Is it? Really?

Journalists are up in Canberra – seeking special privileges.

News Corp and the ABC have confirmed to a Senate Committee that journalists at the centre of police raids in June still do not know whether they could be criminally prosecuted.

News Flash:  Yes, you can be criminally prosecuted. The question is will you be criminally prosecuted.  Dear god – the number of people who struggle with the concepts of “could”, “would”, and “should” seems to an especial problem in the media.

News organisations, including News Corp (publisher of The Australian), Nine Entertainment and the ABC, are demanding changes to laws that include allowing media organisations to contest warrants by police, exemption for journalists from national security laws that make journalism an offence, greater protections for whistleblowers and less documentation stamped “secret” that currently represses reporting.

So hard to get excited about this – I know that a federal senator was trying to alert the media to this problem well before the parliament passed the laws. But the media were too pre-occupied with scoring cheap shots, talking about themselves, and/or promoting their own pet causes to pay any attention. Now they want a carve-out for themselves?

“We are being forcefully reminded every day that a free press is the cornerstone of a good democracy. It is in this environment that we need to find ways to empower journalism and not to penalise it,’’ Mr Reid told the committee.

This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired. I’m becoming less and less convinced that it is true.  It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

This entry was posted in Fake News, Media, Rule of law, Shut it down. Fire them all.. Bookmark the permalink.

45 Responses to Is it? Really?

  1. Pyrmonter

    In terms of any viable carve-out, on what grounds do Nine-Fairfax and the ABC propose to exclude the personnel of Xinhua and the People’s Daily? If they’re not excluded, what point is served by any of these laws?

  2. Doomlord:

    This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired. I’m becoming less and less convinced that it is true. It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

    Correct. The media is not the cornerstone of democracy – an unbiased and free media is. This current media is as morally bankrupt and politically one sided as Pravda in its heyday.
    This media is the Achilles Heel of our Democracy, and will be so described on our epitaph.

  3. Pity we can’t have an honest and truthful press.

  4. Howard Hill

    It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

    This +∞

  5. Mother Lode

    This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired.

    Yarp.

    It is not the press that is a cornerstone, but the flow of information to the citizens of the democracy.

    When the press was fearless and took a mad delight in exposing facts to the chagrin of the powerful then they were vital.

    Now that they see themselves as powerful and believe their are things citizens should not know even though they are true, and things they should know which are not, all to pamper their own egos…not so much.

    When they were anti-establishment they were a check on the mighty. Now they are part of the establishment they are a check on democracy. Could the ABC be any better an example of this if it tried?

    There are now so many vectors by which information can be transmitted that the challenge is filtering out the guff.

    The press has no competence or role in filtering.

    They are just another dubious conduit.

  6. RobK

    I don’t know ……
    The ABCs big exposé on 7.30: racehorses get sent to knackery. Some may not have woken up to that.
    18 months of hidden camera shots of a killing pen makes riveting killing porn dressed as a news scoop.
    After subverting cattle, sheep, pig, chicken, circus and racing dog industry; I wouldn’t trust them with anything. Their motives are clear and not in prosperity’s interest at all.

  7. This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired.

    Democracy is just rage-bait.

    What we need is a classical republic built on demarchy, sortition (lotteries), participatory democracy, automatic sunset clauses on all legislation and direct elections in the way of recall votes and striking down laws with referenda.

    Demarchy. That’s what the classical greeks called democracy. What they called democracy was mob rule ala Antifa and what we have now in the way of representative democracy and party blocs is truly an aristocracy.

    We get pineappled by our ruling class of lawyer potatoes no matter what right now. So many pineapples delivering sweet, sweet corn to us. For our own good, of course.

  8. Louis

    This is really just about the media fearing they are loosing their elites status. They have always considered themselves above the law and the State, and this law treating them just the same as the plebs is completely repugnant to them.

    It may well threaten their King making power too and that just can’t happen or politicians may not feel so compelled to follow their lead.

    #statusanxiety

  9. C.L.

    Trump was right. Enemy of the people.

  10. Mother Lode

    “The press is not my supervisor!”

