The inaugural issue of Gerard Henderson's Media Watch was published in April 1988 - over a year before the first edition of the ABC TV Media Watch went to air. Since November 1997 "Gerard Henderson's Media Watch" has been published as part of The Sydney Institute Quarterly. Gerard Henderson's Media Watch Dog commenced on 6 March 2009.
Issue 45
March 12th, 2010. .
GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG - ISSUE NO. 45
12 MARCH 2010
STOP PRESS
▪ Jon Faine Obsessively Nails An Obsession Of Others
What a great performance by ABC Radio 702 presenter Jon Faine on the ABC 2 News Breakfast this morning. Mr Faine was in the visitor’s chair to comment on the morning’s newspapers. The segment ran for around six minutes and focused on Aboriginal deaths in custody, the Australian economy, ABC chairman Maurice Newman’s speech last Wednesday to ABC managers and, of course, Lara Bingle.
However, Faine’s intensity focused on the Newman story as reported in The Australian. He commenced this segment by opining that The Australian had continued “its obsession [emphasised] with the ABC”. There followed a couple of minutes of Faine obsessively leading an ABC in-house discussion about The Australian’s alleged obsession with the ABC. Mr Faine went on to comment that The Australian had published Mr Newman’s entire speech, despite the fact that it was off-the-record, a few days after it was delivered. This overlooked the fact that Newman’s speech was leaked to Crikey within hours of it being delivered.
At least News Breakfast presenter Michael Rowland acknowledged that the ABC itself was a bit obsessed with Rupert Murdoch’s News Limited, the publisher of The Australian. You can say that again.
Meanwhile last Thursday Crikey came to the defence of ABC journalists and criticised its chairman for suggesting that the Australian media, including the public broadcaster, might do more to challenge the conventional wisdom on carbon emissions.
Believe it or not, Crikey’s sole evidence for its critique of Newman turned on a calculation of the media appearances of climate change agnostic Christopher Monckton (who was in Australia a month or so ago) and American climate change true believer James Hensen (who is in Australia). Is this all Crikey has to criticise Newman’s position? To make any proper assessment, Crikey would have to balance the coverage of all the agnostics against all the true believers - on the ABC and elsewhere.
▪ Your Taxpayer Dollars At Work - In Sydney And Melbourne
How many taxpayer funded academics does it take to discuss a United States presidential visit to Australia? No fewer than eleven, apparently. Last Tuesday, the United States Studies Centre at the University of Sydney put out a media alert advising that it had almost a dozen “experts available for Obama’s visit commentary”. Golly. MWD wonders what they do when President Obama is not in town. The Howard Government provided millions of dollars to establish the US Studies Centre in Sydney.
Meanwhile, what’s the taxpayer funded Grattan Institute doing? Quite a lot it appears. Jason Steger reported in The Age on 16 January that the powers that be at the Grattan Institute had issued the Prime Minister with a recommended reading list for his Christmas browsings. No kidding. The Rudd Government has provided millions of dollars to establish the Grattan Institute in Melbourne.
FIVE PAWS AWARD - OR THE NAKED JOURNALIST CONTINUED 
Some of MWD’s prestigious Five Paws Award gongs have been held in abeyance due to stiff competition. This week’s (belated) award goes to the Daily Telegraph’s Tim Vollmer who is continuing the fine tradition of journalists taking off their gear in public.
You see, Tim Vollmer stripped off in support of artist Spencer Tunick, who photographed losta naked folk outside Sydney Opera House on 28 February. To Vollmer it was all, apparently, an uplifting experience - so to speak. Mr Vollmer reflected on his moment in the public breeze in the Daily Telegraph on 2 March 2010:
In an era of airbrushed perfect bodies that leave people like me a little ashamed of their love handles, man boobs and stretch marks — yep, men can get them too — it was liberating to get a glimpse of the incredible beauty of the human form whatever its shape and size. No two bodies were alike. Each had its own sets of sags and wobbly bits. From hairless to hirsute, six packs to a full keg, tiny little boobs to bountiful bosoms, they were all represented. Being naked not only shattered the body-image myths, but it broke down social barriers as well. I found myself casually conversing with dozens of total strangers without regard for the boobs, bums and family jewels that dangled freely all around me. [What about their social ranking? - Ed]
Hang on a minute. How did Tim Vollner know that some types have “small boobs” when he maintains that he conversed with total strangers without regards for their boobs? Now for some illustrations.
