Values Based Capitalism: The Imperative of Defining Commitment…

By Denis Bright Editorial insiders at The Weekend Australian (28-29 January 2023)…

A walk in the forest

Bayerischer Wald can be just as hard to get to than it…

An Emergent Premier Chris Minns - Uniting Sydney…

By Denis Bright After more than a decade in Opposition, NSW Labor is…

Forget Australia Day And Celebrate: Rum Rebellion Day…

After pointing out for a number of years that January 26th isn't…

Whither Constitutional Change?

Within a very short space of time, we are going to be…

Distracted by hate, we are robbed

We are at a crossroads. The Ultra High Net Worth Individual (UHNWI)…

Doltish Ways: Biden’s Documents Problem

Through the course of his political life, the current US president has…

From 2016: Captained by Crusaders

This account of an event at the Melbourne Club in 2016 was…


The Murdochracy

We are fighting a war on Climate Change in Australia, we are fighting a war against the strong scientific inference of climate change. It is a sad fact, that the absolute significance to changes in the earth’s climatic cycles are not acknowledged to the broader society.

Transnational media has been allowed to access false information on false pretences to formally and informally describe scientific consensus that is neither true nor conclusive. We are living in an age where it is these pretences that lead to the revulsions in public discourse. They perpetuate evidence to the people that anthropogenic climate change does not exist. We can attribute the gradual process of capitalist change to be an overt perversion of scientific reverence. Intelligent and scientifically minded individuals resist in vain, for the conservative social stance is both triumphant and celebrated, but why?

We can look to these clues with changes in social discourse, by examining the News Limited media. By examining News Limited we can incorporate a corporate capitalist phenomena, where an innate power for financial profit has lead to a democratic override, and the winner takes all. We are living in a time where neither a strong evidential basis nor bi-partisan approach will evoke change significant to stop the transgression of the multi-faceted 70% power distributed, Murdoch media. The shocking reverence of the situation is this: what you read, what you see and what you hear is all a representation of interpretivist opinion backed up by sceptics and conglomerate news bodies who seek to mandate public discourse – without true mass media approaches. These approaches are misrepresentations of facts and figures and bias which divulge the ever condensing incorrect views of climate change. These revered and conversely public trusted tabloids are the ones that are perverting the social justice. The very same justice that leads to the dilution and unstructured social opinion that not only persuades but integrates societal ‘know how’.

For those who are aware, this is what we know: it is not just the configuration of society that controls these aspects, and the dissertation of opinion underlying strong scientific background- as well as the complete and utter reverence that science can and should uphold. It is also something else; it is the greater understanding of complex concepts that are not transcribed in a proper ‘user friendly’ way or if transcribed at all. It is the external factor, the foundations of knowledge and the complexity of interpreting this knowledge to the people. I suspect the underlying consideration that we must address is the ‘denial’ and current ignorance that surrounds corporate body structures such as News Limited and the current Liberal Government and one Tony Abbott and their stakeholders. We can only deduce from these observations, a conformist acquisition, one, where media owned adversaries seek to ignore the evidence of climate change science for, their own initiatives for the favouring of their own financial gain.

For this idea to uphold, we must take into consideration the influence that transnational media can and does have on the wider public opinion. We must transgress this idea further, and consider the elements of . . . dare I say it . . . propaganda. Yes, propaganda! Consider this: it is not without thought that we go so far as to say, political factions of propaganda are truly evident in mass media.

Propaganda, whilst alluding the attitudes of political opinion also eludes the values and emotional upheaval of individual opinion; take for instance Adolf Hitler’s approach. As far as we know, we can see these attitudes transgress to the audience through the author’s personal epitomes and consumerist views. That is, through short worded slogans and repeated headlines that seek to optimize emotional and social relevance- often termed invoking the climate of fear, for example ‘Climate change not caused by humans” and “With Climate scientists like this no wonder we doubt”. A tactic that invokes contextual wording to interpret things that tug at fear and make people go ‘wow’, ‘The media doesn’t agree with experts why?’ But, does this transgress (mass media approach) to influence and persuade individual opinion? Does this really pervert public discourse?

YES and here’s why. We have only to examine the structure of hierarchy in Australian society, to exude confidence that indeed capitalist opinion has strongly and forthright berated the notion of climate change science. How, you ask? By decreeing the factual publication that follows it, in exchange for the more effervescent emotionally charged ‘writing on the wall’ and these short worded slogans are the misperceptions that invoke the general climate of fear. The wall has become no longer responsible for initiating freethinking thought or providing factual and progressive knowledge for adequate exploration of external stimuli, that is, exploration that provokes progressions in critical thinking before one accepts new knowledge. In place we have this wall, a safe cove r- a mask if you will, one that seeks to perversely calm and elude individuals away from real danger, pushing an agenda that ignores the kind of investigative thought that brought about the uprise of modern society, modern economy and scientific progression.

Indeed News Limited has exceeded these prospects, and further constructed a consumerist approach that not only constrains the individual, but also eludes them to the incorrect information that will eventually decimate social, emotional, environmental and political/democratic structure. News Limited will elude their audience to a point of no return in which case, we will see more than a group of troubled individuals with no free thought -but a group of troubled individuals that will vote according to these allusions that have propagated in their mass media world. The result you ask? Well, it’s a group of right winged zombies who neither understand nor amend their thought as to why they voted in such a contentious (conservative) way.

For all to see, News Limited got their wish, for the first time, democracy has failed and for the first time, transnational media came, crushed, killed and decimated an audience of free thinkers. News Limited poisoned their right to execute free thought or one that would favour their way of life. For the first time ever we see ‘tradies’, ‘parents’, ’single mothers ‘, ‘pensioners’ and ‘low-income earners’, vote against subsequent benefits that aim to target the particular struggle their respective bracket represents. What has Murdoch Media done? They have allowed Tony Abbot and his pack of liberal dogs to come forth for the kill and bring about the inevitable crumble of social justice. The Murdochcracy has created a new breed in society, once and for all-this new breed has gone against their own rights, their own free will and their best interests at heart- for favour of liberal conservative factions that aim to destroy the very things they are voting against . . . sound familiar? So, the political factions that were once opposition (for good reason), are thrust into power and News Limited epitomise these views with each passing day, so now, for the first time ever – a corporate capitalist structure has finally decomposed the walls of democracy and laid foundations of misadventure to the democratic right of the people.

That is right – you heard that right! News Limited has succeeded in diluting the values of free thought, transgressing ignorance and interpretivist views that assist with the consumerist/conservative approach to financial gain. One that is not in the best interest of social discourse, the best interests of the people and… not in the best interest of scientific reverence. So . . . the bottom line – all of this is not in the best interest for exposing the truth of Australia’s Changing Climate and the struggles that are yet to come. Is it propaganda? Has the Marino Wool from our jackets been pulled over our eyes? Australia’s climate is changing, so why has News Limited and it’s Murdochcracy been allowed to decide our fate?

