GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG – ISSUE NO. 246
10 OCTOBER 2014
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.
“Oh Gerard. You total clown.”
– Jonathan (“Proudly the ABC’s Sneerer-in-Chief”) Green, Friday 3 October 2014, 4.31 pm [Mr Green must be an obsessive avid reader to respond so soon. – Ed]
However, one follower (a certain Robert J. Esq) of Mr Green smelt a rat – as the saying goes (or went). Hence his tweet in reply to Jonathan Green:
“Your just gunning to be top of the endorsements list for next week aren’t you ;-)”
– Robert J. Esq, Friday 3 October, 4.34 pm
And so it came to pass that the ABC’s Sneerer-in-Chief’s endorsement appears this week – so that the prophecy might be fulfilled.
- By Popular Demand: A Linda Mottram Moment Returns covering Bonge (of course), North Sydney Council, Manly Council, Keith Suter & Why the Kaiser Should Have Been Allowed to Have a Victory in 1918 (or earlier)
● MWD ON THE ROAD TO THE GRAND HYATT HOTEL (MELBOURNE)
Nancy’s (male) co-owner will be in Melbourne this weekend for an appearance on Insiders. [I hope that both David Marr and Mike (“Private Schools make us dumber”) Seccombe join Gerard Henderson on the couch – Ed].
It so happens that Hendo has scored a ticket to this evening’s black-tie dinner of the Melbourne Press Club – on an “information-for-food” deal. He provided some material on one of the inductees to the Victorian Media Hall of Fame – in return for an invitation to this evening’s black-tie dinner.
It promises to be a great knees-up. On ABC 1’s News Breakfast, former Age editor Michael Smith had this to say about the function:
[This is] a huge media dinner in Melbourne. There’s 450 journalists and others coming. I think it’s probably the greatest collection of journalistic talent ever assembled in one room in Melbourne.
[In view of this, how did Hendo get a ticket? – Ed]
Due to the requirement to leave for Melbourne not long after lunch, this issue of MWD has been done in even greater haste than usual. So it may contain more than the usual of what are politely called John-Laws-style-deliberate-mistakes. You be the judge.
MWD’s (male) co-owner is just so excited that Virginia Trioli will be going along tonight. Here’s hoping that La Trioli looks her normal gorgeous self. And not like she looks immediately after interviewing the National Party’s Barnaby Joyce.
●AFR RUNS GREEN LEFT PROPAGANDA ON PAGE ONE
What a stunning illustration on the front cover of today’s Australian Financial Review – which presents itself as a pro-business publication. Yet today, the AFR has given free coverage to an environmental activist group based in California and headed by Bill McKibben.
The powers-that-be at Australia’s national business daily saw fit to place a colour photo at the top of Page 1 – featuring protestors organised by the Green Left 350.org group protesting against AGL in Melbourne.
Believe it or not, the total roll-up for this mass demonstration appears to have been – wait for it – just seven. There is a bloke lying on the floor looking at 350.org’s own photographer. Plus a Not-So-Famous-Five looking bored while holding up a “Hand Off Our RET! [Renewable Energy Target]” sign. Plus a pair of feet – to which, presumably, legs, etc are attached.
This pic is not supporting a story. The only explanation for this Green Left art form is the caption which reads as follows:
Protestors organised by activist group 350.org, which is a leading campaigner for divestment, demonstrated at AGL’s Melbourne headquarters on Thursday against the energy company’s position on the Renewable Energy Target. Photo: 350.org
So today the AFR ran 350.org propaganda on Page 1. It’s the kind of lead which would normally be found in Green Left Weekly. [Perhaps, without your I’m-going-to- Melbourne-haste today this item would have fitted well in MWD’s hugely popular “Can You Bear It?” segment – Ed]
THE CASE OF DAVID MARR & JOHN BIRMINGHAM CONSIDERED
Why is it that the left is just so obsessed with Prime Minister Tony Abbott’s private parts.
This is what David Marr had to say about the matter in his 2012 Quarterly Essay titled “Political Animal: The Making of Tony Abbott”.