  11. Minderbinder of Qld

    The mainstream media see themselves as as the judiciary of how our society should evolve, what standards we ants must maintain. These promulgated values should not, nor could not, apply to their superior collective. Even the most superficial examination of our journalistic betters illustrates their ego driven desire for the scoop, no matter how distorted, untruthful, misspelled, pathetic, and reeking of tortured English their reporting may be. Give these dregs nothing, and take them nowhere, the good ones like Michael Smith get sacked the rest are worthy of being ignored. Democracy allows a moderate free press, but like junk yard dogs, a choker chain is needed.

  12. C.L.

    It’s a question of degree, Rob.
    I have no problem with arseholes bashing horses being arrested and charged. They’re scum. But I dare say these filmed episodes were comparatively rare, overall. And of course the media will drive the narrative in a totally insane direction – shut down horse-racing, etc etc.

  13. candy

    It is in this environment that we need to find ways to empower journalism and not to penalise it,’’

    I’m not sure the public wants that, seeing the way various people/personalities/politicians can be demonised by the media until they are threatened with legal action and then they back off, like magic.

    Australian journalists can be a vicious bunch. On the whole I think the general public are suspicious of them.

  14. Idiots.
    Liberty is the cornerstone of democracy, and journalists should be free to do anything any other citizen may do, but no more.
    If journalists are free to carry out their trade it is because all citizens are free to do so. The idea journalists have any rights or privileges above those of any other citizen is anathema.

  15. Mother Lode

    Australian journalists can be a vicious bunch. On the whole I think the general public are suspicious of them.

    They are also hopelessly mediocre. They don’t deserve more privilege because they have nothing worthwhile to do with it.

    Their profession (separate from themselves) would benefit from them being put through the wringers when they lied, omitted relevant facts, or got basic matters of fact (where they are important to the story) wrong without even bothering to try to verify.

    Economics Editor Alberici with her ridiculous expose on taxation should have been sent of for gender reassignment and then had her bollocks lopped off. She had no idea just how egregiously flawed her diatribe was, and ABC management had no idea how ill-informed she was when they gave her the role.

  16. I_am_not_a_robot

    “Could” and “would” are descriptive while “should” is prescriptive: “… the ‘is–ought’ problem is also known as Hume’s law, Hume’s guillotine or fact–value gap …” (Wiki).

    Lawyers have lawyer-client privilege to protect the administration of justice, what benefit would result from ‘journalist’s privilege’ and who decides who is a ‘journalist’ anyway?
    I thought what attracted people to journalism was the raffish, devil-may-care, publish-and-be-damned, Bernstein & Woodward image.
    I think it’s a similar situation to defamation, obviously there are some aspects of government information that need to be protected by law, preferably a minimum, if a journalist chooses to take a risk as part of their calling then they must be prepared to take the consequences, whatever they are.

  17. Roger

    This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired.

    That applied to a free press, not a press captive to the Prog-Left agenda.

  18. old bloke

    It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

    Yes, good point.

  19. duncanm

    I_am_not_a_robot
    #3187341, posted on October 18, 2019 at 2:20 pm
    …who decides who is a ‘journalist’ anyway?

    .. and this, of course, is the first step along the road to doom.

    1. given journalists priviledge
    2. license journalists, so you can enforce step 1.
    3. make sure you license only the ‘right sort’ of journalist
    4. State-controlled media.

    Are they that stupid, or do they think that step 3. will always be under the control of their side?

  20. RobK

    CL,
    It’s a question of degree, Rob.
    I agree. However, to secretly film a guy doing a job that is not particularly pleasant, namely stunning and killing animals, for 18 months, then to show some highlights of what looks to be error without him being able to defend or explain his actions, is in my book a gross error in natural justice. In one example the guy leaned over and bolted the horse a further 4 times, presumably because he realises he may have got it wrong and became agitated by his own actions. That’s not what ABC suggests. No this guy is a monster in their eyes.
    Similarly, they showed course disrespectful language being used Fs and Cs etc. If they took the time to get to know these guys; if they haven’t said Fs andCs four or five times in a sentence, they haven’t finished it yet.
    Anyone who works with animals in these kind of situations knows that losing your cool with the stock only makes life much harder for everyone. That said there are times when tempers fray when things go wrong, especially overan 18 month period.
    I was disgusted by the conceitedness of the presentation and it’s clandestine operations.

  21. Slim Cognito

    Times have changed. The ability to do a bit of digging allows us to make up our own minds whether to believe what the MSM puts out. Previous generations never had that luxury.

