Many thanks to
Lbock for the Tara declaration and
Ruby Begonia for the Kate James requests.
Everyone on here has been an invaluable source of information and insight.
[moderators: apologies if any of the text below strays too far off topic from the immediate lawsuit thread. Please feel free to delete]
The piece written by JM on the media blackout (and all the stuff I’ve read by JM) plus something
AdelAgain said a few pages back reflected the hopelessness and frustration so many of us feel (myself included).
But on a positive note and in practical terms, what can we learn? For a start, lack of reporting leaves its own footprint. Negative reporting leaves another (and neutral or positive reporting leave others). These sets will have their own characteristics. Common journalists or editors. Common masthead ownership. Common themes silenced or amplified.
And follow the money. Not just the flows of cash, but where money is not flowing. Just as we notice the blank areas in story coverage, what non-reporting doesn’t seem to be supported by obvious financial loss/gain decisions? A tabloid or gossip mag will publish anything salacious that won’t get them sued. So why wouldn’t they publish particular items or themes unless they had something to gain or lose? Foregoing profits should be setting off alarm bells in the same way that large profits do.
Being terrified of being next in Mr Depp’s defamation sights would explain some of the blackouts, but when the same mastheads behave in the same manner for almost any female on male violence, then we should know there is something bigger involved.
I haven’t done any metrics or measurements, but we all sense the general direction without putting numbers to it. There is organisation and coordination behind it, and with that comes criminal conspiracy, malicious prosecutions and predatory behaviour (imo). The very fact that Kaplan flips from exceedingly high profile cases like Weinstein and impeaching Trump to a celeb defamation case that has nearly zero mainstream press coverage is baffling (unless other undeclared motives are involved). Who
is paying Kaplan (and why)?
But unless there is mileage for the cases at hand (eg in additional charges or angles of attack), spending too much time looking at the blackout itself risks distracting from the issues (and revelations) before the courts.
I will close with this. It’s only an anecdote but here’s a first-hand account (mine) of how political censorship works:
Off Topic
► Show Spoiler
I live in Canberra, Australia. It’s a company town and that company is Federal Government. Government secrets are quite safe, but everyone knows the personal lives of politicians and high ranking public servants. It’s Fight Club rules: the janitor that stumbles on a senior government minister late at night having sex with a staff member on their desk; the Rudd-Gillard Prime Ministerial coup planned the night before in the Chinese restaurant in Kingston.
So fast forward to the New England by-election, on 2nd December, 2017. This was shaping up as a tabloid Field Day. Johnny and Amber even had a direct part having taunted Barnaby Joyce over the matter in retaliation for Amber’s breach of Australia’s biosecurity laws and perjury. Many of you will know some of this already. But Barnaby had been dismissed from Parliament over dual Australian- NZ citizenship. He also had to resign from his seat, but he quickly renounced the NZ citizenship and was able to stand for his old seat at the subsequent by-election.
I was supporting a candidate. A week before the election I drove to Tamworth (2nd largest town in the electorate) knowing that Barnaby’s staffer Vikki Campion had been visiting pregnancy clinics around Canberra and he was the prime candidate as father. I thought I would be dropping a bombshell only to discover the locals knew more. Mrs Joyce had kicked him out and thrown his clothes on the front lawn. The ride-on mower was in for repair because his boots and belt buckles had broken the blades. His daughter stole the campaign car and drove through the streets one night, hanging out the window with a loudhailer telling everyone in Armidale not to vote for him (followed by a string of expletives). Barnaby was holed up in a hotel room somewhere, a blubbering wreck and was refusing interviews or public appearances. Our candidate had no chance of winning, but we had hoped to hit the 4% primary vote to gain funding. Not being a serious risk, charisma carried the day and he became favourite with the media and even Barnaby’s team but that wasn’t going to translate into votes.
But the media was silent on all of this about Barnaby. Not a single word or rumour appeared in any press (local or national). Barnaby won on stock footage, campaign machinery and commentary alone. We only won a bit over 1.5%. But we drank and hung out with some of the reporters and they said they kept sending through stories that were gold, but they would gain “no traction” with those higher up.
On the 6th February The Daily Telegraph (Murdoch Press) broke the story – “Bundle of Joyce”. Sharri Markson (National Political Editor for the Telegraph) even won a Walkley Award for “Scoop of the Year”. W.T.F.????
| ! | Message from: Theresa |
Yeah, that was a bit too off-topic so I wrapped it in a spoiler box.
We're trying to keep this marathon thread as on-topic as we possibly can.
Theresa |
