed broadband for a total of under $50 a month.

    Here, a committee of government-appointed worthies decided what sort of system we should have. The result: no competition worth mentioning and some of the highest pay-TV fees in the world.

  18. candy

    The “slanty eyed” and colour comments are still inappropriate no matter what the context. A way of speaking long gone and rightly so. And none of us would dream of talking that way at our own workplace. It would not go well.

    Dismissal a bit harsh though. Perhaps being put off for a month or two without salary. Maybe he needs to look at his impromptu way of speaking? He seems overly impulsive. There must be ways of making a point without using particular phrases which to most are offensive and out of date. why not calm it down.

  19. H B Bear

    Don’t like Australia pay TV?

    Thank Kerry Packer.

  20. Old School Conservative

    The “slanty eyed” and colour comments are still inappropriate

    “Inappropriate” is a catch-all word used by people who don’t have a firm point to make Candy.
    If you mean racist or demeaning say so and it’s easier to discuss the sacking.
    Ross could not be described as either of the above once you look at the context of what he said.
    If you mean “old fashioned” or “archaic” then his dismissal looks petty or based on other (unknown) reasons.

  21. Spartacus is right again.
    Sky and the Australian are the only unbiased sources available.
    Every time I see or hear ‘them’ stooping to refer to “grey-haired old white men” or even “blonde bronzed blue-eyed” surf life savers \, etc. I’ll raise merry Hell with the ABC or Nine or wherever it came from.
    The trouble with that plan is that I never listen to or watch the ABC, nor do I resort to the fake Fauxfacts news.

  22. pbw

    But for the most cowardly display all, look no further than the general media community. For a bunch of people who make a living, a generally comfortable living, from words and opinions, where are they? Where are these cowards?

    What’s the problem? This sounds like moral outrage. Isn’t it the job of journalists to make a living? If they don’t consider that Cameron’s sacking threatens their living, they may be wrong, but it is an arguably rational judgement in their own best interests. Just like Sky.

  23. Genghis

    Silly me but why don’t you find out the advertisers that buckled and work on them. Infantile Progressives (now that’s an oxymoron) do not have a majority (yet). So pressure the weak caving advertisers.

  24. Tel

    It was calling out the anti-China lobby on their (in his view) hysterical “yellow peril” alarmism by ironically referring to “slanty-eyed” Chinese in the context of their embracing Western culture (Disneyland).

    Ross attempted to insinuate that people who don’t want to be ruled by Bejing are racist, and he did it in a way that he ended up himself getting called out as racist… because the current level of public discourse is really that freaking stupid and the politically correct morons are running the joint. Style beats substance … welcome to the Age of Seeming.

    Ross tried to play the vibe game and he lost, because it’s not really the thing he’s any good at.

    Anyway, there’s good logical reasons why none of us wants Australia ruled by the Chinese Communist Party, and we should not underestimate their ability to project influence in a variety of indirect ways. This (obviously even to the most brain dead idiot) has nothing to do with eyes, ears, size of nose but it has everything to do with loyalty and citizenship.

    That said, certainly Sky was getting around to kicking out Ross, so this happened to be a convenient time to do it..

  25. Mark M

    So I’m a caucasian with a big nose.

    It’s a fact.

    Is “Big Nose” really used for Westerners?

    Got me thinking about someone (who knows less Chinese than I do) telling me that “Big Nose” is the Chinese term for westerners. Is that true, and if so, is it considered racist, i.e., never said where we might hear and somewhat offensive even when we can’t (like “nigger”)?

    If it is “harmless,” is it written 大鼻子 ?

    1 answer: Yes, 大鼻子 is used for primarily white people, although it is regionally limited to the North East.

    https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/23363/is-big-nose-really-used-for-westerners

  26. Caveman

    Whybpay $29 for Sky news when you get it free on the app??

    Sparty your not John Farnham?

  27. Squirrel

    SkyNews advertisers would be unwise to give in to leftist pressure groups, particularly after the recent extension of selections of the Sky line-up (including Outsiders) to free-to-air viewers through the WIN Network.

    The virtue-signalling snowflakes are very-well catered for through ABC, SBS and, increasingly, mainstream commercial TV – the rest of us need a genuine alternative which is actually prepared to discuss issues which interest and concern people who are outside the affluent-progressive bubble.

  28. Baldrick

    Perhaps he was tired. Could it be. And he made a mistake.

    No, it wasn’t a mistake. It was perfectly suited to the point he was trying to make.

    Stop agreeing with Leftards and grow some balls.