Here are Mr Vollmer’s (very male) boobs:
And here are Nancy’s (very female) boobs:
NANCY’S PICK OF THE WEEK
George Negus - Lightweight of the Week
Can there be a more egotistical lightweight in the Australian media than the SBS Dateline presenter George Negus? [Is this the same George Negus who once wrote a book on contemporary Italy based only on the English language International Herald Tribune and its "Italy Daily" lift-out newspaper? Ed. See The Sydney Institute Quarterly Issue 14, July 2001].
Last Sunday on Dateline George Negus interviewed professional atheist Richard Dawkins. It was one of those interviews where many of Negus’ questions were longer than Dawkins’ answers. No surprise here - after all, George Negus is a great mate of the 7.30 Report presenter Kerry O’Brien who is also more interested in his questions than his guests’ answers. For the statistically minded, a word-count reveals that Richard Dawkins obtained just 50.5 per cent of the interview time with George Negus scoring 49.5 per cent. If you count the Negus introduction, there was more of Negus than there was of Dawkins. Here’s to The Cult of (Negus) Personality.
Negus concluded this segment on Dateline as follows:
Richard Dawkins. And if that doesn’t spark some pretty fiery dinner party carry-on, I don’t know what will!
In fact, the Negus/Dawkins conversation sunk without trace - so much so that it did not even spark breakfast discussion. For starters, Dateline has few viewers. Then there were Negus’ questions which were so mundane that even Professor Dawkins complained about the simplicity of his line of questions. Let’s go to one (long) Negus question and one (short) Dawkins response:
George Negus: Going back to something I said earlier - it wasn’t meant to be a totally facetious question - I wonder whether religious politicians ask themselves whose side God is on. After September 11, when George Bush gave the State of the Union address, at the end of that he concluded it - like all American presidents do - with the words “May God continue to protect America”. At the same time he was doing that, there were millions of Muslims all over the world asking God to protect them from him.
Richard Dawkins: Yes. Horrible. I mean, you know, you keep putting to me things that are playing into my hands that I don’t need to say anything because these are all points you should be putting to religious people and they should hang their heads in shame.
In spite of this advice, Negus did keep putting simplistic, and quite unoriginal, points to Dawkins and inviting him to have a free hit - so to speak. Presumably because Negus is not capable of asking an intellectual like Dawkins challenging and original questions.
Earlier on, Negus alleged that the Israeli security agency Mossad consisted of “people…of the Jewish religious faith who are secretly killing people in the name of God”. Negus obviously is ignorant of the fact that not all Israelis are Jews and not all Israeli Jews are religious believers. Moreover, there is no evidence that, if Mossad kills terrorists and other enemies of Israel, it does so “in the name of God”.
Nancy appreciates the fact that George Negus gives good copy. Even so, SBS should be able to find a Dateline presenter who can ask challenging questions and who knows at least something about Israel and Judaism.
RICHARD DAWKINS’ LACK OF AWARENESS
Richard Dawkins did Dateline on Sunday and Q&A on Monday. He is a wealthy man who flies up the front of the aircraft and addresses his adoring flock of atheists around the English speaking world. Last weekend Sydney. This weekend Melbourne. And so on. It’s a great - and materially rewarding and intellectually enriching - life.
MWD was intrigued by Richard Dawkins’ comments on Q&A last Monday when he responded to a comment by fellow panelist Julie Bishop that she hoped that there was life after death since she wished “that there’s something beyond what we have on earth”. To which Dr Dawkins replied:
But when you say: “Is this it?” How much more do you want? I mean, this [life] is wonderful.
Well, it is if you are an educated Brit who flies business class around the world, stays in fine accommodation and writes books which others claim to read. But not all of mankind lives like Professor Dawkins. For many, life is somewhat Hobbesian - as in nasty, brutish and short. Richard Dawkins seems unaware precisely why the rural poor in India or China might find solace in Hinduism or Buddhism. Alas, the point was totally missed by Q&A presenter Tony Jones.
CATHERINE DEVENY - TYPICAL RANT (PITY ABOUT THE SPELLING)
While on the topic of Q&A, the truly great stand-up comedian Catherine Deveny - who is also a sit-down weekly columnist for The Age - is making (yet another) appearance on the program on Monday. This engagement is proudly announced on Ms Deveny’s blog where she declares: “On Monday I appear (for the third time) on ABC’s Q&A.” Yes, we know. Well done - and so on.
