Radio Australia Today Editorial
Archive for June, 2009
Michael Jackson. No resting in peace here.
30 June 2009
This morning some newspapers in Australia simply couldn’t make up their minds.
You see, someone had leaked the details of Michael Jackson’s autopsy, and this left the papers in a dilemma. It had all the tribute stories ready to go, with quotes from Jackson’s former producers, candle-bearing fans, co-musicians and family. But how do you reconcile something as salacious as an autopsy report with the feel-goodness of a memorial service? Or with Jackson’s former wife Debbie Rowe’s revelation that Jackson wasn’t the biological father of their children?
Answer: You don’t. You don’t even bother trying to reconcile the two. You just stick them in together. The Herald Sun here in Melbourne even jammed together on the front page Janet Jackson’s tribute to her brother, with Debbie Rowe’s claims. And boy, these juxtaposed headlines made for very strange bedfellows.
Stranger bedfellows, you might think are Debbie Rowe herself and Jackson. Why would this woman come out and tell the world that Jackson was not the father of their kids? The children would be in grieving, along with family and fans. A pretty tough time to let them know that their father is not their father. Even if they already knew about it, the embarrassment of a disclosure when the world’s media was focussing on the death of the man they had known as their father would be overwhelming for them. Parentage is a private matter, and should’ve stayed that way.
Being famous is no excuse for every single right to decency to be forgotten. Michael Jackson was a man who gave joy to millions. He may have lived a totally weird life, but it was his life to live.
How sad that his death has become an intrusive circus.
– Phil
Australian politics: so some people are paying attention
29 June 2009
I was starting to despair. I interviewed a number of young Australians for our weekend TV program Insiders (see: http://abc.net.au/insiders/) about the OzCar affair and was quite surprised to see that they weren’t all that concerned about the fake emails or the leaking of information that’s been going on. They just thought that this was politics, and they felt that both sides of politicis were behaving badly.
I say I started feeling despair because this case brought up serious questions about the way our politicians behave in the isolated national capital. We political watchers have suspected that these things happen, but when they are brought to light, and proved, we need to react to ensure they don’t happen again. The young people I spoke to seemed to shrug it off, and that, for me, is the worry.
This morning though came the news that maybe people in general are less fatalistic. Three opinion polls today indicate that voters are not impressed with Malcolm Turnbull’s behaviour over this incident. Put briefly, he has taken a huge fall in popularity, one of the polls finding the biggest single fall for an Opposition leader (11%) since it started taking opinions 26 years ago.
The polls put the Opposition in a very unhappy position. Sure, there is still maybe 18 months until the next election, but leader Malcolm Turnbull has taken a big credibility hit. He ran with an allegation without checking his sources, and made a mistake. Normally I would expect Turnbull to tough this one out, but he is the leader of a party that has never persevered with unpopular leaders. There have been rumblings from within his party room, and a number of his MPs voted with the government on Friday over an immigration bill. Turnbull is not holding his party together, and he really does need to have his party with him if he is going to keep going. One poll even had the one credible alternative, Joe Hockey, being preferred as Opposition leader.
Malcolm Turnbull may have gone into this weekend by privately going whoops, I made a mistake. Perhaps his mistake on this Monday morning is not admitting his mistake publicly and letting that side of the story be put to bed. Instead, like an over-tired child, the story is screaming for attention, and the attention is not the kind that the Opposition leader needs. Tomorrow another poll should confirm that Turnbull’s standing has seriously fallen. If that doesn’t convince the Opposition to put the story to bed, with or without Turnbull, then they’re just not paying attention. They should know that Australia is.
– Phil
The reports of Michael Jackson’s death. A brave new world.
26 June 2009
I write this just minutes after we reported on Radio Australia a claim that singer Michael Jackson has died.
At this moment we don’t know if it’s true. If it isn’t, then then this is either one huge hoax or a great case of ineptness by the website that first reported the claim. The way we reported it on our program was to make it absolutely clear that we were reporting the claims of the website, not stating the death as a fact.
This does bring up the fact that information in the age of the web moves ever so fast. The site involved (TMZ.com) had the story of his heart attack only minutes after Jackson was supposed to have been taken to hospital. When you consider that with the death today of Farrah Fawcett, information and video of her last minutes was posted on the web almost instantly, you’d have to admit that the power of the medium is becoming extraordinary.
This speed changes journalism forever. I was always taught that we never ran with any story unless we could confirm it by at least two sources. In this case of Jackson, if we waited for two sources, then we would not be reporting this story right now. Jackson, if indeed he has died, he would’ve been dead for some hours before we would be able to tell the world about it.
So what do we journalists do in this brave new world of instant information? We are starting to give out what information we have instantly, with the caveat that it is unconfirmed, thus allowing you, the listener, reader and viewer to decide the information’s veracity.
