GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG – ISSUE NO. 207
8 NOVEMBER 2013
The inaugural issue of “Gerard Henderson’s Media Watch” was published in April 1988 – over a year before the first edition of the ABC TV Media Watch program went to air. Since November 1997 “Gerard Henderson’s Media Watch” has been published as part of The Sydney Institute Quarterly. In 2009 Gerard Henderson’s Media Watch Dog blog commenced publication.
- Stop Press from Melbourne: Even Ginger Meggs Cartoonist Joins Eco-Catastrophists; Yet More Catastrophes in the “Guardian-On- The-Yarra”
● MELBOURNE COMEDIAN SEES NO HUMOUR IN UNDER-WATER AGE
How frightfully inner-city Melbourne, where even the comedians are oh-so-serious eco-catastrophists.
Comedian and Ginger Meggs cartoonist Jason Chatfield got oh-so-serious in the ABC Melbourne Southbank studio this morning when doing the “Newspapers” gig on the ABC1 News Breakfast with co-presenters Beverley O’Connor and Michael Rowland.
Commenting on a National Geographic map – reported in The Age – Mr Chatfield went along with Monash University academic Neville Nicholls that the melting of the cryosphere will bring about 70 metre sea-level rises in no less than 5000 years. Australia would have a large inland sea and much of Melbourne and Sydney would become an underwater urban museum. Or something like that.
Your man Chatfield became almost Robert Manne-like in seriousness, describing the scenario as “terrifying” and said that there was a lot of “reality” to it. Michael Rowland expressed concern about “that graphic map” which appears in this morning’s “Guardian-on-the-Yarra”. However, he did concede that it was a worst case scenario.
For the record, Nancy’s (male) co-owner is quite relaxed. Interviewed by Nancy this morning, he said: “So, by 7013, ‘The Guardian-on-the-Yarra’ will become ‘The Guardian-in-the-Yarra’. Big deal.”
● READ ALL ABOUT IT – THIS MORNING’S AGE BAGS JOHN HOWARD, JULIE BISHOP AND TONY ABBOTT (YET AGAIN)
With only 5000 years to live, Nancy’s (male) co-owner commenced the rest of his life by flipping through this morning’s Age. The editorial contained a predictable lecture to John Howard and Tony Abbott on climate change – along with a direction about what the Prime Minister “should” do. Yawn.
The Age’s Letters Page this morning features “The JFK Conspiracy”. Four out of four letters appeared to have been drafted on a grassy knoll somewhere or other since all four letter-writers dispute the Lee Harvey Oswald as sole assassin reality. Yawn.
Over to the “Comment” page. Monash University academic (yes, another one) Tony Taylor uses The Age to rant against Tony Abbott and the Coalition (yes, again). Dr Taylor (for a doctor he is) is allowed by The Age’s Opinion editors to have an undocumented swing at the following predictable targets – John Howard, News Corp, Julie Bishop, the Institute of Public Affairs, Quadrant, The Australian, the Liberal Party, Christopher Pyne, Geoffrey Blainey, George Pell (of course), Gerard Henderson (why not?) and – wait for it – “Tory facts”.
All were linked with the Russian quasi-autocrat Vladimir Putin. How about that? The only person to receive a positive mention was former Communist Party member Professor Stuart Macintyre. Tony Taylor described Dr Macintyre as “mild mannered”. Shucks.
Tony Taylor’s article was so replete with hyperbole and so lacking in evidence that it would have failed if presented as an essay in most tertiary institutions. But The Age’s “Comment” page – which is almost as much as a Conservative-Free-Zone as the ABC – runs plenty of verbal sludge. Tony Taylor is an academic.
ABC managing director and editor-in-chief Mark Scott has taken to labelling critics of the taxpayer funded public broadcaster as “absolutely simplistic” – using the ABC’s facilities to launch such put-downs. See MWD issue 195. So it is expected that any other considered criticism will receive a similar response. Even so, there are two current issues which Mr Scott should address. Moreover, they do not involve the problem of the ABC as a Conservative Free Zone.