Six months ago there were rumblings in the party that the strategy was exhausted. But to the delight of the leader’s office – and the exasperation of Labor – these [carbon tax protests] jaunts were still putting Abbott’s face on the news. Mind you, something of the fun has gone out of them since the time when we never knew what strange body-hugging gear Abbott might be wearing. Not anymore. His minders – and perhaps his wife – have said no to Speedos and Lycra. Even so it can be said that never in the political annals of this country have so many seen so much of so little.
So, according to David Marr, the member for Warringah has a small member. How about that? Quarterly Essay editor Chris Feik left this profound thought in Mr Marr’s essay. [I wonder what would have happened if a similar obsession were exhibited regarding Julia Gillard or Christine Milne. Just a thought. – Ed]
Then, last Saturday, the Brisbane-based columnist for the Sydney Morning Herald, John Birmingham, came up with this in his SMH column:
…Muslim Fashion Week was actually a gift for Tony Abbott. He started the week a tad discomforted by the greed and calumny of corporate Australia and regained some control complaining that he found the burqa a “fairly confronting form of attire, and frankly, I wish it weren’t worn”.
Egregious hypocrisy much? This, after all, came from a middle-aged white man who seems to revel in confronting a captive nation with his favoured form of weekend attire; tiny red porno trunks that serve only to draw the unwilling eye directly to the most horrifying aspect of this hairy, dripping wet horror when it is thrust prominently and repeatedly into our slack and traumatised faces. Still, Toned Abs was exposed, and being able to reach for the burqa to cover himself was of almost inestimable value.
It seems that John Birmingham and David Marr are obsessed with Tony Abbott’s private parts. Yet neither of these middle-aged white guys ever objected when Labor hero Bob Hawke was photographed in his swimmers. We’ll keep you posted if any of MWD’s avid readers come up with a psychological explanation for this phenomenon.
[It’s a pity that the Sydney Morning Herald replaced Mike (“I’ll pour the gin”) Carlton with Birmo from Brisbane. At least there was a plausible explanation for Mr Carlton’s verbal anger directed at Tony Abbott and others – Ed].
● EMMA ALBERICI ON LATELINE
MWD would not have done a one-to-one interview with Hizb ut-Tahrir operative Wassim Doureihi on Lateline last Wednesday – since there is no point in giving a platform to a propagandist.
However, once the decision was made, it was over to presenter Emma Alberici to do her best.
And so it came to pass that Ms Alberici asked some really tough questions of the Hizb ut-Tahrir spokesman. All of which Doureihi refused to answer. His “Let’s-talk- about-the-Crusades-and-the-fall-of-the-Ottoman-Empire-instead” responses were not accepted by the Lateline presenter. She wanted to know why Doureihi would not condemn the so-called Islamic State’s murder of Sh’ia Muslims, Christians and other religious minorities.
It’s about time someone at the ABC asked some really tough questions about IS. Perhaps, Ms Alberici could be rewarded with the Q&A presenter’s chair. But, in the meantime:
Emma Alberci: Five Paws
● MICHAEL DANBY IN THE AUSTRALIAN
What a great piece by Labor MP Michael Danby in the “Media” section of The Australian last Monday.
Mr Danby, Bill Shorten’s parliamentary secretary, is a genuine social democrat – as distinct from a leftist. Moreover, he supports Israel’s right to exist within secure boundaries.
In The Australian, Mr Danby looked back in bemusement at having his political opinions effectively censored over the years by the Jesuit publication Eureka Street, The Age (of course) and Crikey. Michael Danby also wrote about being on the receiving end of the ranting tweets from Crikey’s Bernard Keane.
MWD particularly enjoyed the Melbourne Ports MP’s assessment of Melbourne’s very own Guardian-on-the-Yarra:
My experience was that The Age’s ideological bent was so marked towards the Greens political party that they did not tolerate a non-socialist left, non-Greens and non-conservative point of view. When The Age eventually ceases publication every newsagent south of the Yarra will know why. There is a 40 per cent differential between its Northcote, North Fitzroy and Parkville core readership north of the Yarra and the high-income, tertiary educated “AB” readership in southeast Melbourne.
