We all know just how manipulative, dishonest, sensationalist, gutless, unfair and unbalanced the media is in this country. And it seems at time as though they are simply making up the news.

The Daily Telegraph’s Gemma Jones has been very successful in coming up with some blistering political scoops over the last couple of days that fit that description. She may have a history of such successes, but of this I don’t know as I’ve only noticed her contribution to our political discourse over the past say or so. Given that she is employed by the Murdoch media empire would suggest that she’s a master of political journalism. From what I’ve seen in my rare adventures into reading anything produced by the Murdoch zoo it portrays itself as nothing but a provider of gossip.

The three pieces that Gemma Jones has written, or co-written, over the space of a mere 24 hours confirm my opinions of the rubbish that the Murdoch media specialise in. Stories are fabricated or blown up out of proportion to make them appear as though they are the scoop of the year. These stories may very well be based on facts, and most readers might actually assume that to be the case given the sensationalist and convincing nature of the content.

I would argue that the content, in most cases, is fabricated as are the sources and statements that the articles are built around.

Take this big scoop about the old media favourite: a Rudd challenge to Julia Gillard in the article ‘Ides of March: PM, Rudd set for battle’. The story leads off with:

A final showdown between Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd could come within weeks, as tensions in the Labor caucus rose yesterday over the leaking of a letter critical of the former PM.

She gives the story some ‘weight’ by introducing a host of people that could have easily been fabricated, as so might be their alleged statements. Yet they litter almost every paragraph. The paragraphs are below, where I have highlighted the ‘fictitious’ people.

Supporters of Mr Rudd yesterday accused the Gillard supporters of circulating a damaging letter from a member of the public to the media and among the caucus . . .

Claiming it was in retaliation for Mr Rudd’s public attacks over the failed mining tax, several Rudd backers claimed there was now a push within his ranks to “finish the thing before the end of March”.

Mr Rudd has been privately counselled by some of his key backers to pull back from his public campaign for fear it could spark another showdown before they are ready.

And a source close to the PM said Ms Gillard would not rise to the bait and had no intention of goading the former PM while she still had the numbers behind her.

But many in Parliament believe another challenge to Ms Gillard’s leadership is being hatched.

MPs have been seen openly coming and going from Mr Rudd’s office this week.

One Rudd supporter yesterday admitted that the issue was coming to a head but wanted to give the appearance that “nothing was going on”. “There is nothing happening, no counting, nothing going on,” they said. (“They said”? I thought there was only one supporter).

“But it would be fair to say though that a lot of MPs are becoming increasingly despondent about their prospects after the disasters of the past few weeks.”

Another MP, who supports Mr Rudd, said: “Every day is a blow, every day there is something that dents the confidence of members in the leadership . . . “.

An MP who backed Mr Rudd in the leadership ballot last year said caucus members were “shaking their heads” over the $126 million return on the mining tax and reports yesterday that a $4 billion hole could be left in the Budget when the carbon tax moves to an ETS if the price plunges, as predicted.

Just about every paragraph in the first half of the story is built around what an un-named person insists upon. They could be anybody. Perhaps even Piers Akerman’s distinguished eye surgeon. Names are introduced at the end of the article, by which time readers would be the ones “shaking their heads”.

But what I find most interesting is that this article suspiciously appears to be based around something the Opposition’s Julie Bishop had said the day before:

”Beware the Ides of March.” The next meeting of the Labor caucus falls on the week of March 15, she said. Who would be the Prime Minister’s Brutus? Exeunt and end scene.

How convienient. Someone has given Ms Jones a little spur from which to build a story. And in keeping with the Murdoch agenda it was used as an attack against the Government. Kevin Rudd might very well be planning a challenge. I don’t know. But I do know that Ms Jones’ article fails to convince me that it’s a true story. And I find it odd that when Kevin Rudd does come out and publicly state that he’s not interested in a challenge that it appears in news.com without an author referenced. What’s the matter? Can’t Murdoch find any journalists prepared to but their name to a story that might have some truth about it?

Twelve hours later an article from Ms Jones again makes the front page; an article about taxpayers paying for NBN coffee. Jones didn’t make up many names, just the story. On the front page of news.com we read that:

Aussies are frothing at the mouth over news NBN is spending over $164,000 on fancy beans and coffee machines.

You can read her article here, titled Libs foaming over NBN coffee perk. Have a read of the article and tell if you see where it says that Aussies are frothing at the mouth or whether the Libs are foaming over the coffee machines.

Actually, don’t bother, as they aren’t there. It’s just another one of those pathetic headlining bullshit stories that have become the trademark of the Murdoch media. Expect it to get worse as the election nears.

Jones was at it again within 24 hours with this stunner: By-election threat to test PM’s leadership. I ventured in to read the story. As with her recent article about a Rudd challenge it is filled with speculation and un-named sources, which I have highlighted:

The former federal attorney-general is likely to win a job with the NSW Industrial Relations Commission. Prime Minister Julia Gillard is expected to argue the resignation would be too close to the September 14 election date for a by-election to be necessary, further fuelling speculation the poll decision was simply a strategy to defend that position.

While the minority government would still have the numbers in parliament to retain power, losing another MP – even without a by-election – would cause a “psychological injury” – as one Labor MP described it.

State government sources have confirmed a decision on Mr McClelland’s job application is as little as one month to two months away. He is understood to be prepared to jump out of parliament immediately to take on the role.

A spokesman for Ms Gillard denied yesterday she had any knowledge of Mr McClelland’s decision when she announced the election date – a day after Mr McClelland announced he was retiring from politics at the next election.

The only piece of remote credibility in those paragraphs is the “spokesman for Ms Gillard”. Ms Jones, should that source not put an end to the speculation you have led us to believe are facts?

Like I noted above, expect it to get worse as the election nears. Much, much worse.

Journalists in our fair country claim we need a better government. I would argue that we need a better media. But I don’t expect that Ms Jones and her employer will bother to lead the way.