Essential Reading

Insights from Quadrant
Insights from Quadrant

ABC-style

It has long been the case that reporters craft their contributions to the sum of human knowledge with a “style book” by the keyboard, or at least in the top drawer. All news organisations have them, each different in their own ways and some extraordinarily picayune. In the US, for example, Associated Press only recently dropped its long-standing insistence that “teen-age” be hyphenated. Closer to home, a Herald & Weekly Times style edict from the mid-Seventies banned the use of “stories” to describe its newspapers’ content, the logic being that while a story might be fictional, what the Herald and Sun News-Pictorial published every day were fact-filled testaments to truth. Today, the Herald Sun‘s website advises visitors that ‘Stories start here’, which demonstrates how times, language and chief subeditors change over the years. Reporters who don’t like being upbraided by subeditors still pay close attention, trying never to forget such things as the distinction between a ballpoint, which is a pen, and a Biro, which is a tradename and always requires a capital letter.

The ABC has a style book too, one that appears to have undergone some recent revisions.

For instance, take Fran Kelly’s broadcast of May 3, 2011, when she introduced an item on the death of Osama bin Laden by assuring listeners that

Obama won’t want to see this in political terms but it certainly strengthens his hand.

The audio that followed was favourable to the then-president and featured the thoughts of ardent admirer and Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, the only slight negative being Ms Kelly’s passing thought that the spectacle of Americans celebrating a mass murderer’s demise might be seen as “triumphalism”.

This morning, when the ABC reported the death of another Islamicist butcher, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, it was evident that the national broadcaster’s style book has changed with the president. Where Ms Kelly assured readers that the thought of electoral advantage hadn’t crossed Obama’s mind, current Washington correspondent James Glenday tapped his clairvoyant powers to reveal what President Trump will be saying on the campaign trail, even casting his prediction in the faux first-person:

You know the guy that inspired those terrorist attacks in Europe and those brutal executions that were filmed and broadcast?

Well, we got him. I made sure we got him.

Nor was Glenday stingy with the damning adjectives. Mr Trump was “boastful” and guilty of “inflammatory language”, although just who might be driven to fiery anger at the death of a man who killed many and, at the end, blew himself up in the company of three children was never explained.

By Glenday’s reckoning, Trump also  “rambled”, which was to be expected in such a “chaotic” White House. And the ABC man slipped in a little sneer when commenting on the photo reproduced atop this post.

Expect this photo, which the White House says was taken in the situation room, to be wheeled out again and again on the 2020 trail.

Notice the “says”? Not one to be deceived, Glenday isn’t going to believe a word out of the Trump administration, not even a detail so mundane as the location at which a picture was taken. There were no sneers nor doubts, however, when, back in 2011, the ABC happily displayed Obama and Mrs Clinton watching the action in the very same situation room as Osama bin Laden met his end.

Readers curious to see if this post is an uncharitable appraisal of the ABC’s reporting can watch Trump’s announcement and entire 40-plus minute press conference by following this link.

— roger franklin

Insights from Quadrant

Clappered-out
credibility

It was June  17, 2017, and the cream of Canberra journalism was clotted at the National Press Club to have preconceptions and prejudices about the Trump administration burnished by James Clapper (above), who was in town to pick up some quick pocket change for a FIFO gig at ANU. With the Russiagate hoax in full swing, the hacks  were keen to absorb the alleged insights of the man who served as Barack Obama’s national security adviser and, as he put it, spoke with the authority of an operative with “fifty-plus years in the intel business”.

Things were crook in Washington, Clapper told his audience, what with this Trump creature upsetting apple carts and doing the Russians’ bidding. That was when Mark Kenny of what was then the Fairfax press wondered what would become of America and Australian-US relations with such a rogue in the White House. Clapper replied:

…Watergate pales really, in my view, compared to what we’re confronting now.

I will add at least this American isn’t walking away, put it that way. I will just speak for myself.

Two years on, the Mueller probe having found nothing and with US federal investigators now looking into the origins and perpetrators of the Russiagate hoax which inspired it, Clapper is still speaking for himself, albeit in a somewhat shaken and lost-for-words manner.

Appearing on CNN mere minutes after the news broke that probers are poised to drag him and others into a criminal investigation, with the distinct possibility of grand jury appearances, perjury risks and charges being laid, the confident Clapper seen in Canberra was not in evidence.

For more on the net closing about Clapper and other Deep Staters, the links below are instructive.

Bombshells from the Flynn investigation

Durham investigation goes ‘criminal’ and the media shudders

Insights from Quadrant

Googling bias

Douglas Murray, keen to highlight the leftoid prejudice that shapes Google’s search results, urges the curious to search for “gay couples” in Google Images.

This is what the results present.

As a second experiment, he also recommends searching on “straight couples”.

This is what turns up.

In the clip below he explains what’s afoot. Even those vehemently opposed to regulating the media will find it hard to disagree that the search-engine outfit could use some vigorous persuasion to adopt a straight-bat approach to serving its users’ needs.