The House of Representatives’ last sitting day is Thursday 12 December. However, it is proposed that some major ABC TV current affairs programs (e.g. Four Corners, Media Watch, Q&A and Insiders) will all be wound up by Sunday 1 December. This means that some of the public broadcaster’s main programs will not cover 50 per cent of the first four sitting weeks of the Abbott government.
When the ABC obtained an extra $10 million from the Gillard government earlier this year, Mark Scott said that the money would be used to establish an ABC Fact Checking Unit (designed to fact-check political parties, business, organisations, trade unions and the like, but not the ABC). He also indicated that consideration would be given to using the extra money to extending some ABC TV news and current affairs programs closer to Christmas.
It seems, however, that this idea has got nowhere. It will not bother the Coalition much – since the Prime Minister is on record as stating that his view of the world is different from that of the ABC. See MWD Issue 206. However, with a $1 billion annual budget, it is an anomaly that many of the public broadcaster’s key current affairs programs take at least two months off every year. Mr Scott is yet to explain why.
And there is the controversy over the two-part Catalyst program on ABC TV. The program runs the line that statin drugs, which reduce cholesterol, are of little benefit in combating heart disease. Dr Norman Swan (a medical doctor who presents RN’s The Health Report) has warned that people might die if the advice provided by Catalyst is followed by Australians with high cholesterol levels.
And what has Mr Scott, who is paid to fulfil the dual role of ABC managing director and editor-in-chief, said about this controversy? As far as MWD can establish, nothing.
THE AGE’S GENDER OBSESSION
Nancy’s (male) co-owner is in his home town in Melbourne for a funeral today. Vale John McConnell, a MWD reader and more besides – an obituary will appear in the December 2013 issue of The Sydney Institute Quarterly.
On arriving at Melbourne Airport last night, MWD obtained a copy of The Age – which, as MWD readers will know, is regarded everywhere outside The Age’s office as “The-Guardian-on-the-Yarra”.
What a truly stunning Page 1 lead. The article by Rachel Kleinman was headed: “Girls, boys, toys and ploys”. It was illustrated by a James Boddington pic of a young boy pushing a pram containing a baby doll. How very inner-city Brunswick. Or perhaps Thornbury. The story is even more twee. This is how it commenced:
Four-year-old Archie is happy pushing around a pink pram, just as his brother and sister were when they were toddlers. Archie and twin siblings Louie and Matilda, now 6, made up their own minds early on about what toys they liked.
But there are concerns that many kids their age are being heavily influenced by multimillion-dollar, gender-specific marketing campaigns that could restrict their potential.
A new action group plans to tackle what it says is “gender stereotyping” in the marketing of toys by lobbying the big retailers.
Ms Kleinman’s story spilled on to Page 2 [whatever for? – Ed]. Thea Hughes, spokeswoman for Play Unlimited, and Melbourne University psychologist Cordelia Fine were interviewed.
Readers were advised that Associate Professor Fine will give a talk at the Melbourne Business School on 18 November tilted “Dolls, Trucks and the Workplace Gender Divide” [I can hardly wait – Ed]. Apparently “The-Guardian-on-the-Yarra” regards this event as worthy of Page 2 News coverage. So much so that it was repeated on page 17. Very much a case of “Hold the Front Page: Associate Professor to Give Lecture on Toys At Melbourne University on Monday Week”. What news. What news sense.
Turn to Page 16-17 where there is a two page spread in the “Focus” section by Rachel Kleinman. The heading gave an idea of what was to come:
In the world of toy shops and marketing, girls are still pink and play with dolls, and boys are blue and play soldier games. But a new campaign is out to change all that.
MWD does not intend to go into detail about this gripping news story about the impact of male chauvinistic capitalism on the gender roles of young children. Suffice to say that Thea Hughes is a gender studies student at Macquarie University and the parents of little Archie, Louie and Matilda live in inner-city Coburg. There you go.