But let’s think back. Unconfirmed information has always been given out in the case of major stories. When US president JFK was shot in Dallas in November 1963, TV broadcaster Walter Cronkite crossed the boundaries of journalism by taking off his glasses and with a breaking voice as he made the pronouncement of Kennedy’s death. But in the minutes leading up to the confirmation, he reported on claims that the president had died. He must’ve known there was a chance that the report was wrong, but he went with it, with the appropriate warnings that they were unconfirmed reports. He even placed a caveat on the words of his own reporter Dan Rather, who had sent through a message that Kennedy had died. Cronkite waited for the official confirmation before making it definitive. It was a masterful piece of live journalism, perfectly balanced.
In this age of even faster information and extreme pressure, let’s hope that the reporters of today are as true to the ethics of good journalism as Cronkite.
And just now, as I write, Adelaine has come to me to say that there are now reports that Jackson is in a coma, which always goes to prove that a pinch of Cronkite salt must always be sprinkled on days like these.
– Phil
The latest on the Aussie scandal of the year
25 June 2009
We should have known that this OzCar scandal was not going to be a short-lived story.
I’ve been blogging about it for three days now, and each day the story gets more involved. It’s also a good lesson in political deflection, with the Opposition, which is in real trouble here, turning defence into attack by continuing its allegations that the Treasurer Wayne Swan really did try to help out the car dealer mentioned in the original, but fake, email.
The Australian public would be right to be a bit confused here. Make no mistake, political obfuscation has been the name of the game over the last few days. But there should be no confusion, because at the centre of this scandal are real issues about the behaviour of politicians and public servants..
In essence, the Opposition leader in Australia, Malcolm Turnbull is accused of meeting with a senior Treasury public servant who has been leaking government information to the Opposition. It could be argued that this was an extreme lack of judgement on Turnbull’s part, because the public servant is accused of fabricating the original email that alleged the prime minister gave favoritism to a car dealer.
Today, Malcolm Turnbull is under real pressure. Some media are reporting that members of his party are very unhappy with him, (which is no surprise given the extraordinary events of the last few days) and at least four Opposition members are expected to commit the rare act of defiance against their leader by crossing the floor of parliament to vote with the government on an immigration bill. This flooring crossing is purely a gesture, since the government has the numbers for the bill to be approved anyway. You should know that this is a gesture that Malcolm Turnbull would not need, not on this last sitting day of parliament before the winter break.
If the floor crossing happens, it will be (in the words of George Harrison) a long cold lonely winter for Malcolm Turnbull.
– Phil
OzCar blows up in the Opposition’s face.
24 June 2009
Last night we saw the revelation of one of the most intriguing scandals in Australian political history.
I’ve gone into the background of this OzCar affair in previous blogs, so I won’t go into detail except to say it started with a purported email (now found to be a fake) that suggested that the PM was seeking favoritism and financial benefit for a car dealer.
When the federal police investigated and found that the email was fake, the light turned from the PM and his treasurer Wayne Swan to the Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull, who had blasted off about the email and demanded the resignations of both PM Kevin Rudd and Swan. Yesterday Malcolm Turnbull was in trouble. Today he’s in dire straits.
He’s in these straits because of revelations on ABC TV by reporter Chris Uhlmann that the man with the email, a senior public servant, had been leaking government information to the Opposition for years.
Malcolm Turnbull, in one of his less snappy performances, was caught by journalists in a door stop interview and refused to confirm or deny that this public servant had been working as a spy. It would have been far better for Malcolm Turnbull to keep as far away from the media as possible until after he had worked out what he was going to say to them. He didn’t and he didn’t, and what resulted was not a good look.
One of our comments to yesterday’s blog came from David, who asked if Kevin Rudd could be impeached. Well David, no. Australia does not have an impreachment procedure. It isn’t relevant anyway, since Kevin Rudd has not been found to have done anything wrong. If he had, then what would happen would be for the parliament to move a motion of no confidence. For this to pass, then members of his own party would have to vote against him. That’s why such motions rarely succeed. If it did succeed then he would have to quit as PM. If a motion of no confidence was moved against the whole government, and succeeded, then in theory you would have to have an election. But as I say, the chances of government members voting against themselves is as likely as snowflakes becoming good friends with the devil.
That said, there is every chance of a no confidence motion in Malcolm Turnbull. This would succeeed in the lower house where the government has the numbers. Whether that means the end for Malcolm Turnbull is another thing. The Opposition would go into the party room and could well vote for him again. Almost unbelievably, the Australian Consititution makes no mention of the Prime Minister and the Opposition Leader.
In a separate comment, John has commented that Peter Costello is the one to feel sorry for in this sorry mess. He resigned from the Opposition only days before this scandal. Well John, Peter Costello hasn’t quite gone yet. He only announced that he would be leaving at the next election. He’s still there, and if he wished, he could have the leadership if Turnbull stumbles. That’s two pretty big if’s. The Opposition has little chance of winning the next election, especially if it was to be held early.
Any other questions about this extraordinary scandal, just post a comment and we’ll get back to you.
– Phil