● JAMES VALENTINE’S OBSESSION WITH PM ABBOTT’S SUITS
Just as Julia Gillard was embarking on a nationwide tour to promote her book My Story – along with a message that when she was prime minister there was too much focus on her gender, including her choice of clothes – James Valentine opened up his ABC 702 program last Tuesday with a discussion on Tony Abbott’s clothes.
At the commencement of his program, James Valentine spent a full 20 minutes discussing the Prime Minister’s outfits. Or outfit. You see, according to Mr Valentine, Mr Abbott has only one suit along with one or perhaps two ties. The suit is blue and the tie either blue or grey. Really.
To push out the segment to 1.30 pm comedian Shaun Micallef dropped into the studio to help out in discussing this BIG ISSUE. In time, the conversation was extended to Peta Credlin (the PM’s chief-of-staff) and Opposition leader Bill Shorten.
The combined intellects of Valentine and Micallef came to the conclusion that Mr Shorten is wont to wear red ties and that both the Prime Minister and the Opposition leader have less hair than once was the case. Golly. Their conclusion? Well Abbott and Shorten have “two ties and a full set of hair between them”. How funny can you get?
Oh yes, Valentine and Micallef also proposed that the Prime Minister should establish a “National Wardrobe Advisory Committee”. Really.
Imagine, just imagine, what would have been said if – say – 3AW’s Neil Mitchell devoted 20 minutes to discussing Julia Gillard’s dress sense. But when it comes to a bloke named Abbott, anything goes. Can you bear it?
● MARK LATHAM CHANNELS MARK LATHAM OUT CAMDEN WAY
While on the topic of Julia Gillard, gender and all that – did anyone read Mark Latham’s column in the Australian Financial Review last Saturday or yesterday? Or one of the above? One would do – since the Lair of Liverpool seems to have re-cycled the same column. [Don’t be too hard on Mr Latham. After all he has to get by on a lousy taxpayer funded superannuation scheme of a mere $78,000 a year – fully indexed. – Ed]
On Saturday in his “Relativities” column Latham criticised Ms Gillard’s launch of My Story in Camden – a function which the Lair of Liverpool – now a Mount Hunter resident – attended. Latham commenced his piece by revealing that, in the late 1880s, the ladies of Camden always walked on one side of the road where there were hotels to avoid working class types in the pubs, who used bad language, bashed up Hansom cab drivers and so on. [Go on – Ed].
All this was a backdrop to the fact that Ms Gillard had visited Camden to promote her book. It’s only a few months ago that the Lair of Liverpool was barracking for Julia Gillard. Not any more – as the extract from last Saturday’s AFR indicates:
Australia’s combative two-party system encourages the exposure of trivial points of difference: items from which marginal political advantage can be secured, such as the physical appearance and temperament of senior MPs.
Adding to this problem, the 24-hour media cycle is constantly in search of “filler” material, with journalists drilling into the private lives and idiosyncrasies of party leaders. Thus someone such as Gillard had to endure a goldfish-bowl existence, not because she was female, but because she was powerful.
Australia’s political class was no more fascinated by her dress sense than it had been intrigued by Paul Keating’s Zegna suits and French clocks or, on the other side of politics, Tony Abbott’s budgie smugglers.
Gillard’s repetitive whinge about this phenomenon points to a lack of self-awareness bordering on the delusional.
So, on Saturday the failed former Labor leader described Julia Gillard as delusional.
Then, yesterday, Mark Latham returned to the topic. There was another report on Julia Gillard at the Camden Civic Centre and references to “a tribal gathering of Australia’s ageing sisterhood. [Funny that. I thought that your man Latham (born in 1961) was ageing himself – Ed.]
The Lair of Liverpool once a Gillard hater – then a Gillard booster – now a Gillard hater again went on to declare:
Australian public life has never seen anything like Gillard’s book tour. For the first time, a former leader is trying to cash in commercially on a specific social grievance.
Her sales strategy is based on appealing to women who have been done over by blokes: whether it’s a husband who shot through or an employer giving his female staff a tough time. In buying the book, aggrieved women can empathise with Julia’s story – most notably, her battles with Kevin Rudd and the bastardry of male journalists such as Laurie Oakes and Peter Hartcher. Gillard, in effect, has become an agony aunt to a generation of Australian women in comfortable shoes.