For the record, MWD is totally opposed to gender marketing. Nancy’s (male) co-owner believers that boys and girls alike should be enticed into buying toy surface-to-surface missiles which could be fired at a toy Coburg or a toy sandal-wearer at a toy “Guardian-on-the-Yarra”.
LEIGH SALES – ALL AT SEA
Nancy’s (male) co-owner rarely gets invited to appear on most ABC programs. No problem here – it prevents him having to decline invitations. Yet he is cognisant of the fact that many ABC presenters seem to follow him – due to their on-air comments and tweets.
This, for example, from Leigh Sales on Tuesday:
The reference was to Gerard Henderson’s column in Tuesday’s Sydney Morning Herald. This is the relevant comment.
…the Australian-born Assange remains a guest in the Ecuador embassy in London, from where he provides statements to the media. Assange is a particular favourite of the ABC, with recent appearances on Lateline, The Drum and 7.30.
So Gerard Henderson never referred to a Leigh Sales-Julian Assange interview. And clearly Ms Sales’ memory is not quite what it used to be.
You see, Leigh Sales presented a 7.30 segment on Bradley Manning on 31 July 2013. Now that’s pretty recent, even in the twittersphere. Reporter Ben Knight appeared in the segment and had this to say, as the official transcript documents:
Ben Knight: The Obama White House has been ruthless on classified leaks. It’s launched more prosecutions under the Espionage Act than all previous administrations combined.
Bradley Manning is their biggest scalp so far. But there’s a far bigger one that still eludes them.
Julian Assange gave his response to the verdict from his sanctuary in the Ecuadorian embassy in London.
Julian Assange, Wikileaks Founder: Bradley Manning’s alleged disclosures have exposed war crimes, sparked revolutions and induced democratic reform. He is the quintessential whistleblower. This is the first ever espionage conviction against a whistleblower in the United States. It is a dangerous precedent and an example of national security extremism.
Here’s some (gratuitous) advice. Nascent fact-checker Leigh Sales should check her own facts.
While on the topic of fact-checking, congratulations to Mark Colvin who appears to have been the first to discover the John-Laws-style “deliberate mistake” in last week’s issue. MWD went out at around 3.30 pm, Mr Colvin identified the deliberate mistake re Rupert Murdoch at around 3.45 pm and a correction was made by 4 pm.
Still Nancy was delighted when The Weekend Australian newspaper landed on her kennel last Saturday morning. James Jeffrey picked up MWD’s deliberate mistake in his “Strewth!” column. Alas, it being 6 am, it was too late to be a winner since that was achieved – and the “deliberate mistake” corrected – about 14 hours earlier.
ROBERT MANNE ADMIRATION SOCIETY HANGS-OUT AT ABC SOUTHBANK STUDIO
Due to unprecedented demand, the Maurice Newman Segment gets another run this week. As MWD readers will know, this (hugely popular) segment is devoted to former ABC chairman Maurice Newman’s suggestion that a certain “group-think” might be prevalent at the ABC – and to ABC 1 Media Watch presenter Jonathan Holmes’ certainty that no such phenomenon is extant within the public broadcaster. See MWD passim.
What a turn-out on the ABC Radio National Drive program on Wednesday. RN Drive is currently being presented by that inner-city, sandal-wearing, bicycle-riding leftist Jonathan Green. [Are you sure he is inner-city? I understand your man Green lives in your one-time abode of Hawthorn – which is just a bit further away from Lygon Street, Carlton than Fitzroy North – Ed].
Jonathan Green is truly a Man For All Programs. He has currently stepped down from presenting RN’s Sunday Extra to host RN Drive. Then, after Christmas, the ABC’s Man For All Programs will take over as host of RN Breakfast while Fran (“I’m an activist”) Kelly takes a WEB – or Well Earned Break. At least this will keep a leftist in the chair – just like last year when the leftist John Doyle filled in for the leftist Fran Kelly on RN Breakfast. And that’s good for MWD – and oh-so-very ABC.
In any event, last Wednesday your man Green invited Professor Robert Manne and Dr Gwenda Tavan into RN Drive’s “Drawing Room” to discuss the topic Robert Manne speaks about most. Namely, Robert Manne.