*Author’s note-when I say ‘climate change’ I am referring to ‘anthropogenic (human induced) climate change; therefore, the sceptics view is: denial of ‘human induced climate change’.


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!

Your contribution to help with the running costs of this site will be gratefully accepted.

You can donate through PayPal or credit card via the button below, or donate via bank transfer: BSB: 062500; A/c no: 10495969

Donate Button

 611 total views,  1 views today


Login here Register here
  1. DanDark

    Great article, sad but true
    Murdoch is a grub, has always been a grub
    And will always be grub, but he has money and power
    And the minions
    Like hitler had, and yes we are heading down that
    Path with maniac Murdoch steering the ship,
    He needs cutting down at the knees, before
    We slide past the point of no return

  2. Matters Not

    Nicole when I was ‘studying’ my supervisor said to me. Keep it simple. Keep it short. Big words don’t make an argument. Choose simplicity over complexity.

    Sentences such as, (and there are any number of examples, that I could choose):

    has succeeded in diluting the values of free thought, transgressing ignorance and interpretivist views that assist with the consumerist/conservative approach to financial gain

    simply turn people off.

    Also don’t use words that have ‘contestable’ meanings, such as ‘decimate’. Is it about killing one-tenth? The historical ‘meaning’.

    Only trying to be helpful.

  3. Auricle

    I’m with you, Matters Not.
    “… and bring about the inevitable crumble of social justice.”

  4. stephengb2014

    Ok -convincing article -bit what if this article is doing exactly the same in reverse.

    Got the message in spite of the overuse of words that are not in general use for the majority of those that need to understand it!

  5. Rob Murphy

    ‘Australia’s climate is changing, so why has News Limited and it’s Murdochcracy been allowed to decide our fate?’

    In any search engine of choice, copy/paste the three words below.

    murdoch israel oil

    Israel approves drilling for oil in Golan Heights –

    Isn’t it obvious why the up to it’s armpits in oil murdochracy are so fearful of renewables and any criticism of Israel land grab, ethnic cleaning operations?

  6. john921fraser



    Trolling again I see.

    This simpleton can't even type and I seriously doubt his reading ability, let alone his comprehension skills.

    The garbage he posts he picks out of his feeble imagination.

    Time to troll off now, you silly boy.

  7. Bacchus

    The “intellectual rigour” of this wanna be is shown up by “you shouldn’t of wasted 1500 words…

    Dunning–Kruger comes to mind for some reason…

  8. Nicole Clark

    Kobymac, I leave for you this; “the-political-economy-of-climate-change” which is the first academic article I wrote, which is backed up by literature, there you will find the similarities in what I am saying actually and how above opinions do stem from wider literature. The idea of a opinion piece is to display ones own thoughts and ideas and to share them with the public. I do not claim to ‘know it all’ and I feel it is a bit rich that you claim ‘ideologies are invisible to the common reader’, yes they are, of course they are, my opinions are based on peer review literature- but they are there when those of which do so decide to seek them. Now I leave you with an article that conducted a study through discourse analysis of media content, that confirms up to 77% of the sway in climate change facts come from Murdoch media Also not that I would ordinarily rely too much on Wikipedia, but for the common reader it says in black and white ‘Murdoch owns 70% of the Australian print media’. You state ‘If I remember right…’ well you didn’t because in stead of remembering I looked it up for you.

    To others, your comments are helpful, but at the same time, every word I use has a written intent, and not everyone is going to agree on that written intent. I’m an academic I’m used to the hardest and most difficult scrutiny of them all! Such scrutiny that never leaves anything perfect or anything imperfect and the day I reach perfection in pleasing everyone is the day the sun falls out of the sky! The above article is exactly how I think and feel, it is an opinion piece it is the art of literature, nothing perfect, nothing obvious and nothing brilliant beyond the means of absolute. Some may say it is repetition, but how can you define what it will be, in order to be perfect for everyone. I can promise to share my knowledge and my ideas, but I can not promise the methods or the format of such ways I do share, will please everyone.

    Thank you for taking the time to read anyway 🙂

  9. Carol Taylor

    Kobymac and,

    when a perceived Liberal supporter provides a link to a Murdoch publication they are ridiculed….

    Perhaps because such articles receive a substantial ‘fail’ in the area of factual evidence. To be quoted as ‘evidence’ something has to be more than an opinion based on unsubstantiated rumour or LNP political propaganda..things such as numbers and expert opinion are always good. Apologies for any ridicule but it’s difficult for most to come to terms with the fact that there are people who still believe that the Murdoch rags contain facts. I wouldn’t believe their headliner about 5 fat burning foods either…

  10. Nicole Clark

    Also never make the mistake of thinking that ‘I’ believe anything I write is brilliant, I do not suffer from false self assurance, I’m well aware of my faults just as any open minded adaptable person is.

  11. Carol Taylor

    Nicole, then let me do it for you…it’s a great article, an excellent read. 🙂

  12. Nicole Clark

    You are right Carol, we can only appreciate that ‘most’ of our audience are less inclined to believe any facts from tabloids that are linked to the Murdochcracy. To be blunt, if (the key word being ‘if’) I buy one, it’s promptly returned to the bin where it belongs 😉

  13. Nicole Clark

    Thanks Carol 😉

  14. Carol Taylor

    If ever there was any doubt how the msm could sway public opinion, then it was on the issue of climate change with support for taking action to address the issue plummeting due to a concerted ‘anti’ campaign by the Murdoch stable.

    The current tactic is to try to help Tony out by demonising those on welfare. They did the same thing for Howard. Week after week the Murdoch media would run “news stories” about *so-called* disabled people caught by a neighbour working on a roof/walking without her cane etc and etc. The inference of course being that disabled people really aren’t disabled at all and are just lazy loll-abouts sponging off hardworking citizens.

    Note: mind you that poor fellow on the roof whose pic was splashed all over the newspapers might have had any number of disabilities including a mental illness..disabilities aren’t always visible.

  15. Carol Taylor

    Nicole, they put the DT out for free to read in cafes around here, however as it tends to produce instant indigestion, I tend to avoid it. 😉 However my favourite quote comes from a former neighbour from about 5 years ago, one Mungo MacCallum. Mungo’s habit was to buy a copy of every newspaper every day. When asked by the shopkeeper why didn’t he buy The Australian, his immediate response was, “I only buy that when I want to know what the enemy is thinking”. However..and to add..the DT seldom does much thinking…

  16. Nicole Clark

    OH gosh, I can’t decide what terrifies me more, the people who read the DT or the people who don’t read anything at all. OH wait! On second thought, i’m exponentially more terrified of those who read the DT!

