Not many #lolBolts left
There’s not much time left for the gentle amusement of #lolBolts, but the great man is doing his best to send us off in style.
- Andrew Bolt complains that he appears to be in the higher income brackets that aren’t getting much out of the carbon price compensation package. “Amazing that I’ve missed out“, he complains. Question for Andrew: in what top percentage of salaries would you put yourself? The top 30%? The top 10%? The top 5%? And when did you come to the conclusion that the other percentage of the population, the poorer percentage, should be subsidising you?
- As the Greens push for legislated protections for editorial independence from media proprietors, and the ALP and the Liberals reject it (thereby supporting the right of media owners to control what journalists write), in Andrew Bolt’s bizarro-world that becomes “defending media freedom“. Thereby making it very clear what Bolt and co mean by “media freedom” – the freedom of billionaires to have their views the only ones heard.
- Andrew blasts Eric Beecher (of Crikey) for criticising Fairfax with “a vested interest“. He then goes on to boost Rinehart without any acknowledgment of a professional or personal relationship with her on his part. Which to our mind puts paid to any rumours that Bolt’s present or future career might be linked to Rinehart’s media forays, or we’re sure he’d have mentioned it.
And in a fortnight, none of this will matter.
UPDATE: Meanwhile, Andrew links to another News Ltd blogger complaining that Monday night’s episode of the weekly Media Watch didn’t pretend to be a news program and cover the story of the Fairfax sackings that took place a few hours before broadcast.
The consequence of which is that when Media Watch covers the story this coming Monday, it’ll be able to cover the News Ltd restructuring at the same time. Rather than News getting a free kick at one of its competitors for something it’s about to do itself.
You can see why they’d be outraged.
Are you sure you want to leave? There’s still so much fun to be had
Is it too late to enjoin Mr Beecher to come to his senses and reconsider PP’s future?
After all, this blog has long been a stalwart in his war against Fairfax.
I’m confused. The totalitarian instinct of Gillard’s ALP hatched the Finkelstein plot, but now she’s “defending media freedom”?
Andy must work harder on those binary narratives.
I got a laugh out of the journos at Channel 10 taking the piss out of Bolt on Sunday.
Hours upon hours of commentary on various Sunday political shows and this was their grab for the news.
Craig Emerson:”And then you’ve got Tony Abbott telling his MPs, his frontbenchers, don’t appear on dangerous programs like Meet the Press, because they might actually ask a question or two, which Mr Abbott runs away from… he keeps his frontbenchers away from programs that might actually ask some tough questions and puts him on to The Bolt Report to have a cup of tea.”
You know you’ve got problems when your colleagues ridicule you like that.
not so lol when it’s that depressingly dumb.
Good thing Crikey has determined the mainstream media no longer needs the scrutiny of Pure Poison.
I guess we can all relax now, secure in the knowledge that all is well with the Australian media…
So true. Imagine the carnage if more of the media woke up to the fact that their giving the Opposition a free ride.
Unfortunately I don’t find Bolt amusing.
Contemptable yes Amusing no.
It is scary that there are so many nutjobs around who give him credence.
As to certain persons fear of appearing on real news shows to be asked real questions I recall what my mother taught me. Bullies are always cowards.
The Pav: in which case, perhaps in these last days as we rage against the dying of the light, consider that #lolbolt is a convenient hashtag, but can be translated as meaning roughly OH ANDREW BOLT NO.
For pete’s sake. Does facts mean anything?
Andrew, today:
I have to assume that andrew actually read those links himself, and therefore knows that the “letters” in question involved a call to strengthen the IMF, not to lecture europe. That same call for IMF donations was, in fact, echoed by Barroso himself … IN ONE OF THOSE VERY LINKS. It’s an entirely different subject to the griping about “lecturing”. There is no inconsistancy there to report.
I have to assume that he knows this, because the alternative is too depressing – that our Most Read columnist hasn’t got a clue.
His readers appear to be firmly in the second camp. They definitely don’t have a clue. Probably because they read andrew bolt for information.
No comment. Like hell …
No (further) comment
Yeah, thanks Vince. (Ooh, ooh, Mr Leader – look how fast they’re BREEDING!)
Once again I think he misses the more obvious point (it can’t ALL be down to luck, can it?). I think the issue there might be that some people who actually believe they ARE aboriginal finally felt confident in saying so (could it be the “sorry”?). And I wonder, if they held the census right now, how many more might “come out” after somebody got a high-profile pasting for dumping on those who already have.