The occasion was the publication of Dr Tavan’s (for a doctor she is) edited collection State of the Nation: Essays for Robert Manne (Black Inc).
The release of this tome could have qualified for entry into MWD’s most popular “Your Taxes At Work” segment. Here’s why. Professor Manne (for a professor he is) decided to step down last year as Professor of Politics at La Trobe University after a mere 37 years as an academic in this department. Just 37 years teaching politics – without ever having worked in the private sector or in politics or as a political staffer or as a public servant.
Following this shattering announcement, two of the learned professor’s young friends, Gwenda Tavan and Nicholas Barry decided it would be a you-beaut idea to honour this occasion with a conference. Brilliant? Well, Manne thought so. Who should attend this talk fest in honour of your man Manne? Well, the learned professor’s friends – of course. And what about financing this expensive conference? Easy. Get on the taxpayers’ drip, again. And so it came to pass that the taxpayer subsidised La Trobe University (“Proudly One of Australia’s Top 500 Polluters”) kicked in to bring Robert Manne’s friends to Bundoora to praise him.
And who might publish the learned proceedings of the learned conference? Step forward Robert’s bestie Morry Schwartz – Australia’s most sensitive multi-millionaire property-developer who does a bit of publishing on the side. That’s who.
State of the Nation doesn’t disappoint – not MWD anyrate. Dr Tavan’s introduction is suitably fawning. Then Robert Manne writes movingly – about himself. Then it’s over to Manne’s mates – including such leftists as Raimond Gaita, David McKnight, Clive Hamilton, Anne Manne [Don’t be jealous just because your missus would never take part in a conference praising you – Ed], Carmen Lawrence, Rhonda Galbally, Ramona Koval, Morry Schwartz, Tim Soutphommasane, Patrick Dodson, Mark Aarons, Jean Curthoys and Peter Beilharz. Sounds like a great collection. [Try to cover this book in detail in MWD before Nancy goes on her WEB. – Ed]
Unfortunately Jonathan Green did not speak at La Trobe University’s Praise-the-Manne conference. But he certainly made up for his absence with a suitably fawning effort in the taxpayer funded RN Drive “Drawing Room” in Melbourne as he and the doctor and the professor discussed the taxpayer subsidised State of the Nation.
Needless to say, Jonathan Green agreed with Gwenda Tavan who agreed with Robert Manne who agreed with Jonathan Green who agreed with his “Drawing Room” guests that mainstream politics was in a dreadful state which could only be overcome if the Thought of Professor (“I vote for the Greens”) Manne came to prevail in the land.
Dr Tavan was the star of the proceedings with such declarations as “I would definitely agree with Robert’s views there”, “absolutely”, “absolutely” (again) and “yes absolutely”. However, MWD’s favourite exchange went as follows:
Jonathan Green [referring to comment by Robert Manne]: Does that ring true, Gwenda?
Gwenda Tavan: Oh, definitely.
There you go. Definitely. Towards the end of this intellectual love-in, Robert Manne complained that “virtually no one within the sphere of conservatives” had commented on his mate David Marr’s essay on Cardinal George Pell titled The Prince (Black Inc, of course). The learned professor went on to allege – without evidence, of course – that someone or other had instructed conservatives to “shut down” discussion on Marr’s essay.
Jonathan Green agreed with Gwenda Tavan who agreed with Robert Manne that this was a BAD thing. However, Professor Manne overlooked two facts. First, as David Marr himself has conceded, Gerard Henderson did critically review The Prince – both in the Sydney Morning Herald and in Media Watch Dog. Second, David Marr obtained soft interviews on ABC 1 News Breakfast and Phillip Adams’ RN Late Night Live because the ABC declined to host a debate between Marr and one of his opponents about The Prince. Also, The Age in Melbourne declined to publish Gerard Henderson’s critique of The Prince in its print edition. Also, Robert Manne seemed unaware that The Prince has been reviewed in The Weekend Australian by Peter Craven.