  17. corvus boreus

    On Rupert, those who do not show any concern with the spread of the Newscorp operation do not, I suspect, value the qualities of journalism. It’s not just the bias, it’s the fact that his publications and networks disseminate inaccurate information so often that you have to conclude malice or incompetence. This is compounded by the general unwillingness to voluntarily retract when “mistakes are pointed out.
    If there is a moment of fondness in me for our first female PM, it is for her comment at a Press club address(don’t recall date or venue). She was asked how she thought the media could improve their performance. Her response was pure gold. “Don’t print crap, it can’t be that hard. And when you get it wrong, print the truth as prominently as you printed the mistake”(quoting from memory here). Now that’s crap in context!
    By ACMA findings(% complaints upheld as well as volume) the Murdoch press are the poorest quality journalists in the country. In other countries they face criminal investigations for serious offences. The combination of poor professional performance and shoddy ethics means the Murdoch media’s influence on the public discourse is often misinformation and corruption, which are damaging to healthy democratic societies.
    I strongly suspect there are direct plans to grant this American citizen and global player further control over dialogue and filtering of information. Cross spectrum ownership and monopoly laws are on the table at the same time as there is a high level push for the dismantling of our public broadcasters(in, funnily enough, the Murdoch press).
    It is a play directly from the IPA 75 point plan. Dismantle oversight and control(disband ACMA) and you have an effective unrestrained monopoly of control of public access to crucial information in the hands of an organisation that has shown a consisitent abuse of trust. That some people express ignorance, complacency, or outright approval of these development truly appalls me a a collative thinker.
    Nicole,on the comments regarding your diction, there is a degree of validity to some of the criticisms
    (funny as hell I know, chastisement regarding excessive, un-neccesary and redundant verbalisation out of this one’s gob).
    Matters Not expressed one side well, the MEGO effect(mine eyes glazeth over). The poly-syllabic word can be useful to circumvent a tortuous phraseology, but sometimes small words cut through quickly.
    Also, defining your terms is a principle of logic. In an intellectual realm, we escalate our parlance to add credibility to our claims, but this is a strategy undermined if we are not fully informed as to the nuances of our diction. Few actions dilute intellectual credibility as swiftly as the inappropriate use of a specialised term
    Swallow the dictionary, but do it over many sittings. Chew thoroughly on each portion, savoring the ingredients and long preparation, the flavor and texture. Swallow each new term carefully to allow them to digest . Clear your palate before tackling another portion. I suspect you have many decades ahead of you to consume the full book.
    And always proof your writings with spill chuck 😉

  18. CMMC

    Murdoch newspapers are vehicles for creating a ‘clamour’ of opinion. Legions of hacks writing the same right-wing memes in publications in every state make for a semblance of ‘popular opinion’.

    These memes are further amplified and propigated by Google and Yahoo news sites, which are unwitting players in the Murdoch ‘clamour’ gimmick.

  19. John

    Reblogged this on jpratt27 and commented:
    We are fighting a war on Climate Change.

  20. jagman48

    A great article expressing my feelings in a way I could never replicate. Thank you for most of the replies as well. I fear for our Australia.

  21. bobrafto

    Over 90% of the world’s scientists agree that climate change is real and yet thanks to Rupertus (latin name) trotting out his hacks and quacks to discredit thousands of world wide scientists.

    And to re-enforce that climate change is ‘bad’ comes in the form of further misinformation that the carbon tax will cost every one $550 per year and just a few days ago in the Courier Mail there was a story on electricity price rises where the author credited ‘Insider Power executives stating that it will cost the user an extra $256 a year with the carbon tax and $58 better off without it’.

    This is what the Murdochracy is doing beating everyone over the head with ‘Pain to the hip pocket’ without challenging them to produce the modelling for their misinformation.

    We take out insurance for all sorts of things, yet we can’t take out insurance for what might affect us in the future.


  22. Michael Taylor

    My apologies to Nicole, who in her submission did clearly state that this is an opinion piece but I failed to declare it.

    But having said that, aren’t the majority of articles – even in the mainstream media – merely opinion pieces when it comes to politics?

    And this site is for writers who have an opinion that wouldn’t normally get a voice in other types of media.

    If people don’t like our opinions, then fine. There’s plenty for you to read that’s probably more to your liking in the Murdoch media.

    I’m sorry if we have opinions that are not to your liking. The only way we could ever please you is by saying how wonderful Tony Abbott et al are. By telling you that the mainstream media is holding the government to account. By telling you that climate change is crap. By telling you that Labor destroyed the country. But like I said, if you want to read those ‘opinions’ then run right on back to the Murdoch media.

    We won’t miss you.

  23. scaper...

    Brilliant! The battles to win the minds of Australians were forged by the grassroots and the blame by the warmists (unenlightened) is focused on Murdoch.

    The battlelines were drawn on November 5, 2010 in John McRobert’s board room in Brisbane city. That was just over a month before Turnbull was rolled. There were less than a dozen of us and Malcolm Roberts was the convener. I met Malcolm a few months prior at a private dinner held by Dennis Jensen.

    We analysed the warmist strategy and devised a counter attack by organising a grassroots campaign to lobby against opposition complicity on an ETS, that brought down an opposition leader, No Carbon Tax rallies to gain media exposure and create a nationwide network to inform the people there is no consensus. This was achieved with no funding whatsoever.

    In the winter of 2011 at the Heartland Institute Pacific Rim Policy Exchange conference, after a meeting with Cory Bernadi, CANdo was established to bring all the activist groups under one umbrella and what they have achieved without any publicity is amazing.

    The first Monckton tour that was organised by the Noosa boys was a turning point, especially the protests by the alleged warmists, very helpful…hehehehehe.

    Tim Flannery and his ilk have to be commended for their over the top predictions that never came to pass. Like never raining or snowing again, one hundred foot sea level rises and expired tipping point predictions have received the ridicule it deserves. Not only by the sceptics but middle Australia, whom are a lot smarter than the warmists thought.

    The end game is in play, the systemic dismantling of the climate change bureaucracy and the repeal of the carbon tax. That’s game over, folks.

    I would add that I was once a warmist but thanks to the people at Tim Dunlop’s blog I started to actually look at the underlying science and history. Not buying it. Had input into a certain element of Direct Action and look forward to real environmental concerns being addressed instead of the pantomime that is environmentalism masquerading as socialism.

    Nice try though.

  24. john921fraser


    "scaper" is a Queensland nut.

    Who reads Murdochs rags and picks names out of it to make his post appear to have a ring of truth.

    A good "detergent" will remove the ring.