Insights from Quadrant

Ayers Rock,
almost gone

Marc Hendrickx, who has led a passionate crusade to keep Ayers Rock/Uluru open to climbers, tried to have the ad reproduced above inserted in the pages of the Age and SMH, which both rejected it.  While things must be looking up at the former Fairfax rags, which can apparently afford to knock back ad dollars, Marc remains ropeable. He writes:

This is all wrong! The park board and the petty bureaucrats of Parks Australia have stolen my dreams for my children with their empty words and lies. How dare they! And yet I am one of the lucky ones. I was able to climb. My children, and their children and their children’s children will not be able to climb and share the joy and wonder of views listed as World Heritage by the United Nations.

How dare you!

For more than 30,000 years people have been climbing Ayers Rock. The first humans to see the Rock climbed it. Past Anangu owners like Paddy Uluru and Tiger Tjalkalyirri climbed it, and they were happy to share the climb with visitors. Since 1958 over seven million people, men, women, children, families and lovers have climbed it. They came from all over the world — and now you tell me that Anangu never climb? I am sick of your lies. How dare you

The lease agreement protects cultural heritage in the Park. It protects the climb. The World Heritage agreement protects the views. What is the point of protecting views if nobody can see them. How dare you!

You pretend the climb is especially sacred, even though Paddy Uluru and his brother said it wasn’t. Why do you make stuff up? How dare you!

You say the climb is dangerous when we know it is safer than a visit to the Grand Canyon or diving on the Great Barrier Reef. For people under 50 in good health the risk is the same as flying there. How dare you!

You say that less than 20 per cent of visitors want to climb when we can see with our own eyes what a nonsense that is.

How dare you say climbers are damaging the Rock when it has been there for 70 million years, and it will be there for 70 million more.

How dare you say climbers crap on the Rock. There is only one toilet around the Rock, where do you think the base walkers go? Do they carry excrement in their pockets?

How dare you blame visitors for management’s deficiencies.

How dare you deny the science in favour of animist nonsense. You eagerly trap generations in a cultural prison. How will they escape if they reject science because you won’t tell them about it?

Young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of future generations will be upon you. And if you fail us, we will never forgive you. This is where we draw the line. Change is coming whether you like it or not.

Almost alone, Quadrant has covered the history, culture and myths surrounding the Rock and the climb. That coverage can be accessed via these links.

Essential Reading

Insights from Quadrant
Insights from Quadrant

ABC-style

It has long been the case that reporters craft their contributions to the sum of human knowledge with a “style book” by the keyboard, or at least in the top drawer. All news organisations have them, each different in their own ways and some extraordinarily picayune. In the US, for example, Associated Press only recently dropped its long-standing insistence that “teen-age” be hyphenated. Closer to home, a Herald & Weekly Times style edict from the mid-Seventies banned the use of “stories” to describe its newspapers’ content, the logic being that while a story might be fictional, what the Herald and Sun News-Pictorial published every day were fact-filled testaments to truth. Today, the Herald Sun‘s website advises visitors that ‘Stories start here’, which demonstrates how times, language and chief subeditors change over the years. Reporters who don’t like being upbraided by subeditors still pay close attention, trying never to forget such things as the distinction between a ballpoint, which is a pen, and a Biro, which is a tradename and always requires a capital letter.

The ABC has a style book too, one that appears to have undergone some recent revisions.

For instance, take Fran Kelly’s broadcast of May 3, 2011, when she introduced an item on the death of Osama bin Laden by assuring listeners that

Obama won’t want to see this in political terms but it certainly strengthens his hand.

The audio that followed was favourable to the then-president and featured the thoughts of ardent admirer and Washington Post columnist E.J. Dionne, the only slight negative being Ms Kelly’s passing thought that the spectacle of Americans celebrating a mass murderer’s demise might be seen as “triumphalism”.

This morning, when the ABC reported the death of another Islamicist butcher, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, it was evident that the national broadcaster’s style book has changed with the president. Where Ms Kelly assured readers that the thought of electoral advantage hadn’t crossed Obama’s mind, current Washington correspondent James Glenday tapped his clairvoyant powers to reveal what President Trump will be saying on the campaign trail, even casting his prediction in the faux first-person:

You know the guy that inspired those terrorist attacks in Europe and those brutal executions that were filmed and broadcast?

Well, we got him. I made sure we got him.

Nor was Glenday stingy with the damning adjectives. Mr Trump was “boastful” and guilty of “inflammatory language”, although just who might be driven to fiery anger at the death of a man who killed many and, at the end, blew himself up in the company of three children was never explained.

By Glenday’s reckoning, Trump also  “rambled”, which was to be expected in such a “chaotic” White House. And the ABC man slipped in a little sneer when commenting on the photo reproduced atop this post.

Expect this photo, which the White House says was taken in the situation room, to be wheeled out again and again on the 2020 trail.

