228 comments

1. Barbara FarrellyMay 14, 2016 at 12:36 pm

   Duncan is a symbol for the working poor in this country. As such, he was punished. Degraded. His privacy invaded. He is on suicide watch, for gods sake.

   People romanticise poverty all the time. The grim reality is drug abuse, ignorance, illness, violence, boredom, feelings of helplessness and shame. It’s never an exciting time to be poor.

   Australia is the second richest country in the world, according to the Credit Suisse Index of Households.

   Duncan was right to point out that on the so-called minimum wage, taking the kids to the pictures is beyond the reach of the working poor.

   We can do better.

   Isn’t that a good slogan for Labor?

2. Terry2May 14, 2016 at 12:39 pm

   I notice that the Australian after hounding Storrar and making his life a misery have now turned their guns on the ABC, criticising Q&A for inviting this man on and for not researching him and his family in advance of the question being put.

   News Corp will take any opportunity to attack the ABC and if the coalition get back we can expect more cuts in ABC funding.

3. Steve Laing - makeourvoiceheard.comMay 14, 2016 at 12:39 pm

   If Turnbull was a leader, he would call on Murdoch to call off his hounds. Indeed he would call an enquiry into this utter abuse of power and start drafting legislation to ensure that this abuse was made illegal.

   If Turnbull was a leader…

4. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 12:48 pm

   Any lawyers out there interested in a high profile deformation case? You might not get paid much but you will be famous.

5. Alison WhiteMay 14, 2016 at 12:53 pm

   I wonder if it is just political? The success of the GoFundMe page could have raised the hackles of the bogans and self righteous middle class – we know how jealous we are and how they resent undeserved handouts going to people other than themselves. As witnessed even his poor relations were kicking him with hobnail boots on.

6. RémiMay 14, 2016 at 12:56 pm

   Maybe another crowdfunding for legal fees for defamation case?

7. Ana MilosevicMay 14, 2016 at 12:58 pm

   Who is willing to stand with Duncan?
   Is Malcolm feeling Duncans pain, does he understand? I think not??

8. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 1:07 pm

   … and now they are attacking him for what he ‘might’ do with the 60,000 ways they used to change the subject. Don’t you just love democracy?

9. my sayMay 14, 2016 at 1:10 pm

   This is what happens when you go against the gospel according to murdoch ,surely this is against the law ,its got to stop ,how many more lives are they going to ruin

10. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 1:17 pm

    … and this is the man who owns the media responsible for unbiased coverage of the upcoming federal auction… I mean, election.

11. Carol TaylorMay 14, 2016 at 1:17 pm

    Steve Laing, I notice that you mention the name Turnbull – he who is careful to stay aloof from anything a trifle sordid. Yes he should show leadership, but he won’t.

    I also note a large amount of jealousy coming from, shall we say, the bogan/troll-like element who must at all costs drag others down to their level. Others, admiring of Duncan for telling his story donated to help him and his family. Hopefully Duncan and his family can stay strong.

12. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 1:23 pm

    Steve Laing less legislation is what we need, not more. No doubt they would use it to their own immoral advantage.

13. sueknightMay 14, 2016 at 1:33 pm

    If ya son can get up and speak it says a lot…Its true don’t judge a book by its cover.. there are to sides to a story the sons and him…put the money to breast cancer…

14. glenn r torneyMay 14, 2016 at 1:46 pm

    this government is a dictatorship Murdoch licences should be cancelled in Australia we the bottom feeders must fight this lot on July 2 we need to save Australia from this lnp government for sure .

15. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 1:50 pm

    sueknight have you ever seen a free prostrate screening caravan outside a shopping centre? How about letting the poor man keep it for himself….

16. diannaartMay 14, 2016 at 1:50 pm

    We are surprised the Murdoch media behave like bullies? Surely not.

    To the Storrer family and friends – all my heartfelt support during this time, the media hounds will lose interest, but an important example of class-based hypocrisy will endure, we will not forget.

    Thank you Duncan Storrer.

17. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 1:54 pm

    diannaart hear hear.

18. Kristen LawlerMay 14, 2016 at 2:05 pm

    Sue Knight…the actual point of all this? It’s none of your business. Go judge people you actually know.

19. David SomerfieldMay 14, 2016 at 2:12 pm

    Surely somebody knows a Lawyer who might be prepared to go in to bat for this guy and his family.
    AND both Turnbull AND Shorten AND Di-Natali need to come together and stand up for this man.
    This is just beyond common decency now.
    This shames our nation regardless of the mans past.
    We do not know the circumstances of that either.

20. Sharon HollambyMay 14, 2016 at 2:16 pm

    He didnt ask for public donations he asked a pertinent question. Then a vindictive son and a jealous public decided to tear him down. Well seiously if you all want to berate this man for mistakes he made when he was younger make sure your own past is faultless because one day it could be you on the other end. This man spoke up for the poor in our communities i see that as a good thing. My message to him is to stand tall and his mum should be proud that he had the guts to stand up for the little people. So people donated to him, that was their choice . I wish him well.

21. ronny pilchardMay 14, 2016 at 2:25 pm

    I find it interesting that people are quick to bat for a DV perpetrator who commits assaults and breaks intervention orders, women need us to shun men like this not support them until then DV will always be an issue in Australia. This does not invalidate the question he asked on Q&A indeed it needs to be answered however he is not a hero nor is he a battler, Australia and Australian women would be better off without “men” like Duncan.

22. GinaMay 14, 2016 at 2:25 pm

    It is sad when you stand in front of a country and say something you need to be sure it can’t be taken the wrong way remember this is what happens to the politicians everyday I hope he is ok I thought he was brave and succinct

23. Deanna JonesMay 14, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    It is great to see people like Duncan and Melinda challenging the status quo. Now Duncan is being represented as of the ‘undeserving poor’. His past in no way negates his words on Q and A.

24. Roslyn DavisMay 14, 2016 at 2:26 pm

    I have been warning all week we risked doing irreparable damage to this man if the fuss over his speaking up continued. He should have been allowed to have his say and be left alone. No-one else who appeared on this program is being hounded by the media.

25. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 2:28 pm

    He was honest, said he had a disability. he represents lives many families live at the bottom. A life where one can’t make mistakes without paying big price. No big ticket barristers to get them out of trouble.

    Whatever his worth, his character, the question he asked is still relevant.

26. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    Perhaps Murdock is smarter than all of us. Have you noticed that nowhere is anyone talking about his question?

27. janeMay 14, 2016 at 2:33 pm

    Absolutely right Sharon. Like a well known Jew is purported to have said a couple of thousand years ago, “Let s/he who is without sin cast the first stone.” Everybody makes mistakes, some bigger than others, but Duncan has acknowledged this and has been trying to make a better life for himself and his family.

    IMO, the likes of Turdoch have committed far worse crimes than Duncan ever has or will. Duncan didn’t have a dead child’s phone, torturing her parents and derailing a police investigation into her disappearance and murder. Duncan didn’t employ thugs and criminals to steal people’s medical records and make them public.

    Duncan has never run a smear campaign in his humble life.

    On balance, one Duncan Storrar is worth a million times more than that malevolent creature and the scurrying minions who inhabit NewsCorpse.

    I wish Duncan and his family all the very best in life and want them to know that far more people wish him well than harm.

28. Peter hivMay 14, 2016 at 2:35 pm

    My heart goes out to you Duncan. What bastards these people are.
    http://lifewithhiv-peter.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/duncan-storrar-on-suicide-watch.html

29. Deanna JonesMay 14, 2016 at 2:37 pm

    ronny pilchard, I did not know about the DV and breaches of intervention orders. Thank you. I take your point. Can we do both? Can we shun perpetrators of violence AND challenge our unjust social structures?

30. DavidMay 14, 2016 at 2:40 pm

    Sue Knight why are you attempting to spread your stupidity and complete lack of understanding for the mans condition and situation. Take your nonsense elsewhere madam, I for one do not wish to be tainted. Murdoch’s bullies who regard themselves as the high priests of all morality, have done enough to wreck this mans life, it is sick.

31. Pete ThunderMay 14, 2016 at 2:46 pm

    What have we allowed our country to become when someone like Duncan asks a perfectly reasonable question about the LNP budget and gets treated so appallingly.

    Duncan’s only mistake is he revealed Kelly O’Dwyer as a heartless bitch…. and for that the LNP enlist the help of the Murdoch press to crucify him.

    Is this really what happens when we dare to think and speak for ourselves and it doesn’t fit the “party line”?

    I doubt that all involved in this gutless pursuit will feel ashamed because to feel such an emotion would require other emotions such as compassion, care and an innate willingness to look out for those less fortunate.

    May karma bite hard on everyone involved…you disgust me!

32. James MoylanMay 14, 2016 at 2:47 pm

    {from my FB page}

    I was going to write an article about the Q&A question asked by Duncan Storrar and the response by the right wing media.

    However very soon I realised that in doing so I would simply become just another part of the problem. So I will make do with a few discrete statements on FB.

    The attacks by right wingers on Duncan Storrar are not just disgusting and unwarranted – they are destroying a family simply to pursue a political goal.

    The attacks on Duncan are also an attack on everyone’s right to engage in our political process.

    If we allow one innocent to be torn down by the right wing lynch mob then they will feel emboldened to come after anyone they disagree with. And these are the guys with all the money and who also seem to lead LNP politicians around by their short and curlies.

    In all my years I have never encountered a clearer nor more unwarranted case of Media Abuse. Not a jot of the coverage provided detracts or adds to the question asked by Duncan of the Minister. This witch-hunt has been pursued entirely as an ad hominem attack to distract anyone from paying attention to what was actually asked.

    “If you lift my tax-free threshold that changes my life,” Duncan commented. “That means I get to say to my little girls, ‘Daddy’s not broke this weekend, we can go to the pictures’. Rich people don’t even notice their tax-free threshold lift.”

    “Why don’t I get it? Why do they get it?” he asked.

    Fair enough.

    But by the response in the right wing press anyone would think Duncan had attempted to assassinate Turnbull or urinate on Tony’s head!

    All he did was accept an invitation to ask a question. Then ask a particularly good question.

    Either we have a democracy of ideas where the least and the greatest are all judged on their contribution to the debate rather than the size of their wallet. Or we are all stuffed and we might as well simply appoint a dictator.

    I wonder if the writers at the Australian would be happy to have the weight of their opinions depend entirely on the purity of their own personal lives and history? I am sure that they would not want to try such an experiment, nor should such an experience be inflicted on anyone, including Mr Storrar.

    If they have any sort of moral fibre the Australian will retract the hit pieces that have been written and issue a fulsome public apology for so debasing the reputation of the Australian media.

    Pigs might fly.

    James Moylan & family.

33. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 2:54 pm

    It’s true! I have just checked as many places on the net I know of where this conversation is happening and not one comment anywhere has anything to do with Duncan’s question. I declare this distraction to be a false flag event perpetrated to divert attention from the real issue which is tax related. Wake up people, we are being had yet again.

34. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 3:03 pm

    Make that tax avoidance!

35. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 3:06 pm

    Come and get me Rupert! I dare you.

36. Deanna JonesMay 14, 2016 at 3:17 pm

    Pete Thunder can you leave out your vicious sexist language, please? Nobody would think to call Turnbull a heartless bitch for his response to the single mother who challenged him about the family tax benefit. O’Dwyer is a Lib and part of the most despicable government in my living memory.

37. glad that hate for white males has stopped for a momentMay 14, 2016 at 3:29 pm

    Duncan is a classic Q&A plant, and Q&A take no further responsibility for individuals after they’ve said the their line in a high exposure environment, which in this case has resulted in busting open a large tin of worms

38. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 3:30 pm

    Ronny Pilchard, Duncan asked a valid question that applies to all people living below the poverty line. Why do the wealthy get tax cuts and the poor get nothing? Are we to believe they are all perpetrators of domestic violence? Consumption based taxes hurt the poor because they consume a greater portion of their income. A flat $5 co-payment for doctor visits hurts the poor more, for the same reason.

39. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 3:33 pm

    men are not the only perpetrators of domestic violence so get over it and talk about tax evasion

40. HeatherMay 14, 2016 at 3:42 pm

    Poor guy being hounded by his past, and so what if he has self medicated to get by in life. Better than being beholden to Big Pharma and locked in forever.

    As far as being poor, if you are not greedy or focused on wanting more all the time, then being poor is actually extremely freeing. Some of our best minds are those living “so called” poor. Thus Duncan was able to say what he said. Greed is like any addiction, you just want more and more and more. Such greed is wrecking this planet. We all could be learning to live more frugally in order to save us from our huge human footprint.

    Don’t let me start on the latest slag off about vitamin supplements and complementary medicine. Beware of the nasties and slammers out there, my fellow Aussies. They are doing too much damage for our own good, and wish for us to be robots just like them. They are soooo! insecure in their so-called security. Alan Watts is a very good read on the “Wisdom of Insecurity”.

41. RussMay 14, 2016 at 3:59 pm

    Tax evasion…..get real, it’s never going to bother the high end. Clearly remember many yrs back “packer” brimmed stating he paid $4000 tax for the financial yr. All legal, and it just continues. Big companies, big boys, mates club, protecting mates, and it will perpetuate for eternity…..that’s life.