  25. Kaye Lee

    scum who think they can ignore science to make money for themselves and their mates by endangering our future should be prosecuted for crimes against humanity. The idea that silly little people at the IPA and ANDEV, people who have NO qualifications and very obvious vested interests, can call game over makes me hoot. You think you will be able to control the governments of China and the US and Germany as easily as you can manipulate Tony? Don’t make me laugh. You are greedy self-obsessed scum and your arrogance is laughable. ANYONE who even mentions Monckton or the Heartland Institute immediately loses credibility.

  26. scaper...

    Actually, got one thing wrong. The conference was before the Brisbane meeting.

    Picked it up when sending proof of what I’ve said. Had to delete Cory’s mobile number.

  27. Kaye Lee

    A group of young leaders from Kiribati and Tuvalu in Canberra to call for a rethink of Australia’s climate change policies says they were disappointed no members of the Abbott government would meet them.

    ” I told them that Tuvalu is a very small island nation, it only comprises of a population of around 10,000 to 11,000 people, with 27 square kilometres of land mass, which is something, a country that is most vulnerable to any external threat, such as climate change and the rate ?? related ?? of sea level rise. So what I told them, some practical stories that some of our islands has been submerged underwater and we’re losing our lovely beaches to the sea and also our tradition root crops are dying out, because of the frequent visit of droughts and frequent visit of storm surge to the island. It really makes things more complicated and makes life more harder than the past, and especially, it disturbs our traditional way of living. So those kind of messages that I want to tell them and also I want to relay to them to have that in their mind and they have.”

  28. scaper...

    Having a bad day, Kaye?

    I did get a circular sent around ANDEV for funding but we didn’t need it. The Carbon Tax repeal party will be a hoot!

  29. corvus boreus

    Bobrafto, I was intrigued by your refernce and consulted oracle google(I can’t believe that comes up as a spelling mistake!), and I am proud to say I have found the beast!
    “Rupertus falsus : It is a form of vagrant oceanic megafaunal predator. It consumes most other forms of life, bar some symbiotic and parasitic cross-special associations. The ecology surrounding it is quite interesting.
    There are attatched symbio-parasitic life-forms that aurally mimic the mating calls and distress signals of the surrounding pelargic life. This causes disruption among schooling communities, reducing their collective social cohesion, and the easily confused individuals are enticed into the vicinity of the Rupertus’ maw.
    This augment traditional filter feeding techniques, and the beast(categorisation pending) roams extensively in search of new feeding grounds, displaying little territorial loyalty.
    The eminations from it’s cloacca appears to be a high output source of gross particulate pollution, Comprising, by spectrum analysis, principally metallic compounds and petro-chemical/poly-carbonate matter.
    The cloaccal emissions appear to be turbidifying the lower bathic region and expanding the benthic layer. Bottom feeders of simple function(principally invertebrates) abound.
    The beast’s regurgitative processes have fed a collective growth of organisms resembling pondscum in it’s composition. It appears to group as collectives rather than individual, and the high consumption and exponential growth rates of this group of lifeforms is a cause of concern to many marine scientists. Tentative nomenclature is genus Corporatus. Rupertus falsus tend to spend it’s recreative time in this environment.
    To date only one rupertus falsus has ever been sighted, but the actions of the one representative individual documented have given scientists of many disciplines reason to raise concerns regarding it’s implications upon the wider environment.
    Some have even gone so far as to suggest utilising Japanese- style marine science techniques upon Rupertus to minimalise risks, but at this stage, it remains protected under statutes of international law.”

    Great God Google(oh I see it needs a capital!), what would we do without you?

  30. corvus boreus

    Scaper, if what you claim to have participated in is true, then, sorry bloke, jury’s back in with this one’s assessment. Go feed your torresian crows.

  31. Rob Murphy

    M.A.D. is what it is, a growth industry.

    Seems to me the real discussion needs be about the mental health of our species being of masochistic tenancies. Akin to bees forgetting to go back home for winter dieing in the fields, we to are a species in coherency decline.

    Our global leadership industry is using illegible language and we are expected to listen, to be obedient?

  32. Kaye Lee

    I’m actually having a very good day scaper. Every single day more people are waking up to the debacle that calls itself our government. The back room deals in which you so delight are being exposed and we have a long way further to go in that regard.

    The rubbish portrayed by paid stooges of the fossil fuel industry has been howled down. Your ship is sinking scaper.

  33. Stephen Tardrew

    Its funny Nicole when I hear the name Murdoch these days my brain goes into some type of frozen loop unable to comprehend the irrationality and down right lies that have no empirical basis in fact. I freeze thinking what more could be said about this appalling oligarchic monopolist. The call for evidence. For heavens sake its so far beyond the demand for evidence that it is laughable. Any logical consistent rational assessment of Murdoch press will lead to an unfathomable hole of innuendo, deception, irrationality and down right lies. In terms of propositional logic Murdoch press can be ripped to shreds yet the media is too afraid to challenge it as purely an opinion driven pseudo tabloid (The Australian) rather than a serious news organization. They try to cover their prejudice and lies with a few legitimate articles and then point to them “see, you see, we are not bias.” The weight of facts clearly demonstrate that the Murdoch press is a corporate shrill for the elitist oligarchy of self-aggrandized privilege. Asking for references is just laughable when a, so called, news organization projects opinion as fact as if lists of references is going to change anything about their doctrinal rags.

    The question is not if News Limited are corrupt and prejudice but how to inform the populace of the damage right wing oligarchic media is doing to democracy world wide. The Abbott government is a reflection of oligarchic power writ large foisted upon unwary Australians through unmitigated lying and deception in which Murdoch is completely and irrevocably implicit. Fair and balanced argument has been completely distorted until even the legitimate media are captured by the same lies and innuendos not capable of separating fact from fiction. They work on the premiss if you lie long and often enough people will come to believe you as you bully doubters into submission. And you know what they succeed that is why Australia is in the worst political mess since federation.

    I feel that scientists and academics in every discipline have been remiss in holding the media to standards that reflect rational and logical argument based in demonstrable facts. And now Abbott is brow beating science because he knows if he was held to account scientifically and morally he would be seen to be the immoral oligarch he is. ABC fact check is about all there is however where is the meta-analysis of the implications of increasing inequality and environmental degradation. I can tell you right now there is a mass of scientific evidence that would destroy economic rationalism and neoconservatives which are no more than pseudo sciences but where is the voice. Much of economics, politics and sociology is not scientific in the real sense of the word and the fact that these disciplines are given the legitimacy of science totally confuses the whole issue.

    We have to separate fact from fiction and opinion from subjective wishes hopes and desires and choose those wishes and desires that enhance all of humanity for the sake of survival of the human race. Greed, entrenched inequality and unbridled wealth alongside abject poverty are morally indefensible it is that simple.