Catherine Deveny was recruited by one-time editor of The Age Andrew Jaspan. As documented previously, she has four basic topics which are recycled most months. Namely:
1. God is dead - and all believers are idiots.
2. Private education sucks - and no government funds should go to non-government schools.
3. Marriage is for losers - and all married types are idiots. Married believers are even bigger losers (see 1 above).
4. The poorly educated deserve mocking and having their “bogan” shopping delights in Northland and Chadstone reported in The Age - where the better educated living in inner-city Melbourne can privately sneer at the less well educated living in the suburbs.
MWD went looking for Catherine Deveny’s weekly Age column on Wednesday only to find that it has been spiked. The good news is that Deveny ran the piece on her blog - where it appeared without the corrections for The Age’s sub-editors. The planned column fitted with Deveny’s favourite topic - namely, an attack on Catholicism.
Here is a paragraph from Deveny’s unpublished column in all its non-grammatical form.
The Catholic Church let [sic] pedophiles speak from their [sic] pulpit but ban [sic] a feminist atheist speak [sic] in it’s [sic] parish hall. Whose right to free speech would Jesus deny?
The fact is that there is no evidence that the Catholic Church allows known pedophiles to speak from its pulpits. If Catherine Deveny has anyone in mind, she should name names or go to the police. Ms Deveny is upset that she was not allowed to deliver this diatribe at a Catholic facility in Victoria. In turn, The Age did not want to be publish her particular rant. Here are some other “highlights” from Deveny’s spiked column:
▪ “The only thing that would make me any happier is if they burned me at the stake.”
▪ “The Bible is a weapon of mass oppression”.
▪ “They [sic] only way they [the Catholic Church] can stop me is to kill me. Which I’m sure they’d love to.”
▪ Anyone who enables the church’s behavior cannot distance themselves from their [sic] actions.”
Believe it or not, “The Guardian-on-the-Yarra publishes this Deveny sludge weekly. Except for last Wednesday. MWD cannot wait until next Wednesday when The Age’s highly paid snobbish columnist - who believes that the Catholic Church wants to murder her - returns to write about one of her (predictable) topics. Will Ms Deveny have another bash at potential Age readers in the suburbs? Stay tuned.
NO NEWS ON THE FRASER FRONT
Margaret Simons, who co-authored Malcolm Fraser: The Political Memoirs (The Miegunyah Press, 2010) with Malcolm Fraser himself, is a known reader of MWD. Yet it is MWD’s melancholy duty to report that neither Ms Simons - nor indeed Mr Fraser - have been back in touch to confirm that the meeting of the National Security Council in Washington DC held on 30 April 1982, did really commence at 5 am. See Issue 44.
According to Malcolm Fraser: The Political Memoirs, in April 1982 Fraser convinced George W. H. Bush, then visiting Australia, to phone Washington D.C. and convince the Reagan administration to support Britain in the Falkland conflict - thus saving the good people of the Falkland Islands, the NATO Alliance and all that.
According to Mark Colvin in The Drum (3 March 2010), Malcolm Fraser said that Bush’s phone call was made at the Lodge in Canberra at 7 pm local time - which happened to be 5 am the same day in Washington DC. Since the only evidence for this alleged event is Mr Fraser’s memory, MWD would like to know if Margaret Simons really believes that the National Security Council commenced its meeting on 30 April 1982 at 5 o’clock in the morning - and, if not, what is the standing of this particular scoop. We’ll keep you posted.
HISTORY CORNER
Believe it or not, it is close to three decades since Mungo MacCallum returned from the Canberra Press Gallery and went to live in Ocean Shores (close to Byron Bay) and to drink at the Billinudgel Hotel (close to the front bar).
The story is told in Mungo MacCallum’s memoirs titled Mungo: The Man Who Laughs (Duffy & Snellgrove). Your man Mungo recounted how political life lost all meaning after the dismissal of Gough Whitlam’s Labor government in November 1975 and Labor’s subsequent defeat at the December 1975 election. Mungo recounted how, in the aftermath of the defeat, he “spent a lot of time hanging around Whitlam’s office” (in 1976 and 1977 Whitlam was leader of the Opposition) and did more than his “share of Fraser-baiting”. As Liberal Party prime minister, Malcolm Fraser was much hated by leftists like Mungo. Remember?
After a while, Mungo’s pining after Whitlam’s political ghost became somewhat embarrassing. So, within a few years, he quit the Canberra Press Gallery and, as he put it, “semi-retired to the beach”. You see, Mungo did not really like the Labor government headed by Bob Hawke and Paul Keating and maintained that “it was a cautious, plodding Labor” government. Mungo concluded his memoirs committed to the principles of the left but acknowledging that “the world is not ready for the left….but Byron Shire just might be”. How about that?