  29. pbw

    Speaking of journalists, this whole affair has the tang of karma about it. What did Dean and Cameron do when Mark Latham was sacked? I don’t know, but they didn’t say “One out, all out. This is Outsiders after all.” Now it’s Outsider, and any claim that Sky News is other than an arm of the PCBC has vanished. Any news service that calls the radical left of the Liberal party “moderates” is just mouthing correct-line platitudes anyway.
    To revisit the Where are these cowards? theme, why is it ok to thunder against news journalists for their cowardice, but to airily wave off criticism of a news organisation for precisely the same cowardice?
    Here’s the reason:

    It is a private business making a decision on how to use its private assets…

    Right, got it.
    In fact, Sky is betraying the very people whose attention is being sold to advertisers. When they go, what does Sky have to sell? It was a knee-jerk decision to fire first Latham and now Cameron. There’s no time for focus groups and careful analysis of the cost of alternatives, thankfully. What’s required is principle and backbone. Who knows how that would work out? But if you abandon principle and backbone, what is the point of your private business?

  30. Baldrick

    Perhaps he was tired. Could it be. And he made a mistake.

    No, it wasn’t a mistake. It was perfectly suited to the point he was trying to make.

    Stop agreeing with Leftards and grow some b.a.l.l.s.

    (P.S. The words b.a.l.l.s. now sets off the Spaminator. Go figure!)

  31. Cassie of Sydney

    “Maybe he needs to look at his impromptu way of speaking? He seems overly impulsive.

    Wrong Candy. Ross Cameron is not impulsive…unlike Rowan Dean who is.

  32. egg_

    Sounds like the faux whitey outrage over the teen who wore a “traditional Chinese dress” to the prom.

  33. iamok

    Spot on, and unfortunately the March in Oz is nearly complete

  34. Death Giraffe

    The “slanty eyed” and colour comments are still inappropriate no matter what the context

    ..
    In that case you just did the same thing. Remember: context doesn’t matter.
    So you should therefore at the very least be booted off the cat forthwith.

  35. Peter Greagg

    egg_
    #2857317, posted on November 5, 2018 at 7:18 pm
    Sounds like the faux whitey outrage over the teen who wore a “traditional Chinese dress” to the prom.

    This x 100

  36. Iampeter

    Just remember, first they came for the SkyNews after dark commentators.

    Who came for them?
    Didn’t you just acknowledge a few paragraphs up, quite correctly, that this isn’t a free speech issue?
    Then you conclude that everyone is cowardly for not speaking up? About what?
    Did you really miss the glaring contradiction defeating the purpose of this entire post or did you just post it anyway because total self contradiction is what passes for “dialogue that leads to the discovery of truth and knowledge”?

  37. Herodotus

    Sky is pedalling backwards instead of escalating, so it will happen again.
    As for complaining directly to the ABC – give us a break! We have been observing what happens on that tack for years.
    I note in this context that the ABC is currently soliciting people’s suggestions about what they like or dislike about the ABC . What could possibly go wrong?
    Just give them all your personal info before you fire the broadside?

    I think not. Reason 1: they already know what they are charged with. It has been repeatedly outlined by a number of commentators, going back at least to the start of this century.

    Reason 2: one suspects that they know about the reluctance of critics to dob themselves in. The resultant tsunami of “Friends of the ABC” luvvie comments will be summarised, calculated, homogenised as per BoM’s treatment of those historical temperature readings, and presented to all and sundry as proof that “the people have spoken and we are the supreme voice of Australia”.

    And just in case that doesn’t quite wash, they are also running a typical leftist campaign to use celebs to tell the listeners that the ABC is wonderful. I heard Jimmy Barnes doing just that today.

  38. Herodotus

    Peter, the cock crowed for you long ago.

  39. Pickles

    Look. We’ve lost Cameron but we’ve got Sharri. And Germaine “my assignment is late cause the pig who threw a fuck into after the Duck shut last week won’t take me to the Carathool races on Saddy can I have an extension” Greer. We don’t know how lucky we are.

  40. Hay Stockard

    Candy
    I always corrected my soldierswhen they called the civilian “Gooks”. I pointed out Gooks were Koreans, vide Han Gook, people of the River Han,
    When they called them slopes I didn’t have a leg to stand on.

  41. Oh come on

    Sparty, stay or go. This is getting like a teenage break-up.

  42. Warty

    Spartacus‘No, no, no. Do not suck the resources away from FoxTel. Increase your package and while there subscribe to the Australian.
    In my day, hang on it’s still ‘my day’ while I continue to draw breath, but the belief was/is that one should not reward those who lack a spine. I didn’t halve my foxtel subscription, no, I cancelled the bloody thing, not because Andrew Bolt is somewhat equivocal about his conservatism, nor the belief that large doses of sentimentality nudges Paul Murray in the direction of cuck-conservatism, not even the fact that ‘balance’ is provided by including Speers, Jayes and Gilbert in their presenter line up; I simply do not reward cowardice.
    I think it was Cassie who revealed the gloating in the twittersphere following Ross’ dismissal, and revealing their intention of going after Rowan, perhaps Bolt and Murray and Credlin.
    No, appeasement cannot be linked to ‘give a sucker a break’. Appeasement will not result in ‘peace in our time’, rather the whole concept of [email protected] means a radical rethink for the conservative movement. The American equivalent of Sleeping Giant failed to get rid of Hannity and Ingham, so why should it be tolerated here.
    Appeasement leads to bereavement (ok, a bit corny).

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.