  34. Stephen Tardrew


    And wash scaper down with a cold cup of sick.

    Sometimes I even revolt myself.

  35. scaper...

    Coal is king and will remain so long after we are dead and there is SFA you can do about it. I hear Hancock Coal has just found a mega deposit in Qld of the coking stuff. Enough to keep the Japanese, Koreans and Chinese steel plants fed for over half a century.

    Got to keep finding thermal coal to feed the ever growing number of power stations in India and China. The ship will be steaming ahead at break neck speed and will churn anyone who gets in the way into mince.

    That’s progress!

  36. corvus boreus

    Already seen,
    he’s into loopy dreams,
    and throwing out,
    bizarre smoke-screens.

    IPA and ANDEV…(spits..and doesn’t dribble down shirt)

  37. scaper...

    But, but, but…I’m Mitty. Hehehehehe.

  38. scaper...

    But you can call me Walter.

  39. Kaye Lee

    I note you are a campaigner championing the cause of veterans in Australia scaper

    “We are also lobbying hard for a fair go for our veterans and will not relent until veterans pensions and the like reach parity with the old age pension. The disparity is atrocious.”

    It seems that you don’t have quite as much pull as you would lead us to believe.

    “The Coalition campaigned to improve the indexation of the veteran pension before the election, but revealed it planned to cut pensions after 2017.

    The Coalition will scrap the Seniors Supplement for veterans who hold a Commonwealth Seniors Health Card or Gold Card which helps them pay for energy costs, telephone, internet, rates, water and sewerage expenses.

    Veterans will also suffer ­reductions in other support measures relating to medical and pharmaceutical benefits and various local and state government concessions.”

    With advocates like you, it’s every man for himself!

  40. corvus boreus

    But, to fair to the , it does open discussion on the merit, or lack thereof, of sending our primary axport resourse, without any value adding, to foreign nations, particularly military expansionist communist dictatorships.

  41. Kaye Lee

    And as far as your expert Monckton is concerned…..

    Monckton claimed that he has developed a cure for Graves’ Disease, AIDS, Multiple Sclerosis, the flu, and the common cold. This is no joke–he actually filed an application to patent a “therapeutic treatment” in 2009.

    Lord Monckton’s Rap Sheet

  42. scaper...

    Kaye, Kaye, Kaye…nice CUT and paste with no link.

    I notice that you left out the fact that funding has been increased over the forward estimates.

    Also this: The Abbott Government is honouring its commitment to deliver funding for fair indexation for military superannuants under the Defence Forces Retirement Benefits scheme (DFRB), the Defence Force Retirement, Death Benefits scheme (DFRDB) and for reversionary (widow) pensioners.

    It seems we got our way, hahahahaha!


  43. corvus boreus

    But nothing to say about pig-iron Tony selling metal and coal to the commies(not watermelons, fully blown scary greedy red pandas)?

  44. scaper...

    Didn’t know Tones owned mines, got a link?

  45. corvus boreus

    Doesn’t own them, just subsidises and approves expansion. Doesn’t need links; you’re an insider, you should know about it.
    And on the wisdom and national interest in continuing this practice and the potential dangers(environmental and geo-political)?

  46. bobrafto


    I don’t mind your posts, it adds to the mix of a dissenting voice and unlike the Murdoch press your posts are not censored.

    However, there is no difference in your attitude to one of a schoolboy bully and basically that is what you are and representative of the wider LNP.

    To say that you’re an adult does not fit in with your post above.

  47. scaper...

    So, what are these ‘new’ subsidies to mining by the government that you talk about?

    By approvals, are you referring to the environmental applications that were sitting on Bourke’s desk that he was too scared to either approve or reject?

  48. corvus boreus

    Didn’t say new(link; glance up).
    On approvals, not privy to Bourke’s(former minister Tony Burke?) dealings on the subject, just saw the rush of approvals and expasions with change of Govt.
    About the totalitarian socialists that are buying it?

  49. scaper...

    Yeah, him who sat on his hands and could not make a decision, one way or the other. Greg Hunt’s department is still working through the backlog.

  50. lefturnahead

    Reblogged this on The Grovely Gazette.

  51. corvus boreus

    And, for the fifth, any thoughts on us providing the material for the expansion of the PLA?

  52. Kaye Lee

    scaper you truly do not understand what you are talking about do you. You pointed out an inequity in the way pensions were indexed. To address the inequity the government have lowered the pension to bring it back to the same lower rate (CPI) and you want to sell that as a win???? Not only that, they lose the Seniors Supplement. You are a person I would NEVER want to fight for me scaper, I would end up bankrupt.

    “From July 2017, the rate of the Age Pension (and other pension payments) will be indexed according to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) only, which will make indexation arrangements consistent across social security payments and equivalent Veterans’ Affairs payments”

  53. john921fraser


    He appeared at the Australia and New Zealand Festival of Literature and Arts in London on Saturday wearing black trousers, a black skivvy and a brown jacket.

    James went on to say that to celebrate his right-wing status he’d worn “an ensemble in pre-war Hitler colours”.
    “I think this look is coming back.”

    The New Daily carries the full Article …

    Fairfax Media had the full Article but has now censored out the Hitler bit.

  54. jasonblog

    @john921fraser – classic Clive at his piss-take best. His erudition usually hits the mark.

    @Nicole Clark – I appreciate what you’re trying to do and wish you well for the ongoing development of your ‘personal style’.

    I personally struggled to understand what you meant by “Transnational media has been allowed to access false information on false pretences to formally and informally describe scientific consensus that is neither true nor conclusive. We are living in an age where it is these pretences that lead to the revulsions in public discourse.”


    I understand that your article is an opinion piece, but surely your opinions aren’t that incomprehensible.

    Something that ties into your article and what you may want to consider is the recent article “An Interview with Henry Giroux on Democracy in Crisis” that featured on Counter Punch

    In particular, Giroux comments regarding what has happened to higher education in the US after 40-years of Neoliberalism is pertinent in light of Christopher Pyne’s ongoing efforts to assure us all that market forces will actually mean lower university fees in Oz.

    Giroux remarked: “The increasing corporatization of higher education poses a dire threat to its role as a democratic public sphere and a vital site where students can learn to address important social issues, be self-reflective, and learn the knowledge, values, and ideas central to deepening and expanding the capacities the need to be engaged and critical agents. Under neoliberalism, higher education is dangerous because it has the potential to educate young people to think critically and learn how to hold power accountable. Unfortunately, with the rise of the corporate university which now defines all aspects of governing, curriculum, financial matters, and a host of other academic policies, education is now largely about training, creating an elite class of managers, and eviscerating those forms of knowledge that conjure up what might be considered dangerous forms of moral witnessing and collective political action.”