Notice the “says”? Not one to be deceived, Glenday isn’t going to believe a word out of the Trump administration, not even a detail so mundane as the location at which a picture was taken. There were no sneers nor doubts, however, when, back in 2011, the ABC happily displayed Obama and Mrs Clinton watching the action in the very same situation room as Osama bin Laden met his end.

Readers curious to see if this post is an uncharitable appraisal of the ABC’s reporting can watch Trump’s announcement and entire 40-plus minute press conference by following this link.

— roger franklin

Insights from Quadrant

Clappered-out
credibility

It was June  17, 2017, and the cream of Canberra journalism was clotted at the National Press Club to have preconceptions and prejudices about the Trump administration burnished by James Clapper (above), who was in town to pick up some quick pocket change for a FIFO gig at ANU. With the Russiagate hoax in full swing, the hacks  were keen to absorb the alleged insights of the man who served as Barack Obama’s national security adviser and, as he put it, spoke with the authority of an operative with “fifty-plus years in the intel business”.

Things were crook in Washington, Clapper told his audience, what with this Trump creature upsetting apple carts and doing the Russians’ bidding. That was when Mark Kenny of what was then the Fairfax press wondered what would become of America and Australian-US relations with such a rogue in the White House. Clapper replied:

…Watergate pales really, in my view, compared to what we’re confronting now.

I will add at least this American isn’t walking away, put it that way. I will just speak for myself.

Two years on, the Mueller probe having found nothing and with US federal investigators now looking into the origins and perpetrators of the Russiagate hoax which inspired it, Clapper is still speaking for himself, albeit in a somewhat shaken and lost-for-words manner.

Appearing on CNN mere minutes after the news broke that probers are poised to drag him and others into a criminal investigation, with the distinct possibility of grand jury appearances, perjury risks and charges being laid, the confident Clapper seen in Canberra was not in evidence.

For more on the net closing about Clapper and other Deep Staters, the links below are instructive.

Bombshells from the Flynn investigation

Durham investigation goes ‘criminal’ and the media shudders

Insights from Quadrant

Googling bias

Douglas Murray, keen to highlight the leftoid prejudice that shapes Google’s search results, urges the curious to search for “gay couples” in Google Images.

This is what the results present.

As a second experiment, he also recommends searching on “straight couples”.

This is what turns up.

In the clip below he explains what’s afoot. Even those vehemently opposed to regulating the media will find it hard to disagree that the search-engine outfit could use some vigorous persuasion to adopt a straight-bat approach to serving its users’ needs.

Insights from Quadrant

Ayers Rock,
almost gone

Marc Hendrickx, who has led a passionate crusade to keep Ayers Rock/Uluru open to climbers, tried to have the ad reproduced above inserted in the pages of the Age and SMH, which both rejected it.  While things must be looking up at the former Fairfax rags, which can apparently afford to knock back ad dollars, Marc remains ropeable. He writes:

This is all wrong! The park board and the petty bureaucrats of Parks Australia have stolen my dreams for my children with their empty words and lies. How dare they! And yet I am one of the lucky ones. I was able to climb. My children, and their children and their children’s children will not be able to climb and share the joy and wonder of views listed as World Heritage by the United Nations.

How dare you!

For more than 30,000 years people have been climbing Ayers Rock. The first humans to see the Rock climbed it. Past Anangu owners like Paddy Uluru and Tiger Tjalkalyirri climbed it, and they were happy to share the climb with visitors. Since 1958 over seven million people, men, women, children, families and lovers have climbed it. They came from all over the world — and now you tell me that Anangu never climb? I am sick of your lies. How dare you

The lease agreement protects cultural heritage in the Park. It protects the climb. The World Heritage agreement protects the views. What is the point of protecting views if nobody can see them. How dare you!

You pretend the climb is especially sacred, even though Paddy Uluru and his brother said it wasn’t. Why do you make stuff up? How dare you!

You say the climb is dangerous when we know it is safer than a visit to the Grand Canyon or diving on the Great Barrier Reef. For people under 50 in good health the risk is the same as flying there. How dare you!

You say that less than 20 per cent of visitors want to climb when we can see with our own eyes what a nonsense that is.

How dare you say climbers are damaging the Rock when it has been there for 70 million years, and it will be there for 70 million more.

How dare you say climbers crap on the Rock. There is only one toilet around the Rock, where do you think the base walkers go? Do they carry excrement in their pockets?

How dare you blame visitors for management’s deficiencies.

How dare you deny the science in favour of animist nonsense. You eagerly trap generations in a cultural prison. How will they escape if they reject science because you won’t tell them about it?

Young people are starting to understand your betrayal. The eyes of future generations will be upon you. And if you fail us, we will never forgive you. This is where we draw the line. Change is coming whether you like it or not.

Almost alone, Quadrant has covered the history, culture and myths surrounding the Rock and the climb. That coverage can be accessed via these links.