A drawing a day: Still shameless
The drawing: Keeping up with the Jones.
SMH: “Broadcaster Alan Jones says his advertisers have become the victims of “cyberbullying” and online campaigns like the one that has stripped him of sponsors should be illegal.”
Er, it’s probably what the boycott-protestors call freedom of speech. Even, and up to, including this remark, by Professor Bunyip, blogging on that arch defender of wet-lefty views, the John Howard-approved Quadrant:
“Of all Australia’s many shames, few can rival the disgrace of being forced to share the continent with the likes of Alan Jones, who quite clearly needs to be silenced, ruined financially and shunned by all decent people and former advertisers.” (Though you must read to the end to enjoy the editor’s resiling.)
Macquarie Radio: “The avalanche of telephone, email and Facebook demands to our advertisers to “boycott” the Alan Jones Breakfast Show, and the threats to destroy their businesses if they don’t comply, are coming almost entirely from people who do not listen to Alan Jones, or 2GB, at all, probably never have done and never will … What we are seeing here is 21st-century censorship, via cyber-bullying.”
But they are true altrusists, the Macquarie folk: “The decision (to suspend advertising) is an insignificant price to pay for our audience to be able to listen to what they choose to listen to, and for Australian companies to advertise where they choose to advertise.” (It’s all very odd: how is suspending advertising allowing companies to advertise where they choose?)
Then again, as the ad man says: “Advertisers are very savvy. They have their people go on social media to say ‘We’re pulling our advertising’ but that’s code for ‘We’re pulling our advertising until this blows over…’ ”
But how will Jonesy sweep around town now that his $250K sponsored Mercedes-Benz has been repoed: “We want the car back, the deal is cancelled, it is over. We were appalled and shocked…”
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.
Where’s John Singleton in all this. Maybe he should
wheel out the Workers Party for one more spin around the block.
Jones can freely attack people, who cant answer him ,like the deceased father of the Prime minister but he squeells it is bullying if anyone suggests companies should not advertise on his program.Alan have you heard about pots calling kettles black.By the way when are you going to tell us why you were arrested in a public toilet in the UK?
Jones is a dimwit, but I am personally worried about what’s happening here. I do believe that many of those boycotting his show and asking for advertisers to pull advertising are people that don’t even listen to his show. How can we be sure that these people don’t have a hidden agenda just to get him off the air? I think it’s an issue we need to address. Advertises might have accepted his apology, but they only pulled advertising once the outcry began from, as has been proven by the station’s own research, people that have no interest in the show to begin with.
People are working very, very hard to get him off the air, which is not a good thing. If you don’t like what he has to say, turn off. It’s as simple as that. I am really concerned about the response to this. The man has apologised, admitted his wrong doing, and deserves public scrutiny. But people keep going on and on about it. It’s OK to call Abbott a woman-hating sexist, but say anything about PM Gillard and you’re a sexist pig that doesn’t deserve a voice.
We need to all calm down, step back and look at what this is really doing to a voice with a very large following. I just don’t believe that people are doing this exclusively because of what he said. This is a campaign to shut up a conservative shock jock. It’s quite clear that’s what’s happening.
Also, the author might want to do some research: Jones’ advertising deal with Mercedes ended before the comments at the Liberal party event. The car was taken away because of the comments, but Mercedes ended its advertising deal before this event occurred.
IC-1101 Stop trotting out this nonsensical taking point. What difference does it make if I refuse to listen to the Poison Parrot on 2GB?
If his appalling racism and misogyny is being supported by, say, Harvey Norman – where I shop regularly, I have every right to say to HN, ‘As long as you support this bigot I will shop elsewhere.’
It’s their choice to tell me to rack off. Or they could think about what the message their support for this foul little excuse for a man is giving the world about HN ethics. If HN supports racism – especially against Middle Eastern Australians – and the hatred of women then they are very welcome to continue supporting him and I’ll go and get my electronics elsewhere.
I realise this might be a little too sophisticated for the average 2GB listener, but you seem bright enough to able to use a computer so have a try at getting your head around it…
What’s more interesting to me is the fact that this comment is one of his less appalling pieces of bigotry. The straw that broke the Parrot’s back.
Cheers
Jeff
Well said, IC-1101. People need to remember that this is exactly what happened after that absurd The Circle “Never, ever mock a war hero” controversy earlier this year. The fact that we don’t like Jones shouldn’t make us any less concerned by the way in which this kind of tactic (flood the sponsors’ inbox!) is becoming entrenched in all manner of situations.
This type of phenomenon serves two primary functions:
1) It gives corporates a chance to big-note themselves and get their company’s name in the papers: “Hey everyone, look at us standing up for morality and decency!” Most of them are back on board before long.