    The same forces that hijacked the public discourse on climate change in Australia are the same forces seeking to completely annihilate decent and fairly accessible public education. Murdoch is simply a significant, but small, part of that.

    All the best for your future articles.

  55. Nicole Clark

    Hi Jason, I’m not quite sure what you are getting at there, it’s not incomprehensible at all, transnational media refers to ‘media ownership and the restructuring of’. The rest has implied knowledge.They have been allowed to access false information-they have been allowed to access information from ‘experts’ who are not really experts, that are providing scientific evidence that is inconclusive this evidence is either directly fed to the press or indirectly fed to the press. We are living in an age where these pretenses that lead to revulsion’s in public discourse- this is simply referring to the notion that public opinion is shaped by the discourse of inconclusive science in media content. I apologise is this didn’t make sense to you, but it’s not a concept that can really be described as easily as you think, without saying it in 100 words. In regards to the further education comment, that’s absolutely a topic of importance, but it’s not what this article is about.

  56. Matthew Oborne

    The fact is they didnt run a “kick this mob out” after the budget says it all. Nothing to see here. The Budget removed any last pretext that any wedge issue promise was going to be kept, whose blood were those promises written in anyway……I am sure you dont need a hint.

  57. Nicole Clark

    Also Jason, I found this article might interest you it’s peer reviewed and it talks about the globalisation of capitalist media and homogenization of these media owned sectors and the transnational approach of media sectors.

  58. Nuff Said

    Nicole, is English your first language?

  59. Nicole Clark

    Yes of course why do you ask?

  60. john921fraser


    I would have to say there is nothing wrong with Nicole's english.

    "Nicole Clark looks at that propaganda machine – the Murdoch media (‘affectionately’ known of late as the Murdochracy) – and how it is determined to discredit climate science."

    Struggling to find anything in the "jasonblog" comment that has anything to do with the Article.

    Hopefully I have made it clear in my posts that I am not attacking the Article …. just adding comment about how different media reports.

  61. Nicole Clark

    John are you referring to the link? I left for Jason?

  62. john921fraser


    @Nicole Clark


    Just referring to "Jasons" critique.

  63. Nicole Clark

    Ah yes, an interesting and off topic one at that!

  64. kobymac

    Nicole, I stand by my point that it was a difficult read. I may be a simpleton as others have pointed out…I dont claim to be an amazing writer, or reader, I am a mere engineer. It gave me some flash backs to year 12 English literature reading Heart of Darkness. If you ventured over to the Labor or Greens website, you’ll see a fair congregation of similarly challenged simpletons, so I dont feel embarrassed.

    I am not a climate change skeptic, or supporter either. I understand that “90% of scientists” agree humans affect the environment. I am not interested enough until the argument moves closer to “these are the numbers agreed to by 90%”. IF that’s the case, I’m sure even murdoch would let me know. Anyway, not here to discuss the merits of climate change, or climate change policy – I am here to point out some of the hypocrisy that exists on this website in general.
    In the case of this article you claim that big bad Murdoch has succeeded in diluting our ability to think for ourselves, by ensuring he only presents us with information that suits his agenda. I just believe that at this point in time, the left are just making excuses as to why people aren’t as interested in your core interests as you are. As I pointed out, your first point of call should be to boycott his publications, encourage others to do so…and at any cost, avoid continually linking to articles from his publications to support your own arguments. If not, this site really needs to add an Author Bio section, so that your readers can judge what credentials you have to pick and choose which articles you source your arguments from….there’s no confidence you aren’t cherry picking articles to support your individual ideologies. Disclosure is after all an underlying theme to allowing independent thinking. You guys dont actually ever try to look at articles from both sides objectively, you champion the left and ridicule everything on the right (but your opinion of the ave conservative are wrong to start with). Nicole I understand you are an environmental writer and an ‘academic’ – that doesn’t tell me if I can read your opinions with any confidence. I notice your readers often critisize others with alternate opinions by the state they come from (I’m from WA by the way), or which profession they hold. Is that free thinking? Or prejudice?

  65. kobymac

    Hmm I can’t seem to post anything of length. Hopefully my post doesn’t show up 5 times, apologies if it does.

  66. kobymac

    Nicole, I stand by my point that it was a difficult read. I may be a simpleton as others have pointed out…I dont claim to be an amazing writer, or reader, I am a mere engineer. It gave me some flash backs to year 12 English literature reading Heart of Darkness. If you ventured over to the Labor or Greens website, you’ll see a fair congregation of similarly challenged simpletons, so I dont feel embarrassed.

    I am not a climate change skeptic, or supporter either. I understand that “90% of scientists” agree humans affect the environment. I am not interested enough until the argument moves closer to “these are the numbers agreed to by 90%”. IF that’s the case, I’m sure even murdoch would let me know. Anyway, not here to discuss the merits of climate change, or climate change policy – I am here to point out some of the hypocrisy that exists on this website in general.
    In the case of this article you claim that big bad Murdoch has succeeded in diluting our ability to think for ourselves, by ensuring he only presents us with information that suits his agenda. I just believe that at this point in time, the left are just making excuses as to why people aren’t as interested in your core interests as you are. As I pointed out, your first point of call should be to boycott his publications, encourage others to do so…and at any cost, avoid continually linking to articles from his publications to support your own arguments. If not, this site really needs to add an Author Bio section, so that your readers can judge what credentials you have to pick and choose which articles you source your arguments from….there’s no confidence you aren’t cherry picking articles to support your individual ideologies. Disclosure is after all an underlying theme to allowing independent thinking. You guys dont actually ever try to look at articles from both sides objectively, you champion the left and ridicule everything on the right (but your opinion of the ave conservative are wrong to start with). Nicole I understand you are an environmental writer and an ‘academic’ – that doesn’t tell me if I can read your opinions with any confidence. I notice your readers often critisize others with alternate opinions by the state they come from (I’m from WA by the way), or which profession they hold. Is that free thinking? Or prejudice?

    On another article on this site, the author links to several News Corp articles to support his argument, then goes ahead and ridicules someone in the comments section for presenting a counter argument with a link to a News Corp article. To me, that’s hypocrisy. In that same article, he refers to Gillards ex economic advisor as a “respected economist”, to support an argument that there’s no budget emergency. Yet no mention of the Libs independent advisor Phil Bowen saying it is real. I haven’t read every article to see if he gets a mention, but aren’t you arguing that we should be privy to both sides of the argument, and not just one that supports a certain agenda? Isn’t it reasonable to assume that environmental scientists stand to gain a lot more than just naming rights to new funding schemes? If Phil does get a mention, then I’m sure its in a similar vein to Henry Ergas.
    So let’s go ahead and look at the comments of the other climate change article you kindly linked for me and we find this comment from Kaye Lee:

    “This trotting out of supposed “experts” gets to ridiculous levels when you look at someone like Malcolm Turnbull’s mate Henry Ergas who the Libs ask to give expert testimony on everything – Qantas, defence, carbon pricing, the NBN. He is an economist whose own company went broke but let’s not let that deter us.