42. k8goffMay 14, 2016 at 4:01 pm

    Have you ever been poor Heather? It’s hardly a long term life choice that I would call ‘freeing.’

43. Deanna JonesMay 14, 2016 at 4:03 pm

    Imagi, they are the overwhelming majority of perpetrators.

    Athena, I did not read ronny as making an assumption based on socioeconomic status.

    Bloody hell, Heather, way to romanticise poverty.

44. PamMay 14, 2016 at 4:04 pm

    Down with Murdoch in this country, he should not have a say here at all. Boycott his products that will get rid of his power here. If the cowd fund does not go to Duncan I bloody well want my money back. Otherwise it was money by fraud. I want my money back and I will send twice as much to him personally. That money was collected for a reason and if they are now not going to give it to him then that is totally wrong. Can not believe they are not going to give it him because they are joining in with Murdochs Vitriol. Istandwith Duncan any day over Murdoch and Libs.

45. Michael OliphantMay 14, 2016 at 4:07 pm

    I still don’t know what Duncan’s story has to do with the question he asked. No matter who he is or what his history has been it’s completely irrelevant to his query.

46. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 4:09 pm

    Um… Deanna….
    Almost 24% of all relationships had some violence, and half (49.7%) of those were reciprocally violent. In nonreciprocally violent relationships, women were the perpetrators in more than 70% of the cases.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1854883/

47. more power to DuncanMay 14, 2016 at 4:23 pm

    Duncan 1
    Numpties 0
    Media hounds – find some empathy and get a life;
    Here’s an idea: Lift the tax free threshold for EVERYONE.
    Its not that difficult 🙂

48. xiaoechoMay 14, 2016 at 4:26 pm

    I hope some civic minded law firm try and get some redress for Duncan. PTSD is an illness that destroys ones ability to deal with stress. Murdoch’s Newscorp psychopathically took this course of action knowing the likely outcome. Very very very cruel, torture even. That is assault at the least and GBH in fact. I do not understand how Newscorp are immune from the law. They promote hatred against specific ‘out groups’ every single day. Inciting hatred is a crime for you and me – why is newscorp (an organisation demonstrably without ethics) allowed to do this. Murdoch is a blight on Australia fair and is dragging our nation further down every year. Evil must be called what it is EVIL.

49. RussMay 14, 2016 at 4:26 pm

    “Violence” It begins with your morning coffee, it ceases when you slumber to sleep. We are bombarded with violence on our televisions, our children are contaminated by it, this world, our world is racing to a dark place. It scares the crap out of me.

50. diannaartMay 14, 2016 at 4:27 pm

    Um…. Imagi-ation…

    Duncan asked a question about poverty – which affects both men and women.

    What do you say about the wealthy getting tax breaks and the poor getting welfare cuts?

    If you wish to hold forth on which sex is the most violent, there are plenty of men’s rights websites where you can slag off women to your heart’s content, no intelligent women will be there to scare you.

51. James RoyMay 14, 2016 at 4:28 pm

    Duncan’s personal story is no one’s business but his, and his destruction has been disgraceful. That said, it’s not even the main narrative in this sorry episode. The main message is this: “Beware, anyone who might be thinking about publicly asking an embarrassing or difficult question of the LNP. Using the Murdoch press as the attack dogs, we will destroy you.” In short, it’s about silencing dissent and undermining free and open democratic debate. It’s been very ugly and concerning to watch.

52. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 4:33 pm

    So ABC should hand pick audience. So if you aren’t lily white in eyes of Liberals, you have no rights in this country? Whatever his record is, he has served his time, Entitled to ask qts of Gvt. #auspol

53. ozibodyMay 14, 2016 at 4:39 pm

    At 83 years of age I ( probably ) come from a ‘different era’, and if there were boxes for political beliefs I would probably be designated one marked ” Social Democrat”, i.e. should we have to be ‘ boxed ‘! … 🙂 …

    In terms of conduct, one has to wonder just where these neocons spring from in the social sense ……… had they the whit to simply take the ‘ Duncan.Interlude’ on the chin as a reasonable response to their ( scurrilous) behaviour, and to not respond in the matter, it could have passed over as a cloud ….,(albeit Dark, but clouds pass over) ..particularly when one controls the msm !!

    Their cowardly,gutter style response clearly stamps them as grubby, grimy, and greedy blots on the landscape !!… ..not casual abuse on my part ! …so can I simply conclude that the Australian Wealthy of this era have simply garnered $$ MONEY $$ at the expense of what my Parents described as ” Common Decency ” !! …

54. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 4:43 pm

    diannaart if you were to read my previous posts you would see I am absolutely appalled by the treatment and propaganda towards Duncan especially the blatant manipulation Murdock is using. As for your anger directed at me for politely pointing out another opinion to that of the of the Woman’s Crisis Centre, I question where in my post I ‘slag off women’ as you so eloquently put it. Your aggression I find quite alarming but I do believe you have the right to your opinion on this website as I do. Thank you.

55. Whiskey Tango FoxtrotMay 14, 2016 at 4:48 pm

    My concern is how many are surprised by what has unfolded! He was picked by qanda because it was good television. Yes anyone of a million people could’ve asked the question, but would they have come across in the way qanda wanted? Not likely! every aspect of the media has something to answer for here, qanda chose the person to illicit the response they have now got, as media people they cannot possible say they didn’t see this backlash happening.
    Why is the LNP offering a tax cut to the over $80k people, because they are the fence sitters, no rich enough to be diehard LNP supporters but earn enough to get the shits with excessive tax going to people on welfare,,,,that’s why, they’re going for votes, fair? No. Reality yes!
    i hope Mr Storrar is able to move forward from this and will be ok.

56. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 4:49 pm

    All they are doing is diverting attention away from qt. Too many people are falling for it. Qt important, not questioner. Well at least in this case.

57. Deanna JonesMay 14, 2016 at 4:52 pm

    dianaart, exactly and well said.

    Perhaps some of the money raised could go towards his children. The long history of violence does cause me to re-think this whole thing and while I applaud anyone who stands up to our, increasingly despicable, rulers in any way, my reverence is tempered by my belief in women and children having the right to live free of violence and tyranny. Yes Mr Storrar made a valid statement and asked a question that our so-called journalists shamefully avoid, and yes he spoke for many disempowered people not just himself. High five to him. But it still bothers me to see progressive -minded people turn a blind eye to his violence in order to continue with the hero narrative. Life is tricky.

58. Ross DaviesMay 14, 2016 at 4:54 pm

    Let him who is without sin cast the first stone. Sadly, Murdoch’s Muckrakers pollute my country as well, this is not an Australian problem or a British problem, this cancer has metastasised round the world. How dare you speak up against the status quo, unless you are morally perfect… Like Right wing politicians…Oh and Murdoch, of course!

59. DavidMay 14, 2016 at 4:55 pm

    xiaoecho…if you have no objection I would like to repost yours to my Twitter timeline. I have a few lawyers following me, good Labor folk, one or t’other may be of assistance to Duncan. The suggestion has been posted previously but will do no harm to repeat.
    From what I am seeing, the only party receiving negative response is Murdoch and his storm troopers at the Herald Sun. I don’t follow any Torys so probably be some rubbish discussed but I am not receiving right wing trolling on Duncan, which is encouraging.
    I woudn’t use your handle if you so wish.

    Await your answer, thanks.

60. diannaartMay 14, 2016 at 5:00 pm

    @Imagi

    With every right there are responsibilities, you are entitled to express your opinion on the Duncan Storrer defamation, you are not entitled to derail this topic.

    I will ignore the personal defamation you have stated regarding myself.

61. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 5:03 pm

    I didn’t start it.

62. Deanna JonesMay 14, 2016 at 5:04 pm

    Imagi, the stats you are trying to promote here have been well and truly universally condemned and your ignorance is very annoying for a person who teaches this topic at a tertiary level. Those stats include male on male violence and when the self reporting stats were explored some respondents were very confused about what domestic and family violence even is; some felt it was DV when she refused to cook him dinner every night, for example. Shame on your pernicious mischief-making, particularly given the rise in domestic homicide this year. At the beginning of the semester 9 men had killed their partner or former partner in this country. It is now closer to 30. Sit down.

63. Faye CoxMay 14, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    Thank-you James Moylan and Family for saying what I don’t the eloquence to do.
    Anger always gets in the way. Incoherent with rage describes my response to the Murdoch Press ‘s campaign against Mr. Storror.
    I don’t care what he did or has done. He asked a question that needed to be asked and the Assistant Treasurer couldn’t answer it.

64. ImagiNationMay 14, 2016 at 5:06 pm

    personal defamation?

65. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 5:09 pm

    Duncan Storrar is not running for Father of the Year. He’s asking the same very valid question that poor people everywhere are asking. Those of us who appear to be “turning a blind eye to his violence” are doing no such thing. We’re simply not falling for the logical fallacy set up by the Murdoch media. Duncan Storrar’s rap sheet has nothing to do with why this government is helping the rich to become richer and the poor become poorer. They were doing it long before they even knew of Duncan Storrar. Poverty is a contributing factor to the perpetuation of domestic violence. It creates anger and frustration, it denies people the education to learn that it’s wrong and that there is a better way for dealing with one’s problems, and it keeps the victims trapped in it. A more appropriate concern would be why are people so willing to ignore poverty due to one man’s violent history, when it is known that poverty contributes to violence?

66. JamesMay 14, 2016 at 5:14 pm

    This whole situation with Storrer has simply been for politics. The left now wants to cry “unfair”. They held him up for their own political gain and this article is no better. It’s used him to attack the Murdoch papers and the LNP. You have no right to the high ground here. Your article was into Murdoch and the LNP before you even turned to the letter.

    Suggestion: change the name AIM, it sounds as absurd as Fairfax’s “Independent Always” moniker. Be honest and just call yourselves Leftist Views.

67. PaulMay 14, 2016 at 5:15 pm

    Let he who hath not sinned, cast the first stone!
    Sadly, all of us here commenting are puppets of the media machine that controls and dictates how government operates on a day to day basis (either side). And for some commentators here, they need to satisfy their own cynical, unsatisfied lifestyle and love to knock the hell out of someone who goes against your own false beliefs. Being an Australian was once upon a time about being proud of your country and giving everyone a “fair go”. It is depressing now that our children have been “bleached”, conditioned and brainwashed into believing anything they here in the media.
    There is no such thing as the truth! There are only truths.

68. JamesMay 14, 2016 at 5:18 pm

    It is not defamation if its true, so knock that on the head straight away. This isn’t a case of “Treasurer for Sale”.

69. AdamMay 14, 2016 at 5:23 pm

    Wow, such cynicism and assumptions being made putting words in the mouths of LNP. Emotive, non-constructive words which no one in the coalition ever use, like ‘leech’ and ‘leaner’. How about some more compassion and rational thinking about the people who set these policies which, although you may argue the mechanics are not quite right, I feel confident they come from the best intentions and a hope to make Australia better. The budget authors do not spread hatred. The Herald Sun may skirt close to it. But why do you choose to join them and throw up emotive unfounded language instead of having a calm conversation?

    What I can’t work out in this discussion, is why no one has pointed out that in this day and age of media hype and sensitivity around the public turning for or against the reputation of a private citizen, that surely some responsibility for what occurs to Duncan should be borne by those who thought it wise to set up a crowdfunding campaign for someone they knew absolutely nothing about? And by those who thought it fashionable to throw money at a cause they knew nothing about, at the same time probably ignoring many other opportunities to give to other needy (but less hyped) causes? Frankly, the idea of crowd funding some guy that just appeared on TV for 3 minutes is nonsensical, and time and time again you will continue to see there’s a danger of bad things happening as a result. Of course I don’t forgive the Herald Sun for overstepping the mark, but let’s be honest here: none of this would have occurred if Duncan had said his piece, Twitter spread their likes or comments, and we went on with our lives. Buying Duncan “a toaster” achieves nothing. It’s yet another example of armchair activism so that middle class white people can feel better about themselves and get in on a craze that supports their worldview. The victim, in fact, is a pawn who had nothing to do with the whole thing, who could have been anyone at all, as long as he had a story that resonated with social media.

70. KyranMay 14, 2016 at 5:25 pm

    It was a ‘wee little ripper’ of a question, wasn’t it? In all of the excitement since, O’Dwyer and her attack dog from the AIG, got away with a statement that epitomised the very inequality the question encapsulated.
    “One of the cafe owners I spoke to the other day has got a turnover of just over $2 million. As a result of our change … he will have access to the instant asset write-off, which means he can invest in his business, a $6,000 toaster.”
    Now, maths isn’t my forte, but an annual turnover of $2mil is a daily turnover of, approximately, $5,479.45. With that sort of turnover, the owner need’s $6k from the government (as a concessional deduction), a bit over a days trade, to get a toaster. I sincerely doubt that business owners acumen, unless they have been taking a little too much from the business. Undoubtedly they work hard and the holiday home, negatively geared, was essential to their ongoing viability.

