Facebook Google Menu Linkedin lock Pinterest Search Twitter

Advertisement

Posted

Feb 21, 2012

Hun bases its attack on Gillard on its own lies about "plasma TVs" for refugees

Don't you love it when newspapers repeat their

User login status :

Share

Pure Poison IconDon’t you love it when newspapers repeat their previous bullshit as justification for the next line of bullshit?

Take today’s WE DEMAND ANOTHER ELECTION JUST LIKE WE’VE BEEN DOING SINCE RIGHT AFTER THE LAST ONE ONLY 18 MONTHS AGO WHEN OUR MATES IN THE LIBERAL PARTY LOST editorial in the Herald Sun:


Ms Gillard’s blunders are too numerous to mention here, although that claim might’ve been more credible if the one we’d chosen to run above wasn’t complete rubbish.

The attractive and well-informed readers of Pure Poison of course will be able to see that the Herald Sun is pulling a fast one. As we noted when Gemma Jones’ steaming pile of manipulative garbage first oozed its way onto the less reputable news-stands, the inferences which the Herald Sun editors pretend to believe bear little relation to fact. The $10,000 figure (actually $9850) is the maximum for furnishing homes into which the Department is going to put families of nine people or more – not, as the wording infers, $10,000 per refugee. It’s also not a “home package” as if they get to keep it. The TV is a basic small one, the cheapest you could buy. Nowhere in the material Gemma presented is there any evidence that it’s a “plasma”, and I’ll bet good money it isn’t. It’ll undoubtedly be a “flat-screen”, but only because nobody manufactures tube TVs any more. And this community detention program was actually brought in by the Liberals anyway.

The point is that in order to make its attack on Gillard, the Herald Sun has to rely on misleading half-truths and outright lies.

The question is, what would readers do if they realised? Would they, fooled once, be immediately much more skeptical of any other claims the Herald Sun editors make on subjects on which they’re clearly pushing an outrageously one-sided and shameless agenda? Here’s hoping they’re not the kind of gullible fools who’d cling even more desperately to the rest of the bullshit.

“Policy disaster” indeed.

Get a free trial to post comments
More from Mr Lefty

Advertisement

We recommend

From around the web

Powered by Taboola

14 comments

14 thoughts on “Hun bases its attack on Gillard on its own lies about “plasma TVs” for refugees

  1. Jeremy Sear

    Are you sure you can’t use “infer” in that sentence?

    One of the definitions of “infer” appears to be consistent with “imply”. Also:

    Usage note
    Infer has been used to mean “to hint or suggest” since the 16th century by speakers and writers of unquestioned ability and eminence: The next speaker criticized the proposal, inferring that it was made solely to embarrass the government. Despite its long history, many 20th-century usage guides condemn the use, maintaining that the proper word for the intended sense is imply and that to use infer is to lose a valuable distinction between the two words.
    Although the claimed distinction has probably existed chiefly in the pronouncements of usage guides, and although the use of infer to mean “to suggest” usually produces no ambiguity, the distinction too has a long history and is widely observed by many speakers and writers.