Still who would – or indeed, could – expect Mr Green or Dr Tavan to challenge the teaching of Professor Manne on the taxpayer funded broadcaster?
Maurice Newman: 2
Jonathan Holmes: Zip
● NO COMBAT AS RED KERRY PROFILES PAUL KEATING
When the ABC decided to do a documentary on John Howard’s government, it commissioned one of the ABC’s in-house left-wingers to do the job. Namely Fran (“I’m an activist”) Kelly.
But the ABC has decided to commission Labor’s former Gough Whitlam and Lionel Bowen Labor staffer Kerry O’Brien to do a four part (four hour) documentary on Labor’s Paul Keating – who stepped down as prime minister over 17 years ago. At least the doco is being kept in the family – unlike Mr Howard’s experience.
By the way, don’t expect an angry/agitated Kerry O’Brien on this occasion. After all, he is not interviewing Tony Abbott or John Howard. As Red Kerry told Debi Enker in The Age’s “Green Guide” yesterday, he has to “strike that balance between testing some of the claims and not turning it into a “combative affair”.
Can you bear it?
● MIKE CARLTON & ANNE SUMMERS WRITE ABOUT A DINNER WHICH THEY DID NOT ATTEND
Believe it or not, Mike (“I’ll pour the gin”) Carlton and Anne Summers are still banging on about Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s dinner at Kirribilli House on Saturday 26 October to which they were not invited.
In the Sydney Morning Herald last Saturday, your man Carlton did a trying-to-be-funny-column in which he wrote about how eight of the guests behaved. What a hoot. Especially since only half of Carlton’s guest list was there on the night. And Dr Summers (for a doctor she is) also wrote about the dinner in last Saturday’s Herald. She imagined what took place at the dinner she did not attend.
Can you bear it?
There was enormous interest in last week’s coverage of the discussion between the Melbourne-based Michael Rowland and Dr Scott Burchill on Melbourne-based News Breakfast of recent memory.
A MWD reader was moved to put fingers to key board in response to the claims of Dr Burchill (for a doctor he is) and Young Mr Rowland that they are poorly paid by the Australian taxpayer. This is what MWD’s reader, from rural NSW, had to say:
I was amused by this part of the exchange you published at MWD yesterday. It may go some way to explaining why the modern left can’t understand why people voted for Abbott and Co.
Scott Burchill : This is. Well. Thanks. This is. I’m gonna. This is. I can’t match his mortician-chic that, of course, he [Gerard Henderson] specialises in. But I’m doing my best – what with limited university budgets. You know what it’s like having a small salary.
Michael Rowland : Yeah, we know.
If Burchill (university academic) and Rowland (ABC on-air presenter) think their salaries are “small”, what do they think ordinary Australians live on? Burchill as a senior lecturer at Deakin University is likely to be paid double the average wage in Australia and as much as four times the minimum wage. He earns about three times what the clerks who prepare his pay packet earn. And that is before research grants. It would be safe to assume that Rowland is towards the top end of the ABC pay scales, which peak around $160,000 a year in the 2010-2013 award.
COMRADE WENDY BACON (C/- UTS SOVIET) STEPS-UP
This hugely popular segment of MWD usually works this way. Someone or other thinks it would be a good idea to write to Nancy’s (male) co-owner. And he replies. In modern jargon, it’s called a conversation – albeit of the email genre.
Wendy Bacon got mightily upset at Nancy’s pretence (MWD, Issue 206) that she interviewed her good self about the Sole Protestor who demonstrated against Rupert Murdoch outside the Sydney Town Hall last week. So now read the Epistle of Bacon and the combined response from both Nancy’s (male) co-owner and Nancy herself. Here we go:
Wendy Bacon to Gerard Henderson – 1 November 2013
I note that in your newsletter today in a satirical column you portray me as someone who is applying for tax payer funded grants from a publicly funded institution.
I guess it is just your fantasy column – a small indulgence that provides a good chuckle for a few conservative readers. Some basic research might give it a more authentic feel.