    We have had a RC into trade unions. The convening genius included in his summary;
    “They are not the work of a few rogue unions, or a few rogue officials.
    “The misconduct exhibits great variety. It is widespread. It is deep-seated.
    “It would be utterly naïve to think that what has been uncovered is anything other than the small tip of an enormous iceberg.
    “It is clear that in many parts of the world constituted by Australian trade union officials, there is room for louts, thugs, bullies, thieves, perjurers, those who threaten violence, errant fiduciaries and organisers of boycotts.”

    Don’t worry that they haven’t, as yet, had a successful conviction out of that RC. Not even Jackson/Lawless.
    Have a look, though, at the descriptions of the bankers actions and tell me if they don’t epitomise misconduct, loutishness, thuggery, bullying, thieving and perjury. But we don’t need a RC into them.

    There was an interesting piece on the ABC about penalty rates and CEO ‘incentives’. It detailed CEO’s in a curious context.
    “It shows that as recently as 1982, the CEO was on less than 10 times the average weekly wage.
    When BHP hired the American, Paul Anderson, in the late 1990s its pay scales exploded, hitting a high in 2010 when Marius Kloppers received 250 times the average weekly ordinary time earnings (AWOTE).”
    It goes on to detail many CEO’s taking multiples of AWOTE and then points out the bleeding obvious;
    “A level 1 shop assistant, working under the Retail Industry Award, gets $18.99 an hour, which is less than half AWOTE.
    That rises to $23.74 an hour on Saturdays and $37.98 for Sundays.
    The question that comes to mind is this: If, as company leaders tell us year in and year out, those at the top need to be paid enormous fortunes on top of their base salaries to get them to do a good job, why is it different at the bottom?”

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-05-13/robertson-why-penalty-rates-are-just-like-ceo-bonuses/7410766

    Queensland Nickel and 7-Eleven have reminded me of little johnnie’s genius in establishing a government protection for workers entitlements. It’s not like he set it up for his brother. He was concerned for workers entitlements. He institutionalised a protection for business, funded by taxpayers, and made every one feel good. That it was never funded by a levy on business, the perpetrators of the short fall, was merely an oversight.
    It’s not like we have environmental disasters as a result of mining companies inability to fund reparation after they have pillaged the landscape. That was sarcasm, apparently the lowest form of wit. It’s not like any mining company will ever have to post an ‘environmental bond’ before they dig. Or an adequate one.
    A realtors collective have launched a media campaign about negative gearing, devoid of fact, substance or modelling. And the song goes on. We need to care for and nurture business. People don’t count. My bad, sarcasm. The lowest form of wit. As a pacifist, the alternatives scare me.
    Mr Storrar’s question epitomised that, far more succinctly. How dare he?
    Thank you, AIMN. Slàinte mhath, Mr Storrar. Take care

71. philgorman2014May 14, 2016 at 5:27 pm

    This is what class war looks like. The gloves are coming off. The full might of Citizen Murdoch’s Empire will strike down any miserable upstart who dares question the right of the Corpocracy to enrich itself by enslaving the serfs.

72. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 5:34 pm

    No one here or anywhere else has held the man up as anything, All they have done, is say the question he asked is relevant and should be answered.

    The right have set out to divert attention from the question by demonising, dehumanising the man.

    Why would they take so much effort to do so. Yes, it does divert from the PM narrative. So what.

73. seranvaliMay 14, 2016 at 5:43 pm

    I don’t understand the bloodletting. He asked a question that many of us wanted an answer for. He had a right to ask that question. All Australians have the right to question their leaders. The past drug issue, whether or not he paid taxes, the state of his relationship and his finances are completely irrelevant. So someone started a Kickstarter for him (without his consent) and raised a lot of money for him and his family. That was sweet, People who donated acted out of unsolicited generosity, knowing nothing about him. To me that’s an admirable thing to do, To see someone in need of help and react without analysis, on impulse.

    I’m grateful that Duncan asked that question. I wanted an answer, too. He showed that the assistant treasurer was completely incapable of answering it and could only respond with slogans, dog whistles and prepared talking points. Thanks, Duncan, for showing her up like that.

74. Julie FergusonMay 14, 2016 at 5:45 pm

    How many of us would pass the test if we spoke out against the powerful media and political team of Murdoch and Liberals?. I know I wouldn’t, so good on you Duncan and I don’t judge you on your past. Hope you can take your family to the pictures soon.

75. Möbius EckoMay 14, 2016 at 5:48 pm

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CiYV4xOU4AAGjxS.jpg

76. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 5:48 pm

    Bloodletting is what neo-liberals do. When you don’t have a valid answer for the question, create a distraction by playing the man instead of the ball. Dehumanise him to turn public opinion against him. The majority of the electorate are sheeple who are easily led and soon they will be so busy sinking the boots into this guy that they’ll completely forget there was no justification put forward as an answer to the very relevant question.

77. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 6:03 pm

    The moral outrage we have seen from Telegraph and fellow travellers is about one thing. One thing only.

    They are attempting to cover Kelly’s response, protecting her stupidity.

    Have as hard job on their hands as there has been numerous examples since she was appointed as minister.

78. Pingback: Just a reminder: The Herald Sun is contemptible bullshit not worth the paper it is printed on | Saúl A. Zavarce

79. JasonMay 14, 2016 at 6:27 pm

    Let’s not pretend this is an isolated incident. Individuals are being “mobbed” with alarming frequency. Social media seems to encourage it. And it’s not just one side doing it either.

    Society needs to take a step back and say “enough”, an individual is not in the public interest, and it’s NOT OK to invade an individual’s personal life to fill the pages of tabloids.

80. Wayne TurnerMay 14, 2016 at 6:31 pm

    The Murdoch media continue to be one of the biggest threats to our so called democracy. What their media has done to this ordinary citizen is appalling and shows how dangerous they are.

    The only thing Duncan did was legally and morally get involved in our democratic process by asking a question of an elected representative.Then because the said elected representative made themselves look bad by a bad answer.The PRO-LIBERAL party Murdoch media,then decided to go on the personal attack,against this citizen because they don’t like their Liberal party being questioned.This attack could and would happen to any of us,just because we/they question this Liberal party.

    The attack also had nothing to do with the question asked.Murdoch media just want to demonize this guy with personally attacks,to attack the man and NOT the valid question.

    Clearly his question was so good,he hit a nerve with Limited News Murdoch scum.

    The Murdoch Media is scum,and a bunch of hypocrites.Especially with current Murdoch media hack Sam Maiden found guilty of drinking diving and driving away from police TWICE.So this pathetic media has one rule for theid hack,and another for a questioning citizen.

    The Murdoch media is a disgrace,and should be boycotted by the public and sued by this guy for harassment.

    Finally a vote for this Liberal party is a vote for this disgusting Murdoch media

81. Stephen BowlerMay 14, 2016 at 6:36 pm

    Three times I tried to get the social media to stop attacking Duncan, three times they just carried 8n after attacking me.

    This single event has shown me a side of the LNP, the murdoch press machine, the MSM and the LNP supporters that I admit I had no idea prevailed.

    There are some whom I see on facebook, who led the charge against Duncan Storrar, making unbelievable miliage out of this mans history, the inexplicable attack by his son, however non mentioned the question he asked. The attack made it clear to me that these people have resorted to the ‘Lord Of the Flies’ behavior, for no reason other than to suppprt their born to rule mentality.

    I am so so disgusted I am at a loss as to how I can express my feelings.

82. JamesMay 14, 2016 at 6:37 pm

    “That is assault at the least and GBH in fact. I do not understand how Newscorp are immune from the law.”

    They are not immune from the law and I hope you are not seriously suggesting this is assault or GBH, because it is no such thing.

83. JamesMay 14, 2016 at 7:09 pm

    “The question that comes to mind is this: If, as company leaders tell us year in and year out, those at the top need to be paid enormous fortunes on top of their base salaries to get them to do a good job, why is it different at the bottom?”

    Because what special skills are needed to put a plate of food on a table as opposed to running the entire organisation?

84. peartonblogMay 14, 2016 at 7:25 pm

    I doubt that Duncan is anybody’s hero, but I don’t know the personal circumstances of any other guest or audience member. ‘The question’ does interest me, but more interesting is the dumb answer by Kelly O’Dwyer!

85. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 7:49 pm

    “Because what special skills are needed to put a plate of food on a table as opposed to running the entire organisation?”

    The skill level is addressed by the base salary.

86. JamesMay 14, 2016 at 8:41 pm

    ” The past drug issue, whether or not he paid taxes, the state of his relationship and his finances are completely irrelevant”

    Really? Aren’t you the lot who keep banging on about the budget deficit?

87. guestMay 14, 2016 at 8:44 pm

    Good one, James. Whether a person eats bread and dripping every day for a meal or scoffs down the finest cuisine every meal of the day, both are entitled to ask questions and receive fair answers.

    Duncan asked a question and received a poor answer from someone who should have been able to answer more succinctly.

    What happened next is a travesty. The newspaper quizzed the estranged son and decided from what he said that Duncan had no right to ask the question.

    Further, there are those who say it was an ABC Q&A conspiracy and they should not have allowed him to ask the question.

    All of this is a beat-up in order to distract from the question asked. A great big red herring. And an attempt at censorship. So much for freedom of speech.

    But it does tell us something about the Coalition side of politics. It is about ‘lifters’ and ‘leaners’, as Hockey told us. Duncan is one of those who has fallen into hard times – and he is trapped and he knows why. He works when he can. He spends all his money – and pays the taxes demanded of him when he spends. It is not the kind of life one would choose. But a census would show that there are tens of thousands of Oz citizens who are below the poverty line.

    So Hockey spoke of entitlements. He saw welfare for the poor as “entitlements’ and he spoke of the end of the age of entitlements. But for the wealthy, there are tax concessions and reimbursements and cost allowances and tax avoidance schemes…

    So here is the Murdoch Empire getting stuck into the little man because he dared to ask …for more? The Murdoch Empire which pays very little tax belts the battler for daring to ask a question which embarrasses.

    One way to look at Duncan’s situation is to say: There but for the grace of God go I.

    Another way is to say: I thank God I am not as other men are.

    People of the first kind have sympathy – and some sent money.

    People of the second kind deride him and kick him while he is down.

88. Lindsay StaffordMay 14, 2016 at 8:48 pm

    Logic 101 “argumentum ad hominem” is an invalid debating tool.
    Or, on a more mundane level, “play the ball not the man”

89. xiaoechoMay 14, 2016 at 9:07 pm

    David 4:55pm….go for it with my blessing.

90. Max GrossMay 14, 2016 at 9:17 pm

    Time to turn the spotlight onto Murdoch’s maggots Paul Whittaker, editor of The Australian and Damon Johnston, gutter “journalist”

91. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 9:31 pm

    ” The past drug issue, whether or not he paid taxes, the state of his relationship and his finances are completely irrelevant”

    Really? Aren’t you the lot who keep banging on about the budget deficit?

    @ James

    Duncan is apparently in training and also works when his disability allows it. That doesn’t sound like someone who doesn’t want to work. He has a mental illness. It can happen to any of us at any time – including you – and is not his fault. We don’t know any of the circumstances behind any of the problems raised by Murdoch’s “journalists”, or even whether all of the allegations are true. I’ve recently watched the Murdoch media drag my former boss through the mud with their lies, so I know what they’re like when they’re on a witch hunt. When the truth comes out I’ll bet they won’t have a front page apology all over the nation to compensate for the front page ruining of his career in a political point scoring exercise against the ALP. None of the issues they have raised about Duncan justify the Liberal government taking from the poor and giving to the rich. Duncan is one man with an income of $20,000 per annum. He’s hardly responsible for the deficit accumulated by this government. $20,000 wouldn’t even cover Bronnie’s chopper costs for a week.

92. paul walterMay 14, 2016 at 9:34 pm

    So in the end what have we? More 60 Minutes type stuff, where the opinion makers have bent over backwards to produce a conclusion at odds with the facts. Duncan Storrer is the latest Zaki Mallah, or Ed Snowden or Chelsea Manning, paid out for telling an inconvenient truth.

93. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 9:34 pm

    “Time to turn the spotlight onto Murdoch’s maggots Paul Whittaker, editor of The Australian and Damon Johnston, gutter “journalist” ”

    Samantha Maiden – drunk driver and initiator of police chases.

94. DavidMay 14, 2016 at 9:36 pm

    @xiaoecho..cheers mate will do tomorrow morning, just caught your reply before closing the PC, got old off 🙂

95. paul walterMay 14, 2016 at 9:37 pm

    Athena, your owl-like wisdom is beyond compare..a goddess just whispered in my ear, speaking of Samantha Maiden, as nasty an individual as our civilisation has produced.

96. verdiblueMay 14, 2016 at 9:58 pm

    many here are lambasting the media for having made comments about this bloke yet no one is recommending that he own up to his own responsibility for making a fool of himself or for allowing the abc to allow him to do so. the abc in particular has a lot to answer for because of their penchant for having people like duncan look like idiots. the muslim recently another example. some claim he has a mental illness – was he screened and is this affliction a result of his drug use? why arent you all castigating the abc for placing people like this in the national spotlight? another backfire….

97. paul walterMay 14, 2016 at 10:03 pm

    So, it is the ABC’s fault that Duncan Storrer had a comment to make on the hypocrisy of the rich in farming out more wealth for themselves while folk like him were put into even worse situations by this upper class greed?