Can somebody read to the end of this and say whether there’s actually something in it, or just somebody imagining significances, hearing voices in the static, seeing the fnords etc.
http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/mcclelland_brings_back_gillards_past_to_haunt_her/
Clearly mclelland’s referring to an old case that reminds the listener of an unfortunate piece of gillard’s past, that’s not rocket science. Why should AB be salivating over this? I don’t see how mclelland has alluded to anything that we don’t know about. Sure, everyone’s ticked off at the goings-on at the HSU – but what’s that got to do with gillard? She hasn’t got any skin in that particular game (as that weird expression goes) and our defamation laws remain what they were yesterday.
Is andrew finally losing it? Is he going to be wandering the streets of melbourne tomorrow, dishevelled and unshaven, suit torn, holding gravy-smeared printouts from auslii, ranting about the number 23 and shouting at passers-by about gillard, bruce wilson and something incoherent involving triangles? Is rinehart going to stop taking his calls? Will tonez not drop by to check out the kids’ cooking? Is this the end?
so what happened to my comment about Bolt’s earnings, guys?
{It was the sort of speculation we can’t publish – Jeremy.}
Matthew @11, well there’s enough there to give someone hope who has sufficient animus against the PM and her government to obsess about it. And someone who, you’ll recall, was ready to chuck it all in the last time this ‘scandal’ came to nought.
On the other hand, McLelland was careful to underline his PM’s avowal that “I never want to see a dollar that a worker gives a union used for any purpose other than the proper purposes…” etc.
Andy correctly notes McLelland’s remarks referred “obliquely” to that business about which the PM is understandably rather sensitive. To someone morbidly obsessive, however, an oblique reference may easily become “a warning shot – a cannon, really – over Gillard’s bows.”
Thing is, McLelland may simply be quite sincere about wanting to clean up governance of workers’ unions. And it may simply be an unfortunate coincidence that the matter that “coloured [his] thinking in this area” has a connection with the PM’s past.
All that won’t stop a dedicated obsessive though.
Shorter @13: Gee, dunno.
You fucking pussy, Jeremy.
EDIT
{We’re not a primary source. We do not publish original research. We’re reviewing what is published by the media, not speculating about what various individuals pay themselves. Sorry, Monkeywrench, but we’re not in a position to do that. -Jeremy.}
The information I’ve alluded to in your deletions, I have acquired from what is published in the media. Your point is…?
“You fucking pussy, Jeremy”
We love you long time!
Re Bolta bleating about freedom of speech – I have twice posted to his blog an excerpt from a letter regarding Donna Laframboise, who he endorses. Neither has been published. No bad language, no hectoring or sledging;just a part of a letter that can be seen at http://nittygrittyscience.com/2011/11/03/an-open-letter-to-donna-laframboise-or-you-have-got-to-be-f-kidding-me/.
Are he and his wife back to being the sole moderators of the blog again?
Further on the McLelland stuff, Andy is now quoting the Fin which is stoking the coals of the ‘scandal’ he hopes will ultimately consume the dreaded GillardGillardGillard.
What Andy yesterday called McLelland’s “oblique reference” is reported by AFR variously as “a thinly veiled reference” and “repeatedly referred to allegations”.
But then AFR doesn’t report that McLelland approvingly quoted the PM’s statement that “I never want to see a dollar that a worker gives a union used for any purpose other than the proper purposes…”
Anyway, perhaps if the Fin reckons there’s something in all this, then maybe it is indeed so. And yet, it seems to me they’ve failed to apply the Bolt Test (i.e., if Andy reckons it’s so, then think again).
Mr PotatoHead’s mild “outburst” wouldn’t have owt to do with his now being seated at the very back of the backbench, behind the Member for Petrie would it? His jowls looked distinctly wobbly & unhappy when the obscure member was given, not just a DD but supplementary.
Not much mention in the media of the “huge slide” (if it had been Labor’s) from 51% primary vote to 46% from April to June in Newspoll. Abbott’s beginning to grate on his own supporters, not just the rest of us!
(Just got a “2012 FEDERAL BUDGET EDITION” Liberal brochure. What the?????? Don’t they ecen know it’s next year. And loved the BLOCK CAPITALS!) )