Your readers may have been misled into thinking that I am still an employee of the University of Technology. That has not been the case for some time. All my work as a Professorial Fellow is done in my own time and is unpaid. In other words, it is voluntary. This included the 60,000 word plus report we published this week called Sceptical Climate Part 2: Climate Science in Australian Newspapers.
You suggest that I am busy writing peer reviewed papers that no one reads. Yes, I do still publish peer reviewed work but so that more people can read it, I publish versions of my research in all sorts of publicly accessible ways. I was doing this when I was an employee. Have a look the report and you might get an idea of what I mean. It’s already been read by hundreds if not thousands of readers in the last two days.
This year, I have also published with some other university academics and students our Women in the Media series at New Matilda. Lots of people have read that series. This project does have something to do with feminist activities unlike the nuns’ protest that you mention. You will notice some of the people on the team attend or work at publicly funded universities – perhaps you object to that as well. Maybe you would prefer them to only work on peer reviewed research, which as you say is not read by many. New Matilda is not by the way publicly funded. If any of your backers would like to donate, they should visit the New Matilda website. We could do so much more if we had half your corporate subsidisation.
I was part of a minor part grant application a few years ago with some academics at Sydney Uni. This was in the area of public health. It was relevant to the ethics of journalism. That is the last time that I can remember having any connection for an application for funding from the Australian government. I received no economic benefit from the grant.
You seem to mistakenly think that my nun’s habit protest was part of my activities as a feminist. The demonstration took place 43 years ago. It had nothing to do with feminism at all but everything to do with censorship. My involvement in Women Behind Bars, my employment at Liverpool Women’s Health Centre and my study of Women Homicide Offenders all came later.
I tweeted (not texted) my support to the lone protestor outside the Lowy Institute dinner but that error is not a big deal, especially as your contribution is in the guise of fiction. Anyway, I am happy to be quoted as supportive of him.
One last thing, regretfully, I am not a doctor. The reasons why are personal but have a fair bit to do with the activities mentioned above.
So if in the future you wish to include me in the targets of your newsletter, feel free to check the facts with me first,
Journalist and Media Researcher
Australian Centre for Independent Journalism
Gerard Henderson to Wendy Bacon – 7 November 2013
Anne passed on your letter to me (sent at 5.31 pm on Friday) concerning last Friday’s Media Watch Dog Issue 206 – which went out, after lunch of course, at about 3.30 pm.
You took umbrage at the “Stop Press” segment titled “MWD exclusive: Robert Manne, Phillip Adams, Wendy Bacon, David McKnight & Paul Barry Explain Why They Did Not Join The Mass Anti-Murdoch Demo Last Night”. In particular, you objected to what was reported as your comment “as told to Nancy”. Yep. As told to Nancy. Fancy that.
This is the part of Nancy’s report to which you object, viz:
Dr Wendy (‘I used to mock nuns in the name of feminism’) Bacon: “I had intended to march with a flying-column of taxpayer subsidised and radicalised comrades from the taxpayer subsidised University of Technology, Sydney to express my solidarity with the Lone Protestor and perhaps form a soviet or two. But, alas, I was caught up filling out (yet another) grant application to research a topic and write an academic paper which no one will read.
“I’m worried that the Murdoch-Pell-Abbott Clerical Fascist Dictatorship will cut funding for social science research on 1 July 2014. So it’s a busy time for us lumpen proletariat grant-seekers right now. Anyrate, I sent Lone Protestor a text indicating my support and that of my comrade-in-grant-applications, Dr Judith (‘Trust me I’m into psycho-babble’) Brett.”
In view of the fact that your comments were (allegedly) told to Nancy, I have passed on your assertion to her for consideration. I regret the delay in responding. But Nancy has been busy rounding-up cattle this week. That, after all, is what cattle-dogs do – as I am sure you will understand at the UTS. When Nancy retired to her kennel last night, I gave her your email. She proffered the following responses this morning. Here they are – as told by Nancy:
1. In my report for my (male) co-owner, published in MWD Issue 206, I did not state that you “are an employee of the University of Technology” in Sydney. All I said was that you hang-out at the taxpayer subsidised institution. This, I understand, is the truth as the signature on your email to my (male) co-master attests.