    As for mental cases, what about a comment on Paul Whittaker, or Murdoch or Peter Dutton, or that pitiful creature Sam Maiden?

    Verdiblue has contorted to an extreme degree in order to avoid the real issue with the Murdoch press and Duncan Storrer.

98. Annie BMay 14, 2016 at 10:06 pm

    James Moylan wrote :

    “I wonder if the writers at the Australian would be happy to have the weight of their opinions depend entirely on the purity of their own personal lives and history? I am sure that they would not want to try such an experiment, nor should such an experience be inflicted on anyone, including Mr Storrar.”

    I wonder indeed. …. well said James Moylan ( well said your entire comment ).

    An all encompassing comment from James Moylan – totally agree.

    Pam said : “Down with Murdoch in this country, he should not have a say here at all.” … Totally agree. He chose completely the “Armurican” way of life, and he should live it, and leave all others alone. Let him perpetrate his vileness over there in print – not here.

    I say ‘hear – hear’ to all who have supported Duncan Storrar here, and elsewhere.

    And bad, bad, pfffft to those who are damning him for asking a question, and then bringing into query any past alleged domestic violence or drug use, that he may have been involved in. ( I would like to know of some real facts on this situation, apart from what his son has said – and it is common knowledge that a drug user ( the son ? ) would ultimately blame someone else for their use of drugs — a common situation. Never their fault – always someone elses’. ) ….

    Admittedly, I have only covered a part of the story … and am relying on commenters here for details, and boy is there much of it – mostly in support of this man who stood up and spoke, asking a very legitimate question ….. Whether or not the ABC ‘planted him’ or not is irrelevant ( ALL Current Affairs programmes do much the same thing – they plant, they edit, and then deny ). …. Kelly O’Dwyers’ retaliation was to be expected … she hasn’t a clue, and is a blue blue lined LNP extreme right wing nin-com-poop.

    And Athena ( May 14, 2016 at 5:09 pm ) also sums it up : “Duncan Storrar’s rap sheet has nothing to do with why this government is helping the rich to become richer and the poor become poorer. They were doing it long before they even knew of Duncan Storrar. ”

    There is so much on this thread, most of it great in support of Duncan… and I can only hope that many people read it, absorb it, and make their own decisions ( hopefully in support of a man who simply asked a question on national television ).

    A huge, varied and well expressed debate here … for this article.

    p.s. ” Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone”.

    I think that puts us all ( but mostly the LNP ) up the well known creek.

99. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 10:06 pm

    Verdiblue, so no one who has used drugs can ever ask a reasonable question of a politician? Don’t be so ridiculous. Are we to believe that you have been a model citizen all your life and never done anything stupid?

100. Mohammed Arif HindMay 14, 2016 at 10:15 pm

     I came to this country with nothing. I knew nobody. I did not know the English language. But I knew one thing. Hard work. I worked two jobs while at the same time attending English classes in between. It was a twenty year struggle with self deprivation. My kids wore second hand clothes and never tasted a Mac. But I saw them through university and now own my own home. The kids have jobs and are on their own. I spend most of my time reading good English novels to improve the English language My wife and I work as night cleaners. Our wants are little. I feel sorry for Duncan. But we are makers of our own destiny. Opportunities are there for the taking. Sacrifices must be made. We cannot rely on others for help. I never believed that there is unemployment in this country. Jobs and opportunities are there for those that want them. Determination and self motivation is the key to survival. Depending on the govt. is a cultural thing. Sorry to say that Duncan is the maker of his own destiny. Nobody can be blamed but himself.

101. AthenaMay 14, 2016 at 10:26 pm

     Mohammed, Duncan can’t help being mentally ill any more than you can help being born in a country that had no future for you.

102. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 10:35 pm

     Sorry, why does the man need to be screened. There was nothing wrong with the question, In fact very mild reasonable one that minister was inept in answering.

     Criminals, even the mentally ill are allowed out in public, allowed to ask a MP questions.

     He is the victim in the unreasonable attack made on him.

103. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 10:37 pm

     All Duncan asked, why was there no tax relief for those under $80K. He was told as he pays no tax, he has no right to whinge.

     I ask the same question.

104. Florence nee FedupMay 14, 2016 at 10:38 pm

     Did he blame anyone for the position he was in? Missed that,

105. @RosemaryJ36May 14, 2016 at 10:52 pm

     Mohammed Arif Hind: Welcome to Australia and we need more like you. But you need to be aware that anyone with a mental illness is less able than someone like you to surmount some of the problems that we face in life. Would you have made the progress that you have if you were bi-polar and suffered uncontrollable mood swings from depression to manic?

106. Annie BMay 14, 2016 at 11:22 pm

     Mohammed Arif Hind …..

     I heartily applaud your determination and hard work for your betterment, and ultimately for the best for Australia – your new country ( although I have no idea how long you have been here, so maybe it is not so new for you ).

     I do have to agree though with a couple of other commenters, that situations can be very different for many people. You have worked hard, have learned and good onya for that. There are however some who are not able or capable of daily ongoing positives in their life. My own daughter is one … she is a brilliant academic, but suffers from clinical depression, which is the pits plus. Yet she struggles on, and each battle won, makes her stronger ( until the next attack of depression ). A monumental battle in her life.

     You are right when you say there are opportunities here – as long as one is diligent in seeking them. But not everyone can be ‘blamed’ if they are not able to pursue a specific positive path, at a given time.

     We all have our problems ( large and small ) and thankfully, many of us know how to get over those hurdles.

     I hope you have learned that as well … along with your other very adequate abilities at learning, hard work, and positive upward mobility.

     Good for you, Mohammed Arif Hind. ….

107. John SartoMay 14, 2016 at 11:44 pm

     I have never heard of this Herald Sun journalist Not sure if they hired him for some Murdoch Media damage control. He does ok though he raises all Devils Advocate points like a John Faine but doesn’t finish like an Andrew Bolt. Unfortunately we have become a world of black vrs white. Michael Lallo’s article may just a be strategy within a strategy to win the war. A soothing sense to make us feel The Murdoch media is balanced. . An aim for balance is very admiral thing to do. Society should all try to do this. Mee thinks Murdoch is all over this; because he is strategist. No offence Michael Lallo..you are only pawn. One swallow doesn’t make a summer

     http://www.theage.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/media-failed-duncan-storrar-and-the-issues-he-raised-20160514-gov5ig.html

108. John SartoMay 15, 2016 at 12:07 am

     Mee Thinks i’m an Idiot ‘above was from The Age. I just checked H Sun and there is just sport and fear on the front page. Sorry

109. JamesMay 15, 2016 at 12:22 am

     “The skill level is addressed by the base salary.”

     Exactly. The lower wage shows the skill is a lot lower than the person who runs the organisation, which justifies the higher wage.

110. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 12:28 am

     Read the original question again: “The question that comes to mind is this: If, as company leaders tell us year in and year out, those at the top need to be paid enormous fortunes on top of their base salaries to get them to do a good job, why is it different at the bottom?”

     Note that those at the top have a base salary – which is commensurate with the skill level required to run a company.

111. JamesMay 15, 2016 at 1:16 am

     “What happened next is a travesty. The newspaper quizzed the estranged son and decided from what he said that Duncan had no right to ask the question.”

     The media had as much right to ask the questions of David Storrer as he had to ask the question on the night of Q&A.

112. JamesMay 15, 2016 at 1:22 am

     I’ll never understand the view that people are not allowed to question or be frustrated as to why their money needs to pay for someone else who pays nothing and yet demands more of the free stuff as though they are simply entitled to it.

     Paying GST is not an argument, it’s like buying a product and whinging at the price because you think it’s helping to pay for the companies advertising. It’s childish and pointless.

113. Cathy BarkerMay 15, 2016 at 1:28 am

     Is there a press council in Australia ? If so do they reside in a corner of the LNP or Murdochs Office and what are they paid for doing absolutely nothing when it really matters.

114. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 1:37 am

     It’s just so amazing how Murdoch’s hacks can dig up so much dirt on a relative nobody but they can’t manage to identify and report glaring inconsistencies in what LNP politicians say and do.

115. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 1:48 am

     “Paying GST is not an argument, it’s like buying a product and whinging at the price because you think it’s helping to pay for the companies advertising. It’s childish and pointless.”

     That’s a completely childish and pointless argument. Consumption taxes hit the poor hardest of all, because it takes a greater portion of their income. As Nick Hanauer once said, as a multi-millionaire, he still only needs to buy food and clothing for one person. If the Liberals increase the GST to 15%, those 50 wealthiest Australians who pay no income tax won’t notice it. The poor will struggle even more than they are now.

116. Möbius EckoMay 15, 2016 at 6:20 am

     Cathy Barker there is a press council in Australia but nowadays it’s beholden to Murdoch.

     Here’s what the previous head of the press council had to say about Murdoch. Note the Murdoch media’s response. Familiar?

     https://theconversation.com/press-council-chief-fires-parting-shot-at-news-corp-44841

117. newnozMay 15, 2016 at 7:16 am

     Is there anything we can do to support them?

118. Deanna JonesMay 15, 2016 at 7:27 am

     Athena, I am not ignoring poverty here, I have actually said a couple of times that it is possible to both challenge structural inequality AND condemn the violence. It is possible to hold two thoughts in our heads at once here.

     Poverty does NOT cause domestic violence; this type of violence transcends all social, cultural and economic divisions and is now being described as a public problem of global epidemic proportions. It is irresponsible to ignore this. People here and elsewhere online keep saying they don’t care what he has done; this is to turn a blind eye to domestic violence.

     In my line of work I frequently go in to bat for the Duncan Storrars, I fight hard for them to access their basic rights, as per my professional code of ethics. My whole life is about challenging those in power and empowering those in need. Ignoring poverty is not what I am about at all.

119. KyranMay 15, 2016 at 8:15 am

     An ambitious petition has been started on change.org, which cites this article as its motivation. The objective;
     “I am referring this to the Australian Communication and Media Authority and the Australian Press Council. All of News Corp must be suspended to teach them a lesson. Help support me in getting the Press Council and the ACMA to force News Corp to stop publishing news for the rest of election by signing my petition.”

     It’s already up to 6,500 signatures!

     https://www.change.org/p/press-council-and-acma-suspend-publication-of-news-corp-for-leading-duncan-on-suicide-watch?recruiter=861621&utm_source=share_petition&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=autopublish&utm_term=mob-xs-share_petition-reason_msg&fb_ref=Default

     Seems there are a few who think Australian’s are better than this. Take care

120. SueMay 15, 2016 at 9:09 am

     Mohammed AH: “Sorry to say that Duncan is the maker of his own destiny.”

     Looks like the destiny of Duncan on Q&A was to show up the hypocrisy of our national elite.

     Good work Duncan, done.

     Your honest question cut through the fog of the thousands of manipulated messages from media moguls who are out to deprive our society of fairness. Thank you ABC for allowing the question to be asked on behalf of the working class of this nation.

121. PhilMay 15, 2016 at 9:40 am

     Apparently stoning is a legal punishment in Pakistan, northern Nigeria, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Mauritania, and Yemen.

     Australians universally condemn stoning as barbarous.

     Yet the Murdoch minions join ranks as a vengeful horde to mete out their stoning equivalent on the young man for asking a question that angered his rulers and threatened their hegemony.

     Could there have ever been a more ugly and truthful insight into the character of collective Australia, and its pathological neoliberal rulers.

     Australians love to be seen as world leaders – as winners – well, Australia, congratulations, you’ve achieved it here as leader in the global stakes for outright bastardry and inhumanity – not just to asylum seekers, but to your own – that wins you the gold stoning award!

122. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 9:42 am

     “Poverty does NOT cause domestic violence; this type of violence transcends all social, cultural and economic divisions”

     @ Deanna Jones
     I am not denying that domestic violence occurs across the economic spectrum. I also never said that poverty *causes* domestic violence. It is a known *risk factor*. There is a difference between causes and risk factors and there is data that shows violence is more prevalent in lower socio economic areas. Children raised in low socio-economic environments are more likely to be abused, have more behaviour problems, more injuries, more illnesses and more learning difficulties. Poverty keeps their mothers trapped in DV situations and it limits their access to education, thus limiting opportunities to learn how to address their problems in a more constructive way. DV can never be effectively addressed without education.

     There is also data showing that people in low socio economic areas smoke and drink more than other groups. I attended a presentation last week showing data from a large cohort study of pregnant women. It was noted that the group from Adelaide had significantly higher rates of smoking, alcohol consumption, poorer diet, less exercise and were more overweight than their Auckland counterparts. Each of these factors was associated with more adverse events during pregnancy, and more heart problems later in life and starting at an earlier age than other women. This was discussed further during question time. The Adelaide data was collected at the Lyell McEwin Hospital, which is located in a low socio-economic area. It was pointed out that people living in poverty experience a great deal of stress due to their financial situation and they are more likely to indulge in activities such as smoking and drinking to temporarily alleviate that stress. We also know from elsewhere that consumption of alcohol lowers inhibitions and some people only become violent after drinking.