    Most of the time it’s either misleading by omission or flat out BS to promote an agenda. The real pity is that most people don’t bother going any further and blindly accept what they read or hear.

  22. Crossie

    The press has no competence or role in filtering.

    They are just another dubious conduit.

    First, they do nothing but filter what they think the people should be allowed to know and my reaction to that is “How dare they?” This brings me to the second part, if they were just a conduit they would not be dubious. People would pick out of the stream what they wanted or needed, just as some read the sports pages while others leaf through the social pages.

  23. Steve

    If indeed the media is a cornerstone of democracy, then along with that comes a number of responsibilities: including timely, factual and complete (i.e. unfiltered) reporting – all of which large sections of the media fail to deliver.

  24. Crossie

    When they were anti-establishment they were a check on the mighty. Now they are part of the establishment they are a check on democracy. Could the ABC be any better an example of this if it tried?

    The ABC has always been the establishment, it’s just that the establishment is now rubbish and so is the ABC.

  25. Crossie

    Are they that stupid, or do they think that step 3. will always be under the control of their side?

    Stupid and arrogant yet so little to be arrogant about.

  26. Mother Lode

    First, they do nothing but filter

    I meant no role in us filtering the ore from the slag of the myriad sources of information we have access to.

    We resort to our own experience, our own sense, our own knowledge and logic to glean truth. The MSM does not contribute to any of those processes. Friends might – checking our reasoning as we discuss issues.

    But the media can only give more assertions supported by their own imagined authority.

    Which makes them as reliable as any other self-declared source of information. But a politician’s press secretary would make exactly the same claim.

  27. herodotus

    Just a few of the things the media have stamped “Secret”:
    1. That the climate scam is not founded on science and CO2 isn’t the culprit.
    2. That ruining our power system will not change the climate one bit.
    3. That indigenous people would be better off if they lived like regular Australians.
    4. That education is often in the hands of ideologically misguided and/or incompetent teachers.
    5. That Labor and Greens do not have the nation’s interests at heart.
    6. That our defence forces are often subjected to irrational media campaigns.
    7. That the media are for the most part left leaning players instead of honest reporters.
    8. That nuclear power is now safe and would make sense given all the policy idiocies governing power.
    9. That dams for new Hydro power stations (i.e. not their pumped boondoggles) and for water management should be built and that this outweighs enviro-loon concerns.
    10. That the NEM (along with AEMO) is stuffed and should be done away with until states shoulder the responsibilities of providing affordable and reliable power.
    11. That there are two genders and that gender dysphoria needs to be treated as a mental disorder not written about like it’s something that has to be indulged and encouraged.
    The list is so long it could take book form.

  28. Delcon

    Just curious: is anyone familiar with an example of an occasion whereby society actually benefited from all these laws for protection of sources: why would a source remain anonymous if they want what they say published?

  29. 2dogs

    changes to laws that include allowing media organisations to contest warrants by police

    I demand equality before the law. If the media gets this right, everyone must.

  30. Tel

    This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired. I’m becoming less and less convinced that it is true. It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

    They have plainly proven they are the cornerstone … demonstrating to us what happens when they let it slip so badly. I can’t imagine the country would have gotten into our current predicament without rotten media.

  31. Colonel Crispin Berka

    It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

    Mmm. It may be a statement contingent on technology. The media industry made democracy when the only information editing and dissemination methods were all expensive. Now that this is cheaper and decentralised, the media industry is unnecessary to democracy, but an informed public is still needed.

  32. C.L.

    … to secretly film a guy doing a job that is not particularly pleasant, namely stunning and killing animals, for 18 months, then to show some highlights of what looks to be error without him being able to defend or explain his actions, is in my book a gross error in natural justice.

    Yes. That’s becoming a real theme in Australia lately, isn’t it?
    Pell, Roberts-Smith etc. The ABC considers itself above the law.

  33. Squirrel

    “…the media were too pre-occupied with scoring cheap shots, talking about themselves, and/or promoting their own pet causes….” – that’s the (unofficial) duty statement.

    Just like Sherlock Holmes’ dog that didn’t bark in the night, the things the media does not talk about (or only ever pretend to talk about) says as much about what they’re up to as the things they do talk about.