2. I note your belief that lotsa people read the products of your research. Well done. Also, it’s great news that “hundreds if not thousands of readers” have read your most recent report. Wow. I’d like to state that MWD has hundreds upon hundreds of thousands of readers. Every minute.
3. I heard you on ABC Radio National’s The Media Report last week. Surprise! As I recall, you criticised News Corp newspapers for publishing material on climate change with which you – and your UTS comrades – disagree. You may be interested to know that the privately funded Sydney Institute – run by my masters – is happy to hear a range of issues. Over the past couple of years, speakers have included Senator Christine Milne, Anthony Albanese – even your good self. My (male) co-master believes that such pluralism is not practised within the taxpayer subsidised UTS.
4. You take yourself awesomely seriously. The truth is that, I am a member of the Bacon Fan Club. Unlike my (male) co-owner, I was an enormous fan of the stunt – all those decades ago – when you dressed up as a Catholic nun and proudly held the sign: “I Have Been F-cked by God’s Steel Prick”. What a statement – especially from a proud feminist. My suggestion in MWD last week that your anti-Catholic sectarianism was a reflection of your evident feminism was an attempt at irony. It seems that the UTS Media Soviet does not do irony. Alas.
5. For the record, I had no idea that you tweeted or texted about the Sole Protestor outside the Sydney Town Hall until I read your email. I just made this up because I thought it might appeal to my (male) co-master. I’m that kind of canine.
6. So, you’re not a doctor. How about that? It seems to me that there are too many doctors in the (academic) house. Even though I am a great fan of your colleague and fellow sufferer of Murdochphobia, Dr David McKnight, my favourite one-time fan of the Khmer Rouge.
I deeply regret that your non-Ph.D. status is due to “personal” reasons which also has “a fair bit to do with” your past activities with Women Behind Bars, and the Liverpool Women’s Health Centre and your study “Women Homicide Offenders”. Like my (male) co-owner, I just love a conspiracy – real is good but imagined is even better. It seems to me that you and I are the only remaining media commentators about whom it can be said – for a doctor she is not. They don’t give Ph.Ds to dogs – a case for the Anti-Discrimination Commission, I say.
I don’t expect to be writing about you again in Media Watch Dog. But it’s possible, just possible, that my (male) co-owner may do so. I certainly hope so. He’s that kind of guy.
What a wonderful response by Nancy, as I am sure you will agree. It would be worth a prestigious Five Paws Award if not for consideration about gongs-for-responses conspiracies.
MWD is prepared to run further correspondence from you – despite the fact that you are not paid by the UTS but sign off your correspondence on UTS letterhead “Professorial Fellow, Journalist and Media Researcher, Australian Centre for Independent Journalism” at the UTS.
“The last time Gerard Henderson smiled was in 1978, when he saw a university student being mauled by a pitbull.”
– Ben Pobjie, via Twitter, 13 October 2013 [Editor’s Note: Mr “Why Can’t I Score an
Invite on Q&A?” Pobjie is wrong. In fact, the year was 1977 and the dog was a blue-heeler – like Nancy]
“I think Henderson is seriously ill. There’s enough there for an entire convention of psychiatrists.”
– Mike (“I’ll pour the gin”) Carlton (after Pre-Dinner Drinks tweet to Jeff Sparrow), 8 October 2013
“Wrong, you got caught out, off to Gerard Henderson’s Media Watch Dog for you!”
– Tim Wilson tweet to Jonathan Green and Virginia Trioli, 8 October 2013.
“Nancy as ever will be the judge”
– Jonathan Green to Tim Wilson and Virginia Trioli (conceding to the arbitral authority of Nancy), 8 October 2013
[Gerard Henderson’s analysis of the ABC] is absolutely simplistic.”
– ABC managing director Mark Scott talking to ABC presenter Jonathan Green on ABC Radio National Drive, 2 May 2013.
“Oh my God; you’re as bad as Gerard Henderson.”
