“The media has revealed its shortcomings, and that the media is not a place for complexity; truth is too much to be left to television,” Stan Grant told his former employer the ABC last week.
Reflecting on the media’s attempts to wrestle with the concept of an Indigenous Voice to Parliament in the past year, he concluded: “I don’t think we can squeeze in the fragility of 200 years of this history into a newspaper headline, or television news grab, or a radio interview, or a debate.”
Here’s a few examples he may have been thinking of.
1. “RACIST OR JUST STUPID”
2. “No voters branded ‘racist and stupid’ by prominent Yes campaigner”
Addressing an event in Bunbury, Western Australia, in early September, prominent Yes campaigner Professor Marcia Langton said this of the No campaign: “Every time the No case raises one of their arguments, if you start pulling it apart, you get down to base racism. I’m sorry to say it, but that’s where it lands — or just sheer stupidity.”
The story is written up under the headline “RACIST OR JUST STUPID” by the local paper on September 12, and picked up by The Australian the following day under the headline “No voters branded ‘racist and stupid’ by prominent Yes campaigner”. After a backlash about the disjuncture between the headline and story, the piece was altered. Opposition Leader Peter Dutton’s Facebook post was never taken down.
3. “Anti-Voice campaign director says white people will be ‘paying to live here’ if referendum succeeds”
The story recaps, among other things, a December podcast in which a little-known No campaigner and former One Nation candidate, Narungga elder Kerry White, argued that the Voice, a proposed advisory body that would make representations to the government, was designed to “get rid of the Parliament that’s there now and the Voice will end up taking over”.
And you can call me a conspiracy theorist if you like, but I know the way that these people work and that’s what will end up happening. Aboriginal people will be running this country, and all the white people here will be paying to live here.
That these assertions are made with zero evidence is mentioned first in the piece’s ninth paragraph.
4. “ ‘Conspiracy’: Yes figure’s Voice admission”
The effect is particularly pronounced in social media and search engine headlines. Readers who followed the headline link ” ‘Conspiracy’: Yes figure’s Voice admission” (rather than, say, scrolling past and imbibing its general tone and thumbnail image of a worried-looking Thomas Mayo) would be led to a piece now headed “Video Q&A with prominent Yes campaigner Thomas Mayo ahead of the Voice vote”.
The word conspiracy appears once, 21 paragraphs into the piece, in the sentence “This is not a conspiracy.” What the word “admission” in the headline is referring to is unclear — readers looking for the word “admission” or “admit” will not find it, nor does Mayo appear to be confronted with anything about the Voice’s design or long-term goals which he is forced to concede, confess, divulge, accept, disclose or acknowledge.
Along similar lines, The Australian‘s social heading “Yes ad campaign for Voice ‘misleading’ ” omits that the Yes campaign was being called misleading not by any independent fact-checkers, but by prominent No campaigner Advance.
5. “Coalition send letter to AEC over ‘fundamentally lopsided’ Voice call”
Dutton and opposition spokeswoman on legal matters Michaelia Cash were able to dominate the headlines for days with their claim that voting in the Voice was “rigged” in favour of a Yes vote, on account of the Australian Electoral Commission’s approach that ticks would be counted as Yes but crosses would not register as a No.
This was in keeping with decades of legal advice, and had not been the subject of any consternation while the Liberals spent their near decade in power between 2013 and 2022. That Dutton’s claims induced the commission to make a rare public rejection of his “factually incorrect” claim made its way into many headlines covering the story, but not, for whatever reason, Sky News, 2GB or The Daily Telegraph.
The story recaps, among other things, a December podcast in which a little-known No campaigner and former One Nation candidate, Narungga elder Kerry White, argued that the Voice, a proposed advisory body that would make representations to the government, was designed to “get rid of the Parliament that’s there now and the Voice will end up taking over”.
What is it about right wing leaders and commentators that they feel they can just make s**t up?
As Steve Bannon advised – fill the space with a firehose of sh!t.