     “People here and elsewhere online keep saying they don’t care what he has done; this is to turn a blind eye to domestic violence.”

     That statement could be taken in more than one way. Duncan’s past behaviour is not relevant to the question he asked. Someone saying that they don’t care what he has done may just be trying to say it is a distraction from the real issue here. Duncan has PTSD and has been sexually abused. Do you know how this has contributed to his behaviour problems? Will cutting his welfare or increasing his tax help to reduce his behaviour problems? He’s allegedly in training and takes work when he can get it. That sounds like someone who wants to turn his life around. He has been to prison so he certainly has paid something for his past behaviour. He probably continues to pay for it in various ways and so do his children. What will be achieved by kicking him back down every time he attempts to get up because he has a rap sheet? Those people who derive pleasure by keeping the Duncans of this world permanently kicked to the kerb are no better than him.

123. paul walterMay 15, 2016 at 10:23 am

     I’m surprised you had to point out the difference(s), Athena.

     If his stats are taken from the Lyell Mac, it means he is from Adelaide’s northern suburbs, where I grew up and where Holdens is being shut down to increase an already crushing unemployment and hardship burden.

     No, JMS, it is not about justifying the unjustifiable, it is about context and explaining how things come to pass out in the boondoggles, away from the more genteel refinements of politer, but no less malicious, society.

124. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 10:37 am

     Paul, the LMH is not connected to Duncan.

125. Melissa BMay 15, 2016 at 10:55 am

     ronny pilchard – what has that got to do with the fact he asked a question about poverty on Q&A? You are doing exactly what the media is doing, and vilifying a person who asked a question that was uncomfortable for our Government to answer… You would not know a thing about his past if the media had not been digging around for it, and frankly it is completely unrelated to the question at hand. So what if he’s a scumbag? I could care less if he worshiped Satan. It has nothing to do with the question he asked, or the Government’s obligation to rethink their use of the media to deflect attention from their shortfalls.

126. Ann Brita NilssonMay 15, 2016 at 11:05 am

     The 99% are behind you 100% Duncan – and that’s ironically why you were attacked so viciously by the elitists and their rich cronies. Don’t give up . We are all in the same boat as you financially, working and pedalling however still not able to enjoy the other life that exists outside paying for accommodation and groceries.

127. RobynMay 15, 2016 at 11:14 am

     On another aspect of this matter – we believe it was said Duncan only receives $16 per hour for casual truck driving. My partner was a truck driver and knows this amount is way below what he should be paid as a casual – why isn’t anyone kicking up a stink about illegal underpayment of wages! Newscorp represents the ‘Big End’ of town yet says nothing about the big end companies that do all they can to rip off the little people!

128. RobynMay 15, 2016 at 11:21 am

     from the movie ‘I, Robot’ the phrase “shitting on the little guy” rings true of Newscorp. Why don’t we ALL BOYCOTT NEWSCORP PUBLICATIONS – we don’t need to read his rubbish to know the truth! That would hurt the bastard where he feels it most – his hip pocket!

129. Geoff AndrewsMay 15, 2016 at 11:43 am

     Protesters. Carry signs or chant “Answer Duncan’s Question!” whenever O’Dwyer makes an appearance.
     Reporters. Just ask O’Dwyer Duncan’s question, word for word, until the spin doctors finally think of an answer and she can be schooled to repeat it.

130. John DorianMay 15, 2016 at 11:51 am

     Hopefully this has already been pointed out… But… The Domestic Violence thing is an out of control scam! ANY male going through a relationship breakup with children involved is subjected to one or more DV orders. The first thing a woman’s lawyer does is advise how to trap the male into a situation which can be used for a DV order.

     How many of you know that a man calling his ex partner/wife’s phone too many times is all that it takes to get a DV order from a judge??? All the woman needs to do is not show up to a child access or change over visit then count how many times the phone rings in the next couple of days – she doesn’t answer because she has been instructed not to by her lawyer. Of course the phone rings every few hours & BINGO the holy grail of a DV order against the man becomes the woman’s prized possession…

     A mans lawyer in the relationship breakup experience will tell him to EXPECT a DV order!

     So to those jumping up on the high & lofty moral plateau to condemn this battler for DV in his past I say get over yourselves, get a life & a brain & start asking questions just like this man has done!

     The DV thing has been taken in gleefully by GREEDY lawyers & turned into a polluted gutter dwelling tool for their own ends just like everything else they touch…

     P.S. most of our politicians are lawyers… 🙁

131. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 12:13 pm

     I think I agree with this guy. In fact, I do agree with this guy. Saves me writing a post, so thanks to this guy:

     http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/media-failed-duncan-storrar-and-the-issues-he-raised-20160514-gov5ig.html

132. Deanna JonesMay 15, 2016 at 2:02 pm

     Athena, I really don’t need a lecture from you on any of that, and how am I ‘kicking him down’? I have applauded his action. To put it more simply as I don’t know how many more times I can be bothered to reframe my position so you get it; I applaud Mr Storrar challenging unfair power structures in the public sphere while simultaneously condemning his reinforcement of them in his personal life. We might be desperate for a hero but he is not the one.

     John Dorian, that is utter drivel. Couples mostly only end up in the family court because of DV. Are you really trying to claim that DV is a scam?? You are in the wrong place.

133. Karin EyMay 15, 2016 at 2:43 pm

     Dear Rupert a judge of other people’s morality? Give me a break. How dare he sit in judgement of what is right or wrong? He thinks that people have forgotten the hacking scandal and how his minions hacked the phone of a dead little girl. And here we have his minions here in OZ doing his sleazy work for him again. I would like to be able to delve into the past of those Murdoch minions and see what their past looks like.

     People in glass houses really should desist in throwing stones.

134. Kaye LeeMay 15, 2016 at 2:58 pm

     Deanna,

     Not everything is as black and white as you seem to think. I abhor violence and power struggles but I am personally aware of situations like JD described. I know women who have used access to children in exactly the way he described with exactly the result he described.

     As for Mr Storrar, I am certain he did not set out to be a hero or a role model for anyone. What has subsequently happened to him and his family is deplorable.

135. Deanna JonesMay 15, 2016 at 3:18 pm

     Perhaps, Kaye, you didn’t know the full story, although I would not rule out the odd occasion but statistics turn that old chestnut on its head. Most allegations by all parents are substantiated and false allegations are so rare as to be negligible with women no more likely to make them than men.

     This idea of women making false claims and using children in custody battles has been widely blown apart in the research, going back years. It is dangerous propaganda spread by MRAs, which the Howard government erroneously gave credence to with the amendments to family law. Perpetrators force women and children fearful for their lives through the court system and use the court and mediation processes to wield further abuse against victims. Children are forced to see perpetrators in ‘supervised’ contact settings where their trauma is triggered over and over. This is also when children are most at risk of being killed by the non-resident parent. Rosie Batty goes into great detail about this in her book. There is also an abundance of academic literature in the Oz context, challenging the family court habit of prioritising father’s rights over women and children’s safety. Dr Michael Flood is a good place to start.

     I am not supporting what the media are doing to Mr Storrar; as an advocate for women and children’s rights to be free of male violence I am just challenging the pro status quo attitudes about this, just like he did on qanda.

136. sharktechMay 15, 2016 at 3:37 pm

     Everyone should contact the Australian Press Council and demand that Murdoch’s publishing licences in Australia are revoked. http://www.presscouncil.org.au/making-a-complaint/

137. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 3:37 pm

     “We might be desperate for a hero but he is not the one.”

     Deanna Jones, I have not made Duncan Storrar out to be a hero. My position is that Duncan’s past is not relevant to the question he asked. Protesting for our right to ask legitimate, reasonable questions of our politicians without being slashed and burned by Murdoch’s hacks does not mean that we’re making a hero out of anyone. I have friends who donated to Duncan’s toaster campaign because they see it as a very public way to make fun of Kelly O’Dwyer and show how out of touch she is with ordinary Australians. Making a hero out of Duncan is the last thing on their minds. If we can’t make a stand for transparency and honesty from our politicians and ethical behaviour from our journalists without being accused of making a hero out of an unsuitable person then something is very wrong.

138. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 3:51 pm

     There is little effective difference between turning someone into a “hero” and turning them into a cultural “icon”. The latter has most certainly happened and it was always going to be a mistake. As bad as News Corps’ behaviour has been, both Duncan and his supporters ought to have thought this through a little more. Now it’s too late; the substance/spirit/pathos/symbolism of his question has been mostly lost in the subsequent media melee.

     At least we know a conservative nerve has been hit. Knowledge is power.

139. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 3:56 pm

     “This idea of women making false claims and using children in custody battles has been widely blown apart in the research, going back years. It is dangerous propaganda spread by MRAs, which the Howard government erroneously gave credence to with the amendments to family law. Perpetrators force women and children fearful for their lives through the court system and use the court and mediation processes to wield further abuse against victims. Children are forced to see perpetrators in ‘supervised’ contact settings where their trauma is triggered over and over. This is also when children are most at risk of being killed by the non-resident parent. Rosie Batty goes into great detail about this in her book. There is also an abundance of academic literature in the Oz context, challenging the family court habit of prioritising father’s rights over women and children’s safety. Dr Michael Flood is a good place to start.”

     I have to agree with Deanna here. There are some cases of alleged DV that are false, but the majority have validity. A friend of mine works in this field and has told me of numerous instances where the family court has prioritised a violent father’s rights over the safety and psychological wellbeing of the children, who have been forced to attend parental visitation against their wishes and it screws with their heads. My friend has been in tears when she’s told me about some of those cases and it is quite disturbing to know it goes on, enforced by the family court.

140. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 4:03 pm

     “As bad as News Corps’ behaviour has been, both Duncan and his supporters ought to have thought this through a little more. ”

     Duncan’s supporters should certainly have thought it through, but Duncan is to blame for the melee? How many people, far more educated than Duncan and not hampered with mental illness, would have suspected that they would be hung, drawn and quartered by the media for asking a pre-screened question on a show with a question and answer format?

141. Pingback: On Viral Videos – avvoo

142. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 4:38 pm

     Zacky Mallah is on the phone….. I wish people would stop calling me …

143. Maya Chitrani PérezMay 15, 2016 at 4:51 pm

     Yes after all this, it seems the great question posed by Duncan is indeed getting lost (surely as planned by the LNP all along). So, let’s take Duncan out of the equation and let the poor guy be in peace. Instead, can someone please come up with a graphic/meme with just the words of the question he asked, and perhaps for the answer, a picture of a $6000 toaster, and make THAT go viral?

144. diannaartMay 15, 2016 at 5:27 pm

     Well said, Maya.

145. Faye CoxMay 15, 2016 at 5:39 pm

     Valid point Maya. Why don’t we put our collective heads together and come up with something that asks the question without dragging poor Duncan into the equasion ?

146. paul walterMay 15, 2016 at 6:02 pm

     No, Deanna Jones, Storrar is not some content little petit-bourgeois forsaking his castle to tilt at windmills “in the public sphere” for a pleasant day’s recreation.

     He also no longer has a private sphere. The same people who destroy women through the domestic violence situation destroyed Storrar a long time ago.

     The tarring and feathering by the Murdoch press is nothing to do with setting right class or gender politics and everything to do with its maintainence, shame on you for kicking him when he is down, joining the Murdoch press in its efforts to maintain or worsen the status quo.

147. KyranMay 15, 2016 at 6:03 pm

     ByB @ 3.51. Good point. “Duncan and his supporters ought to have thought this through a little more.”
     Isn’t that the nub of the matter?
     He attended a public forum, or as close as ‘our ABC’ gets to a public forum these days, and asked a question. The point that he DIDN’T have an ‘agenda’, he DIDN’T have a plan, he DIDN’T have a strategy, means nought, apparently.
     He had a question, for which he would have liked an answer. Not surprising, given the show is called Q&A.
     There should have been no personal consequence to asking a simple question, surely? He should not have had to think through the repercussions of asking a question, surely?
     The show is called Q&A, FFS.
     On the other hand, you have those vested interests that DIDN’T like the question. His history, character, worthiness to ask a question, is called into question, because the question could not be answered in an election cycle, if you want to be re-elected.
     Here’s the part that gets me. For all of the trawling through his past, we, the public, are reliant on Newscorpse for reliable testimony on his past.
     I welcome any discussion on DV, drug abuse, mental illness, minimum wages, struggling to pay your bills, as long as they advance the discussion.
     I would never welcome, or rely on, Newscorpse information to inform a discussion.
     “There is little effective difference between turning someone into a “hero” and turning them into a cultural “icon”.”
     My belief is that he went there to ask a question, not become a ‘hero’, or an ‘icon’, or a ‘villain’. I really hope he, and his family, are well. Take care

148. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 6:21 pm

     This was in my Facebook feed a short time ago.

     Dear Mr Storrar,

     You are a low income earner with mental health issues. According to the front pages of a number of Australian newspapers you have a criminal history, did not pay tax and are disliked by some of your children. Those newspapers have therefore deemed your opinions irrelevant.

     Those newspapers are owned by Rupert Murdoch, a billionaire media proprietor with mental health issues. Mr Murdoch also has a criminal history, does not pay tax and is disliked by some of his children. Mr Murdoch’s opinions are published and broadcast by thousands of media outlets worldwide.