    In 2009, Ergas and friends prepared an analysis of the NBN, predicting it would cost $133 a month to connect metropolitan customers and $380 a month to connect non-metro customers, “averaging out at around $170 nationally”.

    Currently, iiNet and Internode offer NBN deals starting at $49.95 a month. Optus starts at $65 a month, Telstra at $73 a month, somewhat less than the cost predicted by Henry and co.”

    The first thing Kaye Lee has done is copy most of this comment directly from an article on Crikey, a similarly unbias website. So immediately she has been influenced by another persons writing….so independent she’s copied and pasted the second bit. Secondly she discredits Ergas because he’s done work for the Libs. Thirdly, she’s copied and pasted numbers that I believe were misrepresented when initially put on Crikey to create a story of incompetence. I dont believe shes taken the time to understand the numbers, but has been brainwashed by a single person’s analysis. Her ability to think independently has been diluted by Crikey misrepresenting numbers to push their left agenda.

    I could be wrong and am happy to be corrected cause i spent all of 5 mins on this….but I just skimmed through the Ergas NBN report to find this $133 cost…and its in a different context (i think) to how Crikey and Kaye Lee presented it. Its several hundred pages in…and mentioned once. In this section he is trying to determine the minimum cost that a consumer would need to pay to make the original $43 billion cost a sound investment. I’m not going to pick apart his calculation and assumptions, just pointing out the context. He calculated this at $133/month for metro users and $380/month for non metro users. The final conclusion of the report is that in order to keep the NBN at an attractive price for consumers (he uses $50/month for 10 Mbps) and to ensure its a sound investment, the NBN can cost no more than $17 billion. The fact that iinet sells 12 Mbps internet with bugger all downloads for $50/month today doesn’t discredit his analysis….his analysis would only be discredited if the total cost of the NBN remained at $43 billion and iinets $50 internet generates enough revenue to pay off this $43 billion in a suitable time frame and met all other parameters such that it could be called a sound investment. When Crikey asked him about these numbers, he explained this…yet seems Crikey obviously still misunderstood the report. If I’m wrong, happy to look like a dick.

    I guess what I’m saying, is practice what you preach….you guys are guilty of doing the same things you critisize heavily in articles and comments. Is this trolling, or free thinking?

    I get your general point though . I’m not going to say I haven’t read an article on something before, failed to research the author, failed to research other people’s opinions, sorta forgotten half of it, then spoken with someone a week later presenting my new knowledge as fact….thing is my mates, also liberal supporters, dont take one persons opinion as bible. For example me saying Murdoch doesn’t own 70% of newspapers, rather about 25% was something i had in my head from ages back. I found the link where I got that info from a website called the conversation.

    I dont know if its correct. Maybe wikipedia is. Or maybe rudd does his research on wikipedia? The one thing on theconversation I can immediately see (I’ve not read another article on that site I will add), are relevant disclaimers and bios of the authors. That goes a long way to legitimizing the argument. You can’t just hide behind an independent banner and expect people will accept you as ‘citizens of the truth’.

  67. bobrafto


    I like to give you a K.I.S.S.

    If you are pitching to an internet audience you need to keep the message to the lowest common denominator

    As an academic piece delivered to an academic audience it passes with flying colours.

    Hence the acronym above: Keep It Simple (Stupid).

    The last S does not apply to you.

  68. Kaye Lee


    Henry Ergas has zero credibility as an independent adviser. His has been wrong about just about everything, including sending his own company broke. Why would you hire someone for an independent review who had already stated in 2010:

    “Given the very high costs this project involves, and the fact those costs and risks must, on the Study’s own numbers, fall largely on taxpayers, a visitor from Mars might well wonder quite what we are doing.”

    In an article he wrote in October last year he said

    “And like a recurring nightmare, the disasters keep coming: from subs and the NBN to pink batts and school halls, governments seem unable to deliver.”

    He also has teamed up with that fruitcake Lord Monckton to do a climate change denial video.

    Excuse me if I choose NOT to accept him as anything like an independent expert adviser.

    And as far as Bowen from the PBO is concerned, let’s be accurate about what he said.

    “If you just continued on the trajectory of payments and revenues prior to the budget, net debt is forecast to grow rapidly, I think, at the highest rate in the OECD,” Mr Bowen said.

    “I don’t think that’s a fiction at all, but neither am I saying that we have an immediate emergency.”

    “Sure we’re currently at a very low level relative to the rest of the developed world, but frankly we don’t want to find ourselves where the rest of the world is,” he said.

  69. Judith

    But how many msm readers have not changed their reading habits and know nothing of how the budget will affect them? How many are still blissfully ignorant?

  70. Zathras

    Author/historian Naomi Oreskes has already demonstrated how science has historically been blurred by self-interested groups and the methods they use.It’s all happened before.

    Other studies have demonstrated the psychology behind sceptics and why they cling to their beliefs so fervently, despite overwhelming proof to the contrary.

    Murdoch is just another example of the system at work. It’s economic self-interest masquerading as fact.

    If it wasn’t for the blogosphere, I wonder if we would have been told anything at all?

  71. Michael Taylor

    I’d say thousands, Judith. More likely tens of thousands.

  72. john921fraser


    Well done Nuff Said …… you're ahead of the curve.

  73. Kaye Lee

    The Murdoch Press, along with koby’s “experts” and our current government, are just looking sillier every day. The sheer arrogance to dismiss us as bogans who accept the lies and corruption is making me really angry.

  74. corvus boreus

    Nuff said, cheers for info at 10:15.
    Useful; I’ve got a dog in that scrap.

  75. Nuff Said


    This Government’s attempts to make stuff disappear are pretty hilarious. It’s as if they don’t know how the Intertoobs work.

  76. john921fraser


    See if readers can tell who the bloke is with the Hitler comb over, tight jacket and pants that appear to be on the short side.

    Hint …… unlike his hero (mentioned above) he has not won any medals for valour.

  77. Anomander

    To my mind, one fo the biggest issues is how we have blithely allowed “Economics” to assume supreme importance over all other considerations.

    You only have to listen to the nightly news to see after 7-8 mins of the news bulletin devoted to reporting upon insignificant fluctuations in the share market.

    Even the ABC are the same. Each afternoon, just before the hourly news is a 5 minute segment devoted exclusively to share prices and how company X had a bad day with their shares declining 0.02% or Company Y declaring a profit of $X billion and their share price rising $0.03.