Makes it easy for mainstream media to obtain content, because that’s all they’re looking for. Not the truth, not facts, just content.
sad. Sad state of politics – sooooooo sad
Because they know the lie cannot be left unaddressed. Which takes time and resources.
Ideally, in addressing said lie, an opening will be left to create another one, and so on.
It’s literally the point – Brandolini’s Law.
Thanks for the reference to Brandolini’s Law – I looked it up, which lead to a a Wikipedia entry on ‘sealioning’. I know the phenomenon well, just didn’t realise it had a name.
The “Gish Gallop” is another favourite variation on the same theme.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gish_gallop
Most reprehensible IMHO, are the media outlets that proclaim ‘balance’. That word has become a euphemism for allowing the crackpots, liars and obfuscators open slather .
One of the worst offenders is SMH which trumpets that ‘facts are sacred’ while printing all manner of bare-faced lies under the cover of “Balance”.
A lot of the shame belongs to the Murdoch press
The only news outlet that can be taken seriously these days is the SBS evening bulletin at 6.30pm.
There are others although they are difficult to access. Both ABC and SBS carry the English language news from Germany’s Deutsche Welle, and SBS also carries the English version of France 24 news. Both are very good and focus much more on European as well as real wide-ranging international news. The coverage tends to be thoughtful and contain some real balance. It probably helps that a certain English language international news outlet that seems intent on destroying both truth and western civilisation does not operate in those countries.
Unfortunately due to the timing in the early hours of the morning you need to be either an insomniac or have a recorder to catch these broadcasts .
I used to think Al Jazeera was very good, but during the Ukraine conflict I have changed my mind as they seem to have simply bought into the Western Narratives around the conflict.
Al Jazeera can be conflicted, esp when their Arabic service apparently can border on the anti-semitic; assume related to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine there maybe some complicated relationships and narratives, bit like GOP media in US inc FoxNews.
The Israel-Russia nexus, no doubt.
Curiously all the images being published of Palestinians and Israelis show the almost all former being of Semitic appearance and the latter mainly of Caucasian/European appearance.
Not curious at all – try Arthur Koestler’s “The Thirteenth Tribe”.
Rather like those here claiming F/N status looking more Aryan than Aboriginal.
Meanwhile the Gap grows as the former wax rich & comfy whilst the latter do the opposite.
As Alice said…
Agree on DW, F24 and Al Jazeera which all bring a broader non Anglo perspective and analysis vs. media in US, UK and locally morphs into a RW MSM blob for fossil fueled nativist authoritarian agitprop; locally our elites in media and politics prefer to disappear anything regional and/or EU, and centrist?
I think some of the most damaging publicity to the voice referendum campaign was the introduction of the W.A. Cultural Heritage Protection laws and the tsunami of negative news stories claiming that you would soon not be able to dig a hole in your backyard without paying an Indigenous cultural expert to attend. This political stunt which was rescinded after only a couple of weeks struck at the heart of Australians fears that their property rights might somehow be usurped by Indigenous rights. I wouldnt be surprised if it was done deliberately to undermine the referendum campaign. W.A has an appalling record around Indigenous justice issues and this kind of covert political backstabbing would not be unrealistic to imagine.
I have no doubt that the anti-cultural heritage campaign here in WA was quite deliberately planned and executed, and the hysterical over-reaction was exactly as intended, with damaging the referendum just one of several intended outcomes. I’ve also no doubt that following the breadcrumbs back to source will lead to encounters with the Big Mining oligarchy that runs the State. I tried to have a letter supporting the Yes case published in our local community paper this week, but it was rejected because the committee said it was against their ‘neutrality’ – without even a momentary blush after publishing No letters and editorialising against the referendum. In the oligarchs WA, no = neutral, yes = political division that must be suprressed. And none of this is accidental.
Tinfoil hat nonsense.
The simplest answer is always the most reasonable- it was simply well intentioned poorly drafted policy and then legislation.
If you think Cook (a most left leaning WA Premier in my lifetime) was trying to scuttle the Voice you’re a fantasist.