     Mr Murdoch wants the Turnbull government reelected. He does not like them being asked awkward questions.

     Do you understand now why he gets a tax cut and you don’t?

149. vanMay 15, 2016 at 6:24 pm

     Huge hypocrisy at work here .The ABC and Left media were more than happy to exploit Duncan to push their agenda.Hailed as a hero -photos all over the papers.When his son points out the fraud (I can,t afford to take my daughters to the pictures but buying dope is no problem) surprise surprise its not reported in the left media but in The Australian -its that evil Murdoch .The ABC and left media were using him and kicked an own goal.If this guy is held up as a model for why workers should be taxed to give more to the “disadvantaged:” then its a huge fail.Note to ABC and like minded -Do your homework before putting forward your case.
     Mr Storrar is understandably upset at being caught out -tough.His charge sheet runs into chapters and god knows how much money has been poured into his coffers over the decades -from the account of his own kids a total waste.

     van

150. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 6:28 pm

     How do you know Duncan doesn’t grow his own dope?

151. Kaye LeeMay 15, 2016 at 6:52 pm

     van,

     Before you express an opinion here I would like to know if you have a criminal record, how much tax you paid last year, and I am especially interested to know if your family likes you. have you ever smoked pot? Do you take prescription medicines and if so why? Do you drink? How many hours did you work last week?

     Unless all these questions are answered I am sorry, you are not entitled to use this site to express your point of view.

     Does that sound reasonable to you?

152. Florence nee FedupMay 15, 2016 at 6:55 pm

     gee all he did was ask a simple, uncomplicated question that anyone could have answered.

153. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 7:10 pm

     I love how the opinion of the son, who was smoking dope at age 17 before he went to live with his father, is valid against a man whose opinion on tax cuts for the rich is considered invalid because he smoked dope.

154. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 7:22 pm

     Kyran,

     My belief is that he went there to ask a question, not become a ‘hero’, or an ‘icon’, or a ‘villain’

     Well, we’ll likely never know his actual motivations, but let’s not pretend he’s some sort of naive victim who couldn’t have known his actions might have consequences. He’s troubled, but that doesn’t make him stupid. He had a plan. He bought tickets to go on the show, a show he clearly knew about. He requested to ask a question, reinforcing his knowledge of how the show works. Did he think about and formulate that question? One would presume so. That leads to perfectly reasonable suggestions that he might have given a touch more thought to what he was doing, given Q&A’s recent history.

     He’s not an idiot. Or maybe he is and is just a patsy for someone. We’ll likely never know that either. Either way he asked a decent question and got a typically evasive response. What else is new?

     It’s not possible to know what was going on in his head, but it ought not really matter. He has been exploited for political purpose by both “sides” of politics. That is irrefutable. I say irrefutable rather than undeniable for reasons that ought be clear to people who give a shit about language and their associated concepts.

     It’s perhaps a sign of our increasingly cynical attitudes here in Australia that at the political and media level we failed to grant Duncan the benefits of the Principle of Charity. Not doing so was a deliberate thing – regardless of whether one is familiar with the formal principle or not.

     The general thrust of his question is worthy of debate, even if the detail lacked economic precision. I’m inclined to think that perhaps my original statement was excessive, in that while the point he was ostensibly making may have been somewhat lost in the aftermath, it hasn’t been entirely lost, and so there’s scope to move on from Duncan as “iconic” to Duncan as “symbolic”. There’s political grist to the mill in the latter and none in the former.

     I feel for Duncan. He has become something of a political/cultural martyr, ultimately beyond his ken and design, but not entirely. Not entirely.

     But even discussing that is to shine the light of inquiry in the wrong direction, which ought to be that of the actual merit of his question. Someone previously mentioned the “ad hominem” fallacy. It certainly applies here to the extent that we can see Duncan’s question through the lens of its symbolism (while applying the Charity Principle). It’s got conservatives jumping and that’s a good thing.

     Let’s move on to debating the substance of the question and forget who asked it. Let him go have a beer with a dead guy.

155. Carol TaylorMay 15, 2016 at 7:24 pm

     Van, a “left wing” question is to ask why those earning under $80,000pa did not receive a tax cut? Sounds neither right nor left wing to me. It was a simple and valid question that anyone might ask. Duncan has not been held up as a model..but come to think of it, at least he had the courage to put himself front and centre and not just troll on a blog using an alias. Some here even use faux email addresses in an attempt to conceal who they are.

156. disgustedMay 15, 2016 at 7:27 pm

     He is a conman. He would not be on suicide watch. Tony Jones no doubt put his little mate up to.

157. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 7:52 pm

     Carol,

     at least he had the courage to put himself front and centre and not just troll on a blog using an alias

     I would politely suggest you not use that particular criticism/judgement given the pseudonymous status of some of your authors. Just sayin…

158. vanMay 15, 2016 at 7:55 pm

     kaye lee
     When I ask something of you I,ll happily provide you with details you wish.You may then decide if you wish to comply with my request otherwise its just an opinion nothing more
     van

159. JamesMay 15, 2016 at 8:02 pm

     Athena: They’re everyday taxes, the entire world pays them. What are you advocating, not only free income tax up to $18,200 and now no taxes anywhere for that same cohort? I mean really when does this “i’m entitled to everything for free” mentality ever end? You wonder why people get angry and lose empathy. The point is, it is a useless argument because you’re just shouting into space. How much is it going to cost and what is the manpower and expertise required to exempt a certain section of society from everyday taxes. I mean the argument is just pointless.

160. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 8:18 pm

     James,

     I agree with you that the GST is a meaningless point in regard to debates about income tax, but what do you think would be a reasonable tax free threshold level? The current $18,200?

161. Kaye LeeMay 15, 2016 at 8:30 pm

     van,

     I would never presume to ask such questions. I was trying, rather poorly, to make a point. You are just as entitled to express your opinion, provided you do so civilly, as any of us are, including he who shall not be named.

     And I don’t agree that his point has been lost.

162. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 8:41 pm

     ” I mean really when does this “i’m entitled to everything for free” mentality ever end?”

     James, perhaps you should ask that of the 50+ wealthiest Australians who pay no income tax.

     Then check out the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to which Australia is a signatory. In particular, read:

     Article 1 – All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.

     Article 22- Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.

     Article 23 – (1) Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
     (2) Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
     (3) Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
     (4) Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.

     Article 25 – (1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
     (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

     Next, Duncan doesn’t want something for nothing. He wants to work. He takes work when he can get it and he’s earning considerably less than award wages at $16 per hour for driving a truck.

     Desiring employment and to earn a living wage for doing so is not asking for something for nothing. It’s a basic human right!

     Perhaps you can explain how people are supposed to work when there are not enough jobs to go around. The number of officially unemployed people, which is well below the number of people looking for extra work, outnumbers advertised job vacancies by 6-7:1. A high rate of unemployment is necessary for capitalism to work.

     The cost of all the publicly funded infrastructure, medical care, education, roads, etc that each and every one of us – including you – takes advantage of every day costs considerably more to provide than most of us are paying in income tax. So technically most of us are receiving something for nothing. Why do you think you’re more entitled to it than anyone else? If you’re not supportive of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, then go and live in a country that is not a signatory. Then you might just begin to realise how many freebies you get living here.

163. Matters NotMay 15, 2016 at 8:55 pm

     Does the ABC have a ‘Duty of Care’ to individuals when it comes to their ‘choosing’ whose questions (from a whole range of options) will be ‘aired’ and given the ABC’s historical understanding of how the Murdoch Media will ‘attack’?

     ‘Clear and present’ danger? And all that. .

     (I have never been to an ABC Q&A recording, but I would be interested to know whether a ‘release’ is required before a ‘seat’ is allocated or before a question is deemed ‘valid’.?)

     Anyone know?

164. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 9:08 pm

     MN it’s hard to find that information on the ABC website, if indeed it exists. The ABC does have a Code of Practice. The closest thing I can see is standard 7.6 on page 8.

     http://about.abc.net.au/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/ABCCodeOfPractice2016.pdf

165. Matters NotMay 15, 2016 at 9:13 pm

     While I am on this ‘Duty of Care’ track, does the AIMN have the some responsibility when it comes to ‘Van’ and Van’s incapability when it comes to the use of the ‘apostrophe’ and the inability to correctly use same?

     Is he a mate of Duncan? Or just a close relation? Just askin …?

     Thanks Athena. It was just a thought.

     Then again: does the broader Media have a responsibility when ‘ridiculing’ any contributor? If not then why not?

     When it comes to ‘defamation’ the definition seems clearer.

166. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 9:23 pm

     Do you have suicidal tendencies due to van being punctuationally challenged?

167. Matters NotMay 15, 2016 at 9:32 pm

     Do you have suicidal tendencies due to van being punctuationally challenged?

     Not at all. Van provides ‘comic’ relief. As I think you acknowledge?

     But Van does advance evidence that further education for the disadvantaged needs to be addressed.

     Go Gonski. (Just jokin … )

168. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 9:33 pm

     I doubt that the MSM cares much about defamation. If someone sues them and happens to win, the pay out is probably less than what the media gained from the shit storm they created. About 5-6 weeks ago my former boss had his reputation trashed in major news bulletins around the country, with false allegations made against him and the agency. Jack Snelling was pleased that his career was in ruins too. I hope he sues and wins.

169. JamesMay 15, 2016 at 9:39 pm

     kaye lee: What an extraordinary sense of entitlement you have in demanding Van provide you all his personal details then the astonishing arrogance and presumptive self importance to then tell him until he provides them he’s not allowed to post comments on this site.

     What a tedious site this is.

170. AthenaMay 15, 2016 at 9:45 pm

     James, no one is forcing you to stay.

171. KyranMay 15, 2016 at 9:48 pm

     ByB @ 7.22. It seems a tad ironic the link you posted for ‘Principle of Charity’ goes to a non existent page.
     I had a look at the Q&A ‘Join the Studio Audience’ questionnaire. A few items jump of the sheet, purely in hindsight;
     “Your information will be confidential.”
     “Q&A is about democracy in action – the audience asks the questions. If you join the studio audience, will you want to ask a question?”

     http://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjthMXu8tvMAhUGF6YKHXIoBfcQFgggMAE&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww2b.abc.net.au%2FAudienceBooking%2FClient%2FAudienceRegistration.aspx&usg=AFQjCNGMIYu14SVAAAAUvFV7Fg9853FqhA

     My belief remains that he went there to ask a question. I have yet to see anything that suggests otherwise. I doubt he had a posse of minders, spin doctors, strategists, media advisors, etcetera. His name was not O’Dwyer or Willox, both of whom would have had an army of minders, spin doctors, strategists, media advisors, etcetera. Another irony is that, with their brilliant army, they couldn’t answer the question in any honest way, without damaging their future’s. An honest answer would have likely highlighted that their futures are built on dishonesty and obfuscation.
     “Let’s move on to debating the substance of the question and forget who asked it.”
     Another cruel irony. The person who asked the question has become the epitome of the question.
     Just out of curiosity, I went and had another look at the gofundme site, which Mr Storrar did NOT ask for. If you read through the comments, with due regard to the time frame and context, the vitriol and newscorpse’s interest have peculiar similarities.
     The most recent post from the organisers;
     “Hi everybody.
     Wow. What a big couple of days! What started as a simple ‘toaster drive’ has grown into something beyond our much bigger.
     Who could have anticipated the generosity of everyday Australians?
     But the public interest has been matched by media interest, and it turns out being in the middle of a media storm can be tough. We heard from Duncan today. He has told us that he is struggling with attention and plans to take some time away. His privacy should be respected. He also said he is feeling a bit “freaked out” but wants you all to know he is safe and really appreciates the giving.
     Given the success of this campaign a number of people are rightly asking what’s next? How exactly will the money be managed?
     These are legitimate questions.
     We have now been in touch with a couple of community service organisations in Victoria asking for assistance establishing a framework to manage your donations. The key thing is that the money gets to Duncan (or the charities/community support groups he chooses to nominate) in the most appropriate way. We can assure you this will be done legally, transparently and in the spirit of why the funds were given.
     As soon as we can provide more detail, we will.
     We also reckon its time to put a halt on any more donations. It turns out there’s no limit to Australians’ generosity, but there is a limit to our ability to manage your contributions!”

     https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwjp7_KG9dvMAhXHL6YKHQxABA4QFggbMAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.gofundme.com%2F23hcwd8&usg=AFQjCNFO6LK41Fm-xNhAZfsPsyNWIo8hjA

     I don’t believe it likely I will ever know his actual motivations, unless I have the pleasure of meeting him. Then, I can make up my own mind. Until then, he deserves, at the very least, the benefit of the doubt. I certainly won’t be relying on newscorpse to form my opinion in the interim. As a matter of interest, the change.org petition is now up to 16,000 signatures.
     Take care

172. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 9:51 pm

     James,

     That “whooshing” sound is Kaye Lee’s point going sailing over your head. Go back and read the comments again.

173. Backyard BobMay 15, 2016 at 9:57 pm

     Kyran,

     ByB @ 7.22. It seems a tad ironic the link you posted for ‘Principle of Charity’ goes to a non existent page.