For a bloke who went into retirement nearly 30 years ago, Mungo gets a surprisingly good run in the media. Last Saturday he reviewed Niki Savva’s book So Greek: Confessions of a Conservative Leftie (Scribe, 2010) in The Age. For coverage of So Greek, see Issues 43 and 44.
Alas, in his review in “The Guardian-on-the-Yarra”, Mungo refrained from mentioning Savva’s account of how in the early 1970s Mungo claimed that he managed to drink lotsa beer while remaining slim by vomiting aplenty. Also there was no mention of the fact that, some years ago, Savva was driven out of The Age because she was devoting too much time to looking after her terminally ill sister. This event caused Savva to reflect in So Greek:
The Age is really good at delivering lectures on the humane treatment of people, and I applaud them for it, but forgive me if I occasionally become impatient with sermons from the bleeding heart brigade on how we should all show more compassion.
In his Age review, Mungo had virtually nothing to say about the Canberra Press Gallery. Little surprise really - because he gave up full employment at Parliament House when many of today’s Press Gallery types were in primary school. In spite of his semi-retired status, Mungo still writes an occasional Quarterly Essay for Morry Schwartz’s Black Inc., still scribbles for the Crikey newsletter and still makes an appearance or so on ABC Radio National.
MWD was most surprised by Mungo MacCallum’s leftist essay titled “Australian Story: Kevin Rudd and the Lucky Country” (Quarterly Essay, Issue 36, 2009). Highlights of this tome are many and varied - but let’s settle on the following:
▪ Page 2. MM asserts that Kevin Rudd often appears to lack “an unquestioning commitment to the Labor cause”. This overlooks the fact that Rudd became a member of the ALP at age 15. How committed to Labor do you need to be? Should future Labor leaders be required to join the ALP while in primary school, perhaps even kindergarten?
▪ Page 20. MM asserts that Kevin Rudd is a bit like William Lane - the mad visionary who set off in the late 19th Century to establish a utopia in Paraguay. According to MM, “Kevin Rudd would perhaps have shared some of Lane’s initial idealism and would certainly have applauded his puritanism”. What absolute tosh. It’s hard to imagine anyone more different from Lane than Rudd.
▪ Page 36. MM claims that President George W. Bush conferred on John Howard “the title of Deputy Sheriff”. No source is cited. No surprise really - since this title was conferred on Howard by Australian journalists, mainly by members of the Canberra Press Gallery.
▪ Page 39. MM asserts that “Irish Catholics” in Australia between 1914 and 1918 “did not want to fight in England’s war”. In fact, Catholic enlistments in the Australian Imperial Force during the First World War reflected the percentage of young Catholic men in Australia at the time.
▪ Page 42. According to MM, between the wars, “the only serious outbreak of anti-British feeling came from the die-hard Tories”:
When the Australian wicketkeeper Bert Oldfield was felled by Harold Larwood during the 1930 [sic] “Bodyline” test series, my grandfather, titular head of the seriously establishment Wentworth clan, stood in his place in the members’ stand at the SCG and thundered: “If England were to go to war tomorrow, not a single Australian would fight by her side.”
How (truly) moving. The English fast bowler Harold Larwood bowls a ball which hits Bert Oldfield in the head and “Grandpa” William Charles Wentworth stands in the Members’ Stand at the Sydney Cricket Ground and declares that no Aussie will ever fight for King and Country again. Moving - until you remember that Oldfield was hit by Larwood in the Third Test in Adelaide - not the First Test or the Fifth Test, both of which were played in Sydney.
Perhaps Mungo’s maternal grandfather had a powerful radio and listened to the Adelaide Test while on his lonesome at the Sydney Cricket Ground. Or perhaps Mungo’s memory has been afflicted by too much of the amber stuff. By the way, the Bodyline series took place during the summer of 1932-1933 - not in 1930. [Hasn't Morry Schwartz got around to employing a fact-checker yet? - Ed.]
▪ Page 62. MM describes the International Monetary Fund as a “dinosaur” - an “institution loathed by the left, a neo-liberal throwback under the effective control of the bankers of Washington”. This suggests that the front bar at the Billinudgel Hotel has yet to learn that the IMF’s managing director is Dominique Strauss-Kahn, a member of France’s Socialist Party and a possible challenger to France’s incumbent conservative president Nicolas Sarkozy. Dr Strauss-Kahn is anything but a neo-liberal and is currently using the IMF to revive European socialism. Should we go on? [No - but you could mention Mungo's recent stunning performance on ABC Radio National during next week's issue - Ed.]
Until next time.