UPDATE below: Leo’s “red-faced Green” stupidity from Monday
The “Greens should be destroyed” Australian‘s Christian Kerr apparently thinks he’s found a startling example of Green “hypocrisy”:
THE Greens have been accused of hypocrisy for demanding a right to privacy while keeping their own party forums hidden behind a shroud of secrecy.
Well – that’s the opening text, which to be fair to Kerr might have been added by The Australian. But – pardon? What’s the inconsistency between a “right to privacy” and keeping meetings “private”? Aren’t those not only not inconsistent, but actually quite similar?
That summary doesn’t even make a passing bit of sense.
The rest of the article, the stuff presumably Kerr definitely did write, is just a bash by someone at the Australian Catholic University contrasting the Greens’ members-only meetings with their “talk” (unspecified, unquoted) of “open government”. Naturally they don’t publish any response from the Greens to Professor Prasser’s out-of-nowhere remarks, just a quote from earlier in the month where Bob Brown said the Greens MPs didn’t have a problem with the conferences being open to media, but the membership hadn’t voted for it. (Perhaps because they’d like to be able to have a meaningful internal debate on policy without it being sabotaged by the media’s standard personality politics rubbish.)
So – why did The Australian turn that non-story (academic from university run by an organisation that detests the Greens says they should “grow up”, it must be a day ending in Y) into an insane dig at the clearly unrelated right to privacy issue? Do they think their readers won’t notice?
Pretty poor #trollday effort, to be honest.
ELSEWHERE: I probably should have mentioned this shameless rubbish from the Oz on Monday, but for the record, here’s Leo Shanahan’s “Greens red-faced over boycott” story:
AN attempt by Greens on the Sydney City Council to boycott businesses supporting an anti-carbon-tax campaign has backfired.
Greens councillor Chris Harris was left red-faced after it emerged the council was itself a member of a business chamber he wanted to boycott.
“Red-faced”? That’s not what the rest of the story indicates:
Mr Harris will present a motion to the council this evening to boycott any business or member of an organisation associated with the Australian Trade and Industry Alliance’s anti-carbon-tax campaign.
But it has been revealed that the council itself is a member of the NSW Business Chamber, a member of the anti-carbon-tax alliance…
According to Mr Harris’s motion – which is likely to be debated tonight – a business would avoid the boycott only if “such companies publicly recant the positions advanced in the campaigns”.
On Friday, Mr Harris sent a hurried email to the council’s chief executive and other councillors, asking whether the council was, in fact, a member of the NSW Business Chamber.
“Could you please confirm that this is the case and could you please confirm that we contribute in excess of $5000 per annum to this chamber in fees? Did the chamber consult the city before it launched the propaganda campaign?” he said in the email obtained by The Australian.
So – far from being embarrassed by the revelation, the councillor has uncovered something other councillors have done about which he’s now demanding answers.
Meanwhile, the business lobby gets another uncritical repeat of its asinine “asking companies to be open about which political campaigns they’re supporting is AN AFFRONT TO DEMOCRACY” line.
I wonder when Australian readers will get sick of being treated like idiots.