– Dr Peter Van Onselen (for a doctor he is), The Contrarians, Sky News, 20 September 2013.
“The nation mourns Gerard Henderson. He’s in perfect health.”
– Phillip Adams, via Twitter, 2 July 2013 (favourited by Virginia Trioli)
“Old Australian saying. ‘He wouldn’t know a tram was up him unless the bell rang’. Wholly appropriate to Gerard Henderson”
– Phillip Adams, via Twitter, 7 May 2013
“I said publicly once that I thought that Gerard’s views on the ABC came not from his brain but from his spinal cord”
– Tim Bowden as told to Phillip (“I was a teenage Stalinist”) Adams, Late Night Live, 11 June 2013 – Queen’s Birthday Public Holiday.
“Gerard Henderson is a crank”
– David Marr at the 2013 Sydney Writers’ Festival (as reported by Mike Carlton)
“The great Australian media nutter Gerard [Henderson is an] ungrateful bastard”.
– Mark Latham, Q&A, 10 June 2013.
“[Gerard Henderson] is a moral dwarf …Gerard, pull your head in”
– Professor Sinclair Davidson, 24 April 2013.
“[Henderson] You are mad. In the 18th century you would have been caged, with the mob invited to poke you with sticks.”
– Mike Carlton, 5.23 pm (Gin & Tonic Time) 25 March 2013
“I like to think of Gerard [Henderson] as the Inspector Clouseau of forensic journalism”
– David Marr, ABC News 24 The Drum, 21 March 2013.
“[Media Watch Dog is] not a moan, more of a miserable dribble”
– Peter Munro, 21 March 2013
“You are a fool, Henderson, a malicious and mendacious piece of shit… Now F_ck off”
– Mike Carlton, 11 March 2013 (Hangover Time).
“[Gerard Henderson is] an internet pest”
– Dr (for a doctor he is) Jeff Sparrow, 26 February 2013.
Jonathan Green: “Nancy, will be taking notes, I suspect”
Michael Rowland: “Nancy…yes. We’ll get a nice write-up on Friday. Good morning as well, Gerard. Thanks for watching, by the way.”
– ABC 1 News Breakfast, 18 October 2012
“Gerard [Henderson] is a complete f-ckwit”
– Malcolm Farr, via Twitter, 29 June 2012 (circa pre-dinner drinks)
“What a haughty flapping half-arsed buffoon he [Henderson] is”
– Bob Ellis on his Table Talk blog, 8 May 2012 (before breakfast)
“We’d better be careful what we say, just in case Gerard’s offsider pooch Nancy is keeping an eye on us for his delightfully earnest Media Watch Dog”
– Tom Cowie of The Power Index, Crikey 20 January 2012
“Henderson…What a pompous, pretentious turd you are.”
– Mike Carlton, Saturday 13 August 2011 (after lunch)
“Go to the Sydney Institute Media Watch Dog website to marvel at [its] work”
– Mark Latham The Spectator Australia 11 June 2011.
Media Watch Dog – “disgraceful”, “sick”
– Professor Robert Manne, April Fool’s Day 2011.
“Before going further can you write to confirm that these emails are private correspondence and not for publication”
– ABC News Radio’s Marius Benson, 11 March 2011. He did go further – see MWD Issue 86.
“I realise this makes me practically retarded, but until five minutes ago I thought Nancy was Gerard Henderson’s wife, not his dog.”
– Byronbache via Twitter, Monday 7 February 2011
“Gerard Henderson is big enough to take care of himself, but that doesn’t stop us worrying about him from time to time. Lately it’s Hendo’s tendency to self-harm that has us losing sleep. For example, peruse the correspondence he’s published in his latest Media Watch Dog blog… There’s a part of us that just wants to ask: “Hendo, are you OK?”
– James Jeffrey’s “Strewth!” column, The Australian, 8 November 2010.
“Media Watch Dog on Fridays…is a sort of popular read in the Crikey office”
– Crikey’s Andrew Crook on ABC 2 News Breakfast, 24 September 2010.
Until next time, keep morale high.