     The link has a ” at the end that ought not be there and I didn’t notice till I ran out of time to edit. Just Google it. Or: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_charity

     You probably already did that, but anyway …

174. Matters NotMay 15, 2016 at 10:06 pm

     What Backyard Bob said!

     But seriously, the ‘reading’ (recognising the words) is probably not the problem. It’s much ‘deeper’ than that. It’s all about James’ ‘meaning’ (crucial) given to the ‘whole’ attempt of KL’s ‘communication’.

175. Michael TaylorMay 15, 2016 at 10:07 pm

     Matter Not, there’s nothing wrong with Van’s apostrophes. He just prefers to use them as commas.

176. Matters NotMay 15, 2016 at 10:21 pm

     Spot on MT. After all, these ‘commas’ and ‘apostrophes’ are the same ‘shape’.

     It’s just they are a keystroke or so away from each other. (Forget the ‘world of difference’.)

     Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

177. paul walterMay 15, 2016 at 10:27 pm

     This thread is coming to an apostrophic denouement, afflicted of a sort of semi colonic ailment, maybe related to irritable vowel syndrome.
     Consonantly, alarm spread as the people realised there was no noun cure, not even a prolixer of youth.

     There is no doubt, we failed completely in attaining our adjectives.

178. KyranMay 15, 2016 at 10:41 pm

     My bad, ByB, I hadn’t. At the risk of sounding argumentative, the Principle of Charity sounds like debate criteria, defining rules for interpretation of ‘statements’ or ‘arguments’. Mr Storrar asked a question. He didn’t make a statement. He didn’t seeking an argument. In your link is reference to the Principle of humanity. “we must assume that another speaker’s beliefs and desires are connected to each other and to reality in some way”. Unfortunately, the respondent (and her attack dog) live in another reality, with no connection to the desires or belief’s of most people’s reality.
     Matters Not @ 8.55. The link to the Q&A page has a curious section;
     “Have you registered for the audience before?
     If you have already registered for Q&A, please do not register again. We will contact you if we have availability.”
     I think their duty of care to the public was diminished when their budget got butchered.
     Take care

179. KyranMay 15, 2016 at 10:59 pm

     Thank you, Mr Walter @ 10.27. In keeping with many comments, I sense a vowel movement is imminent. Maybe, eminent. Take care

180. paul walterMay 16, 2016 at 2:44 am

     Of course, Kyran. We understand it is a vowel problem. Perhaps colonic irrigation is the answer.

181. diannaartMay 16, 2016 at 12:27 pm

     To those who believe Duncan Storrer is a ‘lowlife, pursuing some leftist agenda’ just answer the question.

     Why do the top end of town get tax breaks (of so minute proportions they won’t even notice the difference in their bank balance), and the very lowest at the bottom end of town get zilch, even though a minute tax break could mean so much?

     For anyone who believes I have no right to ask such questions:

     Lost virginity at 15 because I was so damn lonely

     Started taking drugs at 16

     was drinking by 14

     wished my alcoholic father dead when I was 18 – 2 weeks later he died

     married a manipulative and violent man

     that’s before I turned 22

     If you want to know anything else, ask Newscorp…

182. Terry2May 16, 2016 at 12:33 pm

     That was a tough start to life, I hope things are going better for you now, Diana (:

183. paul walterMay 16, 2016 at 12:42 pm

     Onya diannaart- what you don’t lack, is guts.

184. diannaartMay 16, 2016 at 12:46 pm

     My point, which was lost as soon as I pressed the ‘post’ button, was that not one of those ripping into Duncan, was answering his perfectly reasonable and legitimate question, all the while disparaging Duncan for being himself, while not taking a good hard look at themselves.

185. Backyard BobMay 16, 2016 at 1:00 pm

     Kyran,

     At the risk of sounding argumentative, the Principle of Charity sounds like debate criteria, defining rules for interpretation of ‘statements’ or ‘arguments’. Mr Storrar asked a question. He didn’t make a statement. He didn’t seeking an argument.

     We’re possibly being a touch pedantic here, but I think it reveals an important social dynamic – that of how we treat the statements of those with whom we may disagree. I’m not sure you actually read the first paragraph of the link I provided. Yes, the principle can be applied to argument and debate, but also to rhetoric and statements in general – including questions. It’s a simple enough principle, one that gets ignored every day right here in this place (and frankly just about everywhere freakin’ else).

     Put simply, it’s just not interpreting a person’s statements or arguments in the worst possible way so as to dismiss them or to make it easier to win a point. It’s a principle with echos of the strawman fallacy. In Duncan’s case, its application would mean: “Ok, he didn’t word that so well and there may be a problem with his personalisation of it when it might not apply to him personally, but we know or can reasonably surmise what he meant and respond to the gist of it.” Something like that.

     That didn’t happen for entirely obvious reasons – i.e. people suck.

     I don’t agree Duncan didn’t make an argument. He did. His question was a moral argument, even if an implied one. Statements can be arguments and question simultaneously. Or a question might have an argument at its base. That was the case for Duncan. One might say his question was an emergent property of his underlying argument (that people on higher incomes ought not get tax breaks while low income people are ignored). His argument/point had to be made in the form of a question because of the nature of the context – Q&A.

     His argument was a perfectly reasonable one, as was the question it spawned. The proof of that pudding was in the fact that the knob-heads it was put to refused to even taste it, they being aware that it would be bitter as hell (btw, the proof of a pudding is always in the eating. I hate it when people say the proof is in the pudding. It’s so daft!) Anyhoo …

     The Government just gave a leg-up to people earning $80,000 or more, costing us a billion dollars per year for the next 4 years, while we’re in the middle of desperate revenue shortages, apparently. I’m not an economist or a taxation expert of even passingly good at Math, but I’d like to see the cost figures on raising the tax free threshold to $25,000, because that’s something I’d like to see happen (unless those figures showed that it would be a bad idea).

     Anyway, thanks for the convo.

186. jimhazMay 16, 2016 at 2:00 pm

     It would seem Q and A to the cons means Question and Attack.

     I would love to see somebody on next weeks show, and every show until the election, ask exactly the same question with the same words. Know anyone attending?

     Tonight wouldn’t work as there are no pollies on it – which also means I can actually watch the show. I cannot stand listening to people like O’Dwyer and Willox so often do not watch the show.

187. AthenaMay 16, 2016 at 2:02 pm

     “My point, which was lost as soon as I pressed the ‘post’ button, was that not one of those ripping into Duncan, was answering his perfectly reasonable and legitimate question, all the while disparaging Duncan for being himself, while not taking a good hard look at themselves.”

     It wasn’t lost on me, diannaart. I’m thoroughly sick of the “want something for nothing” criticism. Some people can’t handle the thought that someone else gets something they themselves don’t. Or someone is perceived to get something for nothing. Our government pays for a lot behind the scenes and the average Australian does not realise that we all get something for nothing.

     Small minded people look down upon Duncan and resent him getting something for nothing. I look at him and am grateful that I haven’t been sexually abused, have no mental health issues arising from a traumatic incident in my past that affect my well being and my relationships for many years afterwards, have received a good education, have a good job that provides me with enough money to live comfortably and I don’t need alcohol or drugs to help me escape from an awful reality. If you look at Duncan and are resentful because he gets something for nothing, it is because you are not satisfied with what you do have and you too want something for nothing.

188. AthenaMay 16, 2016 at 2:09 pm

     “I don’t agree Duncan didn’t make an argument. He did. His question was a moral argument, even if an implied one. ”

     Agreed, BYB, and it was a very important one on the eve of an election, which many sheeple quickly forgot in their haste to attack Duncan.

189. diannaartMay 16, 2016 at 2:27 pm

     I am grateful I did not wind up as haunted as Duncan – nor as helpless.

     While I have regrets (too many Frank Sinatra – I hate that song), I have managed to reach the other side, well, not unscathed, I’ll be on anti-depressants for the rest of my life (please no advice on how to give up the meds – I have tried many, many times and, believe me “you won’t like me off meds”).

     Back to point – not one person here prepared to answer Duncan’s question?

     Cat got your tongue?

     Van, disgusted, James, verdiblue, Mohammed Arif Hind? Can’t be arsed typing all your names – you know who you are

     😛

     How about you answer the question?

190. Backyard BobMay 16, 2016 at 3:54 pm

     Hands up all those Aussies who do not get something for “nothing”? Anyone? What, no-one? Oh, wait, there’s one! Henry the Hermit who lives off the land, somewhere on Fraser Island, in a tent made from his own skin. Onya, Henry. You truly are alone.

191. Florence nee FedupMay 16, 2016 at 3:58 pm

     I still don’t know why the answers he got aren’t being condemned. That one who doesn’t earn enough to pay income tax, has no right to ask questions. Worse was implied they are sick these people whinging. Then his comment that he paid tax every time he went shopping, was brushed aside, as we all pay that. His point that it took more out of his ability to spend than those at the top.

192. diannaartMay 16, 2016 at 4:14 pm

     Big “c” Conservatives and truth – oil and water.

193. Kaye LeeMay 16, 2016 at 5:21 pm

     ^^^^Murdoch stooge alert

194. jimhazMay 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm

     Wyatt Roy’s secret lover.

     I have no idea why people expect citizens to be screened before being given the OK to ask a question. Funny how the right wing act like communist leaders aint it.

195. cornlegendMay 16, 2016 at 5:36 pm

     I think the MSM and LNP achieved their goal,
     The audience will be to shit scared to ask questions of LNP on Q&A unless they want the next day “celebrity treatment”
     I think my past would keep them in headlines for weeks

196. cornlegendMay 16, 2016 at 5:38 pm

     jimhazMay 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm

     “Wyatt Roy’s secret lover.”
     I wish to christ he would do a bit of pillow talk and get Wyatt to come clean about Ashbygate

197. diannaartMay 16, 2016 at 5:39 pm

     @Jimhaz

     Take the Right and the Left to their extreme ends and they wind up in Authoritarianism.

     Notice how yet another Duncan-dumpster has not answered The Question?

     Do RWNJ’s hate questions or are they simply too stupid?

198. KyranMay 16, 2016 at 5:47 pm

     ByB @ 1.00 pm, good call. We are being pedantic. We now get a few more weeks of sophistry and get to chose a government. High five’s all round, good on us.
     Politicians will be so busy playing wedgie with each other, they will never address the issues of the people they claim they want to represent.
     “How we treat the statements of those with whom we may disagree” is going to be critical.
     Should we ask them (the politicians) to detail, explicitly, their plan?
     Should we question every bit of ‘information’ they give us?
     Or should we merely acquiesce to their slogans, in fear of a tirade of abuse?
     Whilst I think I understand diannaart’s post @ 12.27, I shudder at the thought that we now live in a society where we must detail our lives, as private individuals, before we can ask a question of a public individual, whose very existence is reliant on our largesse, with subsidies from their sponsors. PS, diannaart, mine is much worse.
     Gonski, NDIS, climate change, NBN, asylum seekers/refugee’s, tax avoidance, corporate subsidies, Medicare, universal education, DV, marriage equality (in no way definitive, and in no particular order) are issues that have majority support, on a positive basis, from the majority of Australians.
     High five’s all round, good on us. We know what we want, but our politicians know better. That’s why sites like this are soooo important.
     Mr Walter @ 2.44. I’m not sure if I will colonise an irrigation, or irrigate a colony. Are they both trickle down? Take care

199. diannaartMay 16, 2016 at 5:53 pm

     PS, diannaart, mine is much worse

     What makes you think I spilled everything?

     But if it makes you feel better; there, there you poor little misunderstood lamb.

200. Terry2May 16, 2016 at 5:53 pm

     Now here’s something you don’t see everyday and you certainly won’t see anything about in News Corp publications.

     Turnbull re-announcing the patrol boat contracts in Fremantle today without the Liberal Fremantle candidate, Sheri Sufi whose CV for preselection had a few embellishments, claiming to have worked for the premier and finance departments in WA when he actually worked for state MPs. Telling lies is OK in the Liberal Party – it’s a ‘broad church’ of liars and hypocrites after all.

     Sufi also doesn’t like homosexuals or aborigines and I daresay he’s not too keen on women : sounds like a budding Liberal Minister in the making.

     But he wasn’t invited to the hi-viz occasion in his electorate and neither was Colin Barnett, Liberal Premier of WA. Now what’s going on there, were they not invited or did they boycott the cherry ?

     Shorten has called this bloke a ‘knuckle dragger which seems apt. I wonder if Turnbull will have the guts to disendorse him – watch this space.

     There has never been a more exciting time to be in Fremantle!

201. RossleighMay 16, 2016 at 6:02 pm

     Given Awyatt Mann’s idea that people should be screened for asking questions, I guess that he expects to have his past sins blasted all over the “Socialist Alliance” or “The Sydney Morning Herald”…

202. Backyard BobMay 16, 2016 at 6:05 pm

     Um, you just have to look at “Awyatt Mann”‘s google channel to see what he is. Move on.

     https://plus.google.com/100763045410622973899/posts

     A. Wyatt Mann is the pen name of the political cartoonist Nick Bougas, best known for his drawings depicting white supremacist and racist sentiments. Online, Mann’s drawings have gained a cult following on communities such as 4chan’s /pol/ (Politically Incorrect) and Stormfront, typically being used as exploitables.