2) It validates mob ‘outrage’, usually encouraged by media hysteria.
We can all sit back and applaud now because a big bad hatemonger is getting his come-uppance, but don’t be too surprised if a genuinely important, subversive voice is silenced in the future in a similar manner.
It’s amazing that some progressives are content to not only applaud Jones’s demise, but defend the way in which it is being done. I think they may be confusing people power with a lynch-mob.
David Heslin, it’s amusing that you condemn ‘media hysteria’ and then go on to summon up the spectre of a ‘lynch mob’ as your concluding flourish. Let’s assume some people involved in the online campaign do have more long-standing reasons for their protest than the recent verbal thuggery concerning Julia Gillard’s father. So what? Why on earth is it sinister for people to use online speech to oppose someone who has used broadcast speech to manipulate public response to political events for decades? Why are they ‘a mob’? I suppose you know that the modern concept of free speech arose in response to attempts by those who had formerly dominated public discourse (eg, the Church)to crush the threat of the printing press. Why shouldn’t we conclude that you are similarly scared of the new forms of speech allowed by the internet? Why do you equate the exercise of free speech on the net with physical violence. Feels distinctly ‘hysterical’ to this reader.
As Moloch said. Jones was quoted as saying in other circumstances the police would be brought in – to do what? arrest me and make me spend my money at stores that sponsor Jones?
What I (or any one else) does with their money is entirely their business. Who someone does business with is entirely their business. If someone wants to arrange a boycott (for whatever reason) they have that right. It is up to the boycotted firms to respond as they see fit.
As for:
I imagine that a genuine dissenter would have difficulty in finding corporate sponsorship but let’s look at how dissent is really treated, I give you the occupy protests, ASIO and special branch files on dissenters just for starters.
Heslin ! Lynch confusion ? Depending upon which end your hangin’ off …… ? The Lynchee is not confused any longer, and the Lynchers only wonder why this outcome was not arrived at sooner …… There, you might project further. No thanks required.
Schaffer, I’m not scared by the internet one bit. Hell, I’m a child of the internet age; it’s so much part of the wallpaper that it didn’t even strike me that it played an important role in this story.
I suppose it has, now you mention it. Without the immediacy of the net, petitions like the one on change.org (with over 100,000 signatures) would barely get off the ground, let alone gain the support of more than 100,000 people, many unlikely to take more than 30 seconds to even consider the implications of what’s being proposed.
Don’t confuse my argument with Jones’s world’s-tiniest-violin symphony. I’m not claiming that expressing displeasure to sponsors about their associations should somehow be unlawful; that’s completely absurd. What concerns me is the mob mentality behind these kinds of responses. As we saw with the George Negus/Yumi Stynes moral panic, it’s as arbitrary as it is careless. When you realise that what really provokes this kind of thing is the breaking of taboo, not offences against any sort of morality, you’ll understand why some of us think it’s dangerous.
izatso, Lynch confusion? Moi? I can indeed tell my Eraserheads from my Blue Velvets, if that’s what you’re scurriously asserting!
Wait … what is wrong with breaking taboos? I’ve tried it and it was quite pleasant. But really, why do you insist on describing the internet response as the work of ‘mobs’? Surely not to distinguish them from the fans Jones whips up to mass action on a regular basis? You don’t think that Jones exploits that little frisson of taboo smashage every time he abuses one of the endless victims of his scorn? Aaide from just saying ‘mob’, what exactly distinguishes internet users from the ‘rusted on’ mass audience that Jones cateers to and which has enjoyed a disproportionate influence on state and federal policy for decades as a result of his ability to intimidate? How exactly have you divined the mental state or moral motivations of tens of thousands? Feels like a scene in a David Lynch film where the perpetrator suddenly morphs into the victim without any diegetic explanation
The Liberal Cyber Goons streaming “CYBER BULLYING” in defence of Jones have got to be joking!!…They have ben throwing garbage at the PM for a very long time. in any forum and Chat Room they can squeeze into – REGARDLESS of the topic!
It looks to me as if they have been using the same script writer as Alan Jones!… “Juliar” “Cow” “Commie bitch” “Red headed witch” Their campaign of Cyber Bullying against Julia Gillard has been RELENTLESS and very very NASTY!!
Jones and his Liberal Party CYBER BULLy cohorts are getting their just deserts! They have been pounding the PM’s ass, relentlesly and viciously, for a long time! Really NASTY stuff! The Libs are offering no policies to stake their claim for their ‘right to rule’…all they are doing is insulting, abusing and attacking in incumbent government! POOR LOSERS!
er…THE incumbent government
Please login below to comment, OR simply register here :
Thank you for registering, we have just sent you a confirmation email, which includes your new password to be entered below.