  34. The BigBlueCat

    But the media were too pre-occupied with scoring cheap shots, talking about themselves, and/or promoting their own pet causes to pay any attention. Now they want a carve-out for themselves?

    Just say NO! The media is big on deciding what is in the “national interest” and using that schtick to defend actions that would see anyone else in jail. That the media is interested in creating national scandals for their readership does not mean that what they are peddling is necessarily “in the national interest” (even if the nation is interested), and an independent assessment needs to determine the veracity of the media’s declarations on this.

    The media must not be their own judge and jury when it comes to “national interest” – they can make a determination when publishing, but after that, they should be held accountable if they’ve crossed a line.

    We have a free press – they can make their own decisions on what to publish and what not to publish. If there are consequences to be had, they need to be scrutinised at law and cop the punishment.

  35. Old Lefty

    Meanwhile Gerard Henderson has got a concession from Ita Buttrose, who says that she doesn’t condone her 1975 Whitlam-appointed predecessor’s apparent condoning of p3derasty – though she’s still hedging her bets.

    But the ABC still stands by the actions of Richard Neville and his Marxist p3er3rt mates in refusing to cooperate with police inquiries into the activities of the self-proclaimed p3does to whom Neville and Ashbolt gave a public platform. Just imagine for a moment of it were a bishop, a private-school head or an ADF officer.

  36. Siltstone

    There are millions of “journalists” these days, anyone with a smart phone can film, record, write anywhere anytime and they have access to thousands of non-MSM outlets (like here, for example). The old media are still trying to pretend that old fashioned “journalists” are special. But most of us know that’s complete rubbish. When anyone with any speciality occupation or knowledge reads or hears a story from a MSM “journalist” about a topic that person has a good undertstanding of, they know the “journalistic” version is invariably either incompetent or malicious (or both). So naturally that audience discounts as rubbish other stories or opinion by said “journalist”. The term “journalist” is of no use anymore. anymore.

  37. Beachcomber

    This whole “media is a cornerstone of democracy” argument has become tired. I’m becoming less and less convinced that it is true. It may well be the case that democracy provides us with media, not media provides us with democracy.

    The media are the enemies of working people. Especially since the Universities started filling the media with the products of their “Schools of Journalism”.

    The Universities and the ABC should be de-funded immediately.

  38. RobK

    Delcon.
    why would a source remain anonymous if they want what they say published?
    Because in many cases gathering or releasing that information would constitute a crime.

  39. Beachcomber

    RobK at 4:27

    I was disgusted by the conceitedness of the (ABC) presentation and it’s clandestine operations.

    The distortion, misrepresentation and outright lies in these undercover “scoops” demonizing enemies of the Leftist establishment have become ABC standard operating procedure. It is disgusting and disgraceful that we pay for it with our taxes; and the Coalition surrenders to them every time.

    But it’s interesting. It’s becoming a repetitive. This time it may be that viewers are less convinced that it is a systemic scandal and are turning away because they understand that it is cynical cruelty porn.

  40. feelthebern

    Racing NSW & the ATC have both released statements regarding 7:30.
    Both condemn it etc etc etc.
    Then go on to point out errors in the 7:30 reporting.
    Here we go again…

  41. Howard Hill

    I agree with, Chris Harper. They’re not special, infact they’re not even average, scewem all!

  42. CameronH

    The press should have no more freedom than the rest of us. If they just stuck to reporting the facts they would probably not be in this position. Years of telling deliberate lies and making stuff up to suit their far left wing bias has got most people cheering for them to end up behind bars. This goes doubly for the hacks in their ABC.

  43. bespoke

    I don’t think romanticizing past media is helpful they have always had an agender it’s just we have tools to fact check them

  44. Gerry

    Maybe we could care more about “journalistic freedom” if they stopped being so biased, so anti-nationalist, so incredibly lazy and stopped spreading fake news they pick up from their enlightened mentors at NYT, CNN and BBC and their deity, the UN.

    The guys getting on with the job know what their doing and respect the boundaries. The ABC, Crikey, Age types only cross these issues when there’s a Liberal government to bring down and a globalist agenda to push.

  45. Percy Popinjay

    the number of people who struggle with the concepts of “could”, “would”, and “should” seems to an especial problem in the media

    Yes, some might be forgiven for thinking they’re a rabble of braindead illiterate shamelessly partisan know nothing hacks.

    Oh, wait …

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.