    Even if you hold a small parcel of shares, the daily fluctuations mean nothing because most of us don’t have the capacity to trade those shares daily. The only people capable of doing that are the major corporations who employee high frequency trading, which is being carried out by supercomputers performing millions of transactions per second, all seeking to skim profit off the minor share price fluctuations. Taking the cream, but contributing or producing nothing.

    To most people this is completely irrelevant, yet it gets reported as though it is the most important issue in the news, and that distorts people’s opinions into believing finance and economics is crucial to the functioning of society.

    As has often been said in these comments and in many posts, the economy should work for society, not the other way around. But people like Murdoch and his big corporate mates have been allowed to manipulate the message to reverse the coverage and hence distort the message.

  78. Stephen Tardrew

    The intellectually challenged just keep on giving.

    He sure is ending up with a great portfolio.

    What an inspiring scrapbook.

    Damn you people are a laugh electing this bloke just for the slapstick.

    Ain’t much good at anything else.

  79. Stephen Tardrew

    I avoid those dictatorship references like the plague but my heavens this guy is really cutting close to the cloth.

    I am indeed getting more and more worried each day.

    When you think you have the measure of this twit he manages to out-think you with more stupidity.

  80. corvus boreus


    The Siberian Traps
    by Humanity

    Methane monster wakes,
    rampages, throwing tantrum.
    we do not hold the leash.
    sorry, continue.

  81. corvus boreus

    Óops, sorry, fupduck raven strikes again. This is why you proof before you submit (deliberate mistake for the purposes of illustration, I assure you). Six closing syllables does not a haiku make, inepte.
    take 2

    Methane monster wakes,
    rampages, throwing tantrum.
    We don’t hold the leas

    Siberian traps:
    A haiku by the forum,
    corvus fuksidup

  82. jasonblog

    @john921fraser – Take a deep breath and clear your mind. The penny may well drop.

    @Nicole Clark – Thanks for the link.

    @Corvus boreus – Nice random haiku insertion!

    @ Nuff said – I liked Malcolm’s use of the word demented

  83. Nicole Clark

    @ Bobpraf… and Kobymac, The idea of this article was an opinion piece! I didn’t think it was always necessary to have to keep everything simple, especially when trying explain propaganda tactics,political economy and capitalism! Not to mention this article is a deliberate academic piece, because correct me if I’m wrong but I wasn’t aware that simpletons were frequenting this site in vast numbers. I intentionally created an academic piece and intentionally made it so, it’s a showcase of ideas and mounting theories about how some famous left wing activists have viewed the world and media influenced governments as part of a smoke screen to mask the truth. It is therefore more or less my ‘thoughts on paper, and my thoughts as most in society are not simple, certainly not about such topics that I am passionate and fond of. I did not intent this article for a general audience, it is an extremely complex topic and even I can only link it to such contexts of my own understanding. If however, you would like for me to produce an article of a likened ‘simple nature’ I would gladly attempt this. I make no mistakes when I intend my pieces to their audiences, there are many things I cannot do, but writing for a variety of audiences is not one of them.

    I’m new to this atmosphere and in no time at all you will come to see that I am absolutely 100% capable of delivering fast paced intelligent content that is also easy to read and easy to comprehend for ‘everyone’, but forgive me for catering to particular intellectuals at times, I am not divided when it comes to producing content of all types. I have the desire to converse with all people and hardly anyone is ever too ‘simple’ to ever understand me, because last time I checked my name wasn’t Stephen Hawking ;).

  84. Ian

    Hi Nicole, good article, but I tend to agree with MattersNot, some of your language is a bit cloudy. And in par 5 you’ve used ‘elude’ where I am sure you meant ‘delude’.


  85. Ian

    And re your last comment, Nicole, tell ’em to buy a dictionary!!

  86. Nicole Clark

    Hi Ian, thanks and yes some of my language could be better, but I am just starting my journey on AIM! I didn’t mean delude, if anything I again meant allude, but there was some discrepancies with spell check -it kept telling me elude was the right word, I looked it up a number of times and spent a good 20 minutes on it at the time. Perhaps in such an event next time i’ll just leave the word out. In my own defense it was an opinion piece and I had never considered their would be confusion, as the audience would be very specific. Let live and learn! You will be surprised with the next piece I bring to the table, I’m currently working on this!

  87. Nuff Said

    Can’t wait, Nicole. I love reading stuff from people who are obviously high as a kite when they write.

  88. corvus boreus

    Nicole, my suggestion would be to strip your language back a bit, and assume/nuance less meaning.
    An example would be your definition of transnational media as “media and the restructuring thereof”.
    I would argue it to more accurately describe “the ownership and operation of media enterprises across(transcending) defined national boundaries”. A mouthful, but a clear intent of definition.
    “Define your terms” was a principle of logic that was gently hammered into me when my verbosity strayed into babble. It remains invaluable, universal advice.
    Hope that somewhere amidst the pedantry, pickiness and pointless precision I offered something useful. 😉

  89. DanDark

    Nicole C practice makes perfect
    We all have to start somewhere, whatever it is
    Constructive criticism from other
    well meaning folk can be a good thing
    But just plain nastiness, nothing constructive, only destructive
    as a comment is usually because said person
    is jealous, and can only express their
    feelings through emotive nasty words
    because of their own inadequacies, and insecurities
    Keep up the good work Nicole 🙂

  90. DanDark

    Corvus= constructive criticism=wanting to help
    Kobyman/Neil from Sydney= destructive/insecure/inadequate 🙂

  91. corvus boreus

    Thanx for reassurance.
    Group hug!

  92. corvus boreus

    WARNING! (!!!) Incoming haiku with plagiarism disclaimer! (!!!)
    Drunk on fossil fuels,
    we are making duck faces
    into black mirrors.
    Dunno the author on that one. Dug it enough to share.
    Off to work now.

  93. Kaye Lee


    I would like to encourage young writers (and old ones 🙂 ) so my comments are made with that in mind.

    I found your comment at 1:23 am condescending and patronising. The majority of readers here already know about the evils of the Murdochracy which is why there may have been more comment about your use of language rather than the content. And I have to say, I found the language a little florid. It’s not that I don’t understand the meaning of the words used, but they have been used in the wrong context, muddying the meaning when a simpler word would have sufficed.

    eg “We must transgress this idea further”…..explore/extend/develop/examine/extrapolate ?

    “we can see these attitudes transgress to the audience”……transmit/influence/transfer ?

    “But, does this transgress (mass media approach) to influence and persuade individual opinion?”.. .translate/manifest/equate ?

    You don’t have to dumb it down so much as tighten it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: