Most of you probably saw Monday’s papers which contained words interrupted by large blocks of ink suggesting that the inbetween bits had been redacted. Of course, they hadn’t because if you read the printed words, they still made sense so the whole thing was a little contrived.
Personally, I’m not sure that it was the way to go. It may have been far more effective to have printed a story with the best bits blanked out. To show you what I mean, look at the following hypothetical example:
Barnaby Joyce caused quite a stir while at the (redacted). After consuming (redacted) followed by(redacted), he seemed (redacted), so nobody was surprised when he pulled out his (redacted) and started showing (redacted) to anyone in the vicinity. “Look at my(redacted)!” exclaimed Barnaby, “What a beautiful (redacted)!” He was forced to stop when his (redacted) went (redacted). He requested to put his (redacted) into a nearby (redacted) but he was told that it (redacted). He did manage to use someone’s (redacted).
Which, of course, is a lot more worrying than the unredacted version.
Barnaby Joyce caused quite a stir while at the local pub. After consuming a hearty main course followed by a dessert, he seemed relaxed, so nobody was surprised when he pulled out his phone and started showing photos of his baby to anyone in the vicinity. “Look at my boy!” exclaimed Barnaby, “What a beautiful baby” He was forced to stop when his mobile went flat. He requested to put his charger into a nearby powerpoint but he was told that it was faulty He did manage to use someone’s portable charger.
Similarly, read this one about Scott Morrison so that you can see how censoring information can create a totally wrong impression.
ScoMo, as he likes to call himself, or (redacted), as many others call him, has some very interesting friends. Most people have heard about his friend, (redacted) , whose father was a (redacted) . But very few people have heard about his bestie whose part of (redacted) group which believes that there’s a “deep state” conspiracy trying to (redacted), and whose wife is on the public payroll as (redacted) , because the media have been told not to print anything about them because it’s been declared off limits by Morrison and none of them want to print anything unless the government says it’s ok.
Oh, apparently I can’t print the unredacted version of that one without expecting the police to come and ask me to hand over my computer and show them what I had in my underwear drawer…
Anyway, I can’t wait for the media to actually show the sort of courage that I’m not prepared to because I’m worried that they’d make fun of my Sponge Bob boxer shorts. Besides I’m not a serious journalist…
I trust that last sentence won’t have me sharing a cell with Julian Assange, and not just because the Ecuadorians said that he wasn’t much fun. Whatever, if you don’t hear from me, you’ll know that I’ve been (redacted) and (redacted).
[textblock style=”7″]
Like what we do at The AIMN?
You’ll like it even more knowing that your donation will help us to keep up the good fight.
Chuck in a few bucks and see just how far it goes!
[/textblock]
That unwiped yankee arsehole Murdoch, he of the maggot machine in media, is trying to refressh the saddle, the whip, the spurs, all the better to control the fading plantation, assure the slutty slaves that typing will go on, and to refresh his position as the king of the corpse and controller of burial. The shitsmeared slaves like Morrison, Dutton, Joyce, Bolt, Devine, all require some assurance that the usual filth will prevail and notice, pose and money will be stable. Real and ordinary Australians need not worry about relevance; it’s effing well gone and will not return until the uberfuhrer of lies and exaggeration passes. Murdoch wants to corner and embarrass the unreliable LNP dickheads who can’t corner the control system correctly, like the Boeing liars and profiteers.
Well, I wonder what the reaction would be if only the abc was raided?
thanks boobby
Rossleigh, your redacted article made entertaining reading. But a more effective student approach to redaction would have redacted the names of the politicians in every article printed or broadcast. This would frustrate the main purpose of political press releases which is to keep the name of the politicians before the public so that the public knows who to vote for at the next election.
So your offering would become anonymous;
“XXXXXXXXXX caused quite a stir while at the local pub. After consuming a hearty main course followed by a dessert, XXXXX seemed relaxed, so nobody was surprised when XXXXX pulled out his XXXXX and started showing photos of XXXXX XXXXX to anyone in the vicinity. “Look at my XXXXX!” exclaimed XXXXXXXXXX, “What a beautiful XXXXX” XXXXX was forced to stop when his XXXXX went flat.”
Marvellously stimulating for the imagination of the reader.
In Barnyard’s case, this would defeat his present campaign to de-stabilise the current incumbent nat$ leader, Mick What’s-‘s’name, by using the incorrect terms “former Leader of the Nat$” and “former deputy Prim Monster” instead of his correct label “representative of the nat$ and big money in New England to the detriment of Australian voters”.
I love that plan NEC !! Great idea. Losing the publicity would be horrendous for them all
Just one question to all these so-called freedom of the press warriors, displaying such ‘courage and outrage’, trying to gain credibility as voices for democracy etc etc……. Where were you for the last 7 years and particularly before the last 3 election campaigns, when you fully and brazenly supported one side of politics and even now, keep demonizing the parties who are not in government, and praising and covering up the misdemeanors of the current bastards in charge.
So, spare us the bullshit, keep f#cking yourselves, because that’s what you’re good at and what you excel in. Just don’t bullshit and fck with us.
Henry, I couldn’t agree more. The msm screamed loud and clear,” vote this mob out”, etc etc. not just Turdoch but the the whole bloody lot of them including “your” ABC. It’s a classic case of, no them not us. Your suppose to go after them, whoever them are, not us the compliant sycophantic dish lickers in media, not us. Hahahahaha!
It’s probably a good thing that the media are starting to mount a campaign about freedom. True, they’ve come a little late to the party and there is the element of naked self-interest. “Gee, we always thought we were exempt because some of us are on first name terms with MPs but now the AFP is raiding us, we better take a close look at things”. When I wrote a play about the overreach of our anti-terrorism laws a lot of people bought the government’s line of: “Well, the legislation might say that, but this is Australia and it would never be used like that, so stop your hysterical nonsense.” My point was that even if you trust Howard (ha!), the laws are there and who can say how someone will use them at some point twenty years into the future.
I’m sure that Mosco’s statement to Parliament that while press freedom is important, nobody is above the law, would have been a great relief to any whistleblower planning to reveal such „state secrets“ as the government’s mismanagement of (redacted) or their (redacted). This is even before we look at (redacted).
Rossleigh …
“This is Australia ” seems to be the main point re press freedom whistleblowers etc.
This is Australia as administered by the redacted redacted Morrison redacted “government”.
I believe the word is out overseas re the parlous state this country finds itself in.
If only we took the lead from the Scandinavian countries e.g. Denmark or perhaps Norway …well known for their sovereign wealth fund of one trillion $. {used for the benefit of their citizens) rather than our foreign debt of half a trillion $
the clever country ? I don’t think so.