203. Michael TaylorMay 16, 2016 at 6:12 pm

     Thanks Bob. ?

204. Kaye LeeMay 16, 2016 at 6:13 pm

     Awyatt Mann’s comment has been deleted. Good call admin. He calls himself a “pavement ape hunter”. I wondered what that meant but ByB’s comment may have sorted that out for me.

     Apparently A. Wyatt Mann is a pun for “a white man”.

205. KyranMay 16, 2016 at 6:29 pm

     “What makes you think I spilled everything?” Well said, diannaart. I was being presumptuous.
     I still shudder at the thought that we now live in a society where we must detail our lives, as private individuals, before we can ask a question of a public individual, whose very existence is reliant on our largesse, with subsidies from their sponsors.
     I’ve been called lot’s of things. I can now add lamb. Take care

206. RossleighMay 16, 2016 at 6:41 pm

     Ah, nothing’s changed since artists had to live on the whims of patrons and people became debt slaves because their parents or someone couldn’t pay their debts. The only difference is that now we’re expected to believe that somehow the few who win the lottery of life are an indication that the rest of us didn’t work hard enough.
     You know the story, this person was born into a family of miners and yet, due to the triumph of the will, he overcame everything to be the best dancer in the history of the family and was aknowledged as someone worthy of funding from the Liberals. The fact that the rest of you just got beaten into submission was your fault and why didn’t you just ask your parents for a two million dollar loan to enter the property investment market.

     Mm, triumph of the will???
     Now why does that ring a bell.

     Leni Reifenstahl…

     What fun she’d have today!

207. Sir ScotchmisteryMay 16, 2016 at 6:53 pm

     LOL Shorten referring to any politician as a knuckle dragger smacks of pots and kettles. If Shorten is the best the ALP can do that’s them stuffed.

     One lives in hope however. Shorten would be the lesser of two evils.

208. Kaye LeeMay 16, 2016 at 7:13 pm

     “Arbeit macht frei” (unless you are an asylum seeker of course)

209. Deanna JonesMay 16, 2016 at 7:53 pm

     What is quite disturbing is that a commenter here has stated that the issue of domestic/family violence is a ‘scam’ and this statement has been supported by AIMN. Is this the position of AIMN?

210. Michael TaylorMay 16, 2016 at 8:00 pm

     Deanna, it’s definitely not the position of The AIMN, any of our authors, and 99.9% of the people who comment here. But if we deleted a comment simply because we disagree with that commenter’s opinion, we are hounded for not supporting free speech.

     Sometimes you just can’t win.

     (Obviously some comments do deserve to be deleted though).

211. AthenaMay 16, 2016 at 8:29 pm

     “Do RWNJ’s hate questions or are they simply too stupid?”

     Well they just repeat the crap spoon fed to them by Murdoch and his cronies. It’s obvious they lack critical thinking skills so I’ll go with too stupid.

212. Annie BMay 16, 2016 at 8:51 pm

     Kaye – …

     “Work sets you free” … ( yep – I had to look that up !! 🙂 ). And you are right with – ‘unless you are an asylum seeker of course’.

     I cannot comprehend in any way ( who can ? ), why there is so much antagonism and outright vile perception, towards asylum seekers. There are plenty of proper – and no doubt easy – ways to sort out those that are, and those that are not eligible – in terms of validity, health ( regular immigrants with health issues are perused seriously and often are not permitted to emigrate because of illness, possible disease etc ) … and their background and work ethic.

     The whole thing stinks to high heaven. Smacks of perceived superiority of the worst kind. The ‘we are better than them’ concept. Ugh – repugnant.

     ………

     As for that awyatt man ( a white man ) garbage – thank you AIM for deleting it. I did receive the full- on version in my mail account and it was truly disgusting. But even more disgusting was the google account trash, this travesty of humanity delivers. Yes, I looked, and left very quickly. Sickening garbage.

     He calls himself “A pavement ape hunter” ? Just a pavement pervert I would think, and a very dangerous ape ( with all apologies to apes in this world ).

     ………..

213. Annie BMay 16, 2016 at 9:04 pm

     No person on this earth, should ever have to explain themselves, cowering down, to any other person.

     …………. Period.

     Every last one of us on this website, has done something or other in their past, that is – er – questionable ? ….. I would make book on that.

     I have – to my utter chagrin ( details not for public consumption ), done stupid, utterly idiotic – even dangerous things ( but not involving violence ). Still and all, if Storrar has committed offences, been brought to justice, has paid ( in some way ) for his past, then he has – as we all should have – freedom of speech to ask his perfectly simple question.

     The rot set in when the person addressed could not – or would not – answer. And the media took it up big time … it is bleeding – let it be leading.

     The MSM are mostly – a pack of bastards. …

     My rant …. probably don’t have to tell anyone here, that little snippet of news.

214. Helen SMay 16, 2016 at 9:57 pm

     I think Mr Storrer felt he was speaking for everyone who could not speak for themselves he would have had no idea he would be attacked and denigrated the way he was. I feel I must apologise to him and his family for the disgraceful actions of the LNP and some media, I am so sorry you had to suffer through the cowardly attacks of the people who have made your life a misery and hope that in some small way this message helps.
     The actions of right wing politicians and media have appalled me for the last 50 years they have had the same credo of right wing governments since time began. If any person has the temerity to question their actions/policies ATTACK and make them feel and seem small and unworthy to the general population. I am disgusted with our current mob of political parties including the Greens I think I will be voting independent.

215. Annie BMay 16, 2016 at 10:06 pm

     Helen S …

     Hear, hear and ditto x 10 to your comments.

     I hope Duncan can recover from this onslaught quickly, and move on with his life.

     The question – however, still remains to be answered.

     And such a simple open and honest question it was – at the time.

216. jospannerMay 21, 2016 at 12:16 am

     Hang in there Duncan! Newcorp’s hardly surviving. Sun sales just drop and drop. The Australian has never paid its own way. It’s Murdock’s little vanity piece, how to pretend to have a brain or heart. Murdock press couldn’t even afford to keep doing the one useful thing they published, the Free paper for homebound commuters to do the puzzles in. Duncan S. you have zero to be asshamed of, much to be proud of and oodles of people rooting for you and planning to emulate you. Give the wife and kids a hug.

217. Alan WettonMay 23, 2016 at 1:26 pm

     I think the real Villian in this unfortunate episode is the ABC Producer of Q&A. I cannot believe that Duncan woke up one day and said I must go on the ABC Q&A and tell everybody I am poor and the Governments new Budget doesn’t help me! I have experienced Media outlets seeking out people like Duncan to kick the Government in the shins. I had stopped watching Q&A after they allowed a Terrorist on their program and then couldn’t admit they made a mistake, I turned on Q&A in time to hear Duncan’s question and the ABC’s leftist activists were overjoyed at the scripted question that came from Duncan. A&A is back in the sin bin!

218. jimhazMay 23, 2016 at 1:52 pm

     Alan, you are a patronising prude who is a compete and utter sucker to the propaganda of the right.

219. Annie BMay 23, 2016 at 2:43 pm

     I have attempted to reply to jimhaz, with some pertinent information about media and what they get up to, but all I get when trying to post the comment is “page not found” …. and an image of the header at the top of AIM pages in the “Leave a Reply” area.

     hmmmm…….. I will try to repost the comment again later. Fortunately, I took a copy of it, and perhaps I should post it in small increments, as this comment has been successfully posted. !!

220. Annie BMay 23, 2016 at 8:07 pm

     Tried again, and had the same result …. so will post in smaller increments …. that might work !!! 🙁
     …………

     jimhaz ….

     Whether Alan is prudish, or a sucker to right wing propaganda, or is indeed completely right-wing LNP-all-the-way supporter himself, is neither here nor there –

     I worked in media and TV myself many years ago. And I doubt that anything has changed at all. They will edit, screen, interview, select, introduce inappropriate comments at wrong times, photograph a ‘shoe’ ( always a damned shoe’ ) at the scene of a tragic accident. ( they even photograph blood these days as well ) …. all for the ‘enjoyment’ ????? of the viewing public. They defend themselves by uttering ” it’s what the people want “. ……. ( continuing – – )

221. Annie BMay 23, 2016 at 8:09 pm

     …. continued > > >

     The oldest mantra since print began is “if it bleeds, it leads” …. and in this case, after screening of various people in the audience, [ that was no doubt done by Q & A minions ], they chose a man who looked like he’d been through the mill, perhaps ‘helped’ him formulate his question ( I wouldn’t put it past them ) …. and would have turned their cameras on him before he was asked the question because shows don’t ‘just happen’ …. They are scripted. … They are directed. …. They are produced.

     Production and direction follows a format. Tony Jones as moderator, watches carefully for ‘wind-up’ signals from directors, if it appears he or the subject being discussed, is going over time. Similarly, they have signals for ‘expanding’ the subject – filling it in. …. ( continuing ) …

222. Annie BMay 23, 2016 at 8:12 pm

     …. ( continued ) …..

     The number of times I have heard people interviewed, the interview is edited ( often harshly ) to give the audience what the programme WANTS the audience to hear. And the number of times I have heard those same people say “but that’s not actually what I meant”. They can’t claim it’s not what they said of course, but with clever editing, can give a very wrong impression.

     The ABC Q & A, knew exactly what they were doing, in ‘selecting’ Duncan to put his question. Just as all other TV shows ( and newsprint editorials, shock jock articles, reports of whatever, do ).

     And they dare to call it ‘truth’. I have little or no time for the MSM, in its variety of forms.

223. Annie BMay 23, 2016 at 8:15 pm

     Well – that trick seemed to work !!! 🙂

     Michael — do you have any idea why that happened ? Is it the number of posts here,and subsequently now a limit to lengths of posts – – – or what ? 🙂 Would be interested to know.

224. diannaartMay 24, 2016 at 8:10 am

     Annie B

     I agree that mostly everything is scripted to a ridiculous degree- while I haven’t been involved in news programs – I do know that absolute control, due to many factors, is the goal.

     BUT

     Duncan is a real person.

     His question is valid.

     He was vilified, hounded and trashed by MSM.

     …and no one has answered the question.

225. Annie BMay 24, 2016 at 2:15 pm

     diannaart …..

     Totally agree with you.

     Real person who attended the Q & A show, with the intention ( possibly ) of asking a question, in some way.

     Real and valid question. ( possibly coached – but that can’t be proved ).

     Hounded and trashed by the MSM – which was the ‘roll-on’ effect from the programme, and gave them superb ammunition to vilify him by dragging up his past ( which of course suited perfectly the aims of the right-wing loving MSM ).

     And no-one has answered the question – – – and they are not likely to either. Too hot a potato to handle for this ridiculous government.

     The audience reaction ( from memory ) was very favourable towards him. Be good to think he has been able to move on and leave that media trash behind him.

226. diannaartMay 24, 2016 at 4:44 pm

     Annie B

     I hope Duncan has managed to put the entire debacle behind him – I understand only too well the difficulty what the eggshell walk of depression can be.

     I agree that the neo-cons won’t dare go near the question – not one person who posted here lambasting Duncan responded to repeated requests to simply explain why rich get a tax break and the poorest of us get zip.

227. jimhazMay 24, 2016 at 5:11 pm

     Annie,

     I got annoyed with Alan, as he was more or less inferring the Duncan was too dumb to think or such a question on his own or that as a low income person then by default he would simply not be sufficiently interested to attend a QandA session.

     As for the question it was his as it was submitted prior to the show.

     “His question on tax rates was one of two he submitted on May 6 in response to Q&A’s regular audience mail-out to its upcoming studio audience, and he knew it had made the show’s shortlist.

     “They defend themselves by uttering ” it’s what the people want “

     Well I want more questions like this from average Australians, and less about topics like refugees that have already been covered repeatedly by QandA.

228. Annie BMay 24, 2016 at 9:08 pm

     jimhaz ….

     I understand your sentiments here. But Alan was having a real ding dong go at the ABC ( and it’s programmes ) ……. not at Duncan Storrar himself.

     Well, that’s how I read it.

     Alan commented about ” Media outlets seeking out people like Duncan to kick the Government in the shins.” …. The media kick a great many more in the shins, than just government. In fact, government is way down the list of shin-kicking, because most of the MSM is right wing motivated, and they dare not kick too many shins in that territory ….. . But, if it comes to the crunch, any story will do as long as they can kick someone’s shins. ….. That’s the way the MSM is, works and lives.

     Whether or not that commenter is a ‘sucker to the right’ or not is immaterial. Unfortunately, there are many who are indeed ‘suckers to the right’ … and it often comes from a need for more and more money. Something the Labor party and other parties / independents, will not give them. So – they suck up to the LNP who will look after the wealthy and the climbing wealthy.

     I do have to repeat though, that Q&A would have vetted their audience questions, and chosen something that could become contentious —- which proved correct. A possibility is, that they snidely chose him to put his question ( with or without coaching ) …. to a person they knew would not answer, nor be capable of answering. …. Weird suggestion here – maybe Aunty ABC is not as pro-right, as many seem to think they are.

     Just a thought …… !! 😉