So, according to the Lair of Liverpool Ms Gillard is not only delusional but also an agony aunt.
And so it went on – with (Thursday) Mark Latham channelling (Saturday) Mark Latham in bagging Julia Gillard. And the AFR is willing to pay the Lair of Liverpool for one column at the price of two. Can you bear it?
● BARNEY ZWARTZ: A FALSE PROPHET RETURNS
Last Friday’s Herald Sun reminded us all that Barney Zwartz, The Age’s former religion editor, is still banging on. This time as a senior fellow at the Centre for Public Christianity. [The what? – Ed]
Your man Zwartz was one of a dozen staff at The Age – or was it two dozen – who were always bagging the Catholic Church in general and Cardinal George Pell in particular as part of The-Guardian-on-the-Yarra’s ongoing anti-Catholic sectarianism.
In his final column for The Age – published on 26 December 2013 – Mr Zwartz declared that George Pell is a “figurehead” for a “narrow, authoritarian clericalism explicitly rejected by Pope Francis”. Zwartz went on to suggest that Pell might return to being a parish priest in Melbourne or Sydney or whatever.
That was Boxing Day 2013. Within eight weeks, Cardinal Pell was appointed by Pope Francis to the number three position in the Vatican. And Barney Zwartz is still presenting himself as an expert on the Catholic Church. Can you bear it?
● FERGUS HUNTER – NOTICES THE MALDIVES, IGNORES FRANCE
What a stunning piece by Fergus Hunter in the Fairfax Media newspapers last Sunday. Here’s how it commenced:
Speaker Bronwyn Bishop’s bid for a prestigious international job may have suffered a blow after controversial announcements about the wearing of burqas and niqabs at Parliament House.
The Speaker is campaigning for the presidency of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, an international organisation that promotes democracy. She is running against candidates from Muslim nations Bangladesh, Indonesia and the Maldives. Ms Bishop is reportedly the frontrunner. The IPU places an emphasis on the empowerment of women, especially when it comes to politics and government. At October’s assembly, a debate has been scheduled on “achieving gender equality [and] ending violence against women”.
This is all very well. Except that Mr Hunter forgot to mention that many nations have bans on wearing burqas and niqabs. Nations banning burqas and niqabs include the likes of France, Belgium, Italy, Egypt, Turkey and more besides. Some of these nations are members of the International Parliamentary Union and are not likely to desert Mrs Bishop on this issue. But Fergus Hunter did not inform his Fairfax Media readers of this. Can you bear it?
MORE MEDIA DEBATE ON FOX NEWS THAN AUNTY’S MEDIA WATCH
Since its inception in May 1989, the ABC TV’s Media Watch program has had a succession of leftist presenters – Stuart Littlemore, Richard Ackland, Paul Barry, David Marr, Liz Jackson, Monica Attard, Jonathan Holmes and Paul Barry (again). This is consistent with:
▪ Leftist journalist David Marr’s comment in 2004 (when he was presenting the ABC’s Media Watch) that only leftists can be journalists – here it is:
The natural culture of journalism is a kind of vaguely soft left inquiry, sceptical of authority. I mean, that’s just the world out of which journalists come. If they don’t come out of this world, they really can’t be reporters. I mean, if you are not sceptical of authority – find another job. You know, just find another job. And that [journalism] is the kind of soft-leftie kind of culture. (ABC Radio National, Big Ideas, 26 September 2004)
▪ The fact that the ABC is a Conservative-Free-Zone with not one presenter, producer or editor on any of the taxpayer funded public broadcaster’s prominent television, radio or on-line outlets.
As MWD has documented previously, there is more political diversity on Mr Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News than there is on Nice Mr Scott’s ABC.
Take last Monday, for example. Once again, Media Watch presenter Paul Barry ran a leftist line – this time attacking the new national security legislation which has been introduced by the Coalition government with the support of the Labor Opposition. This is consistent with the long-term practice of ABC presenters and journalists attacking both the Coalition and Labor – from the left.
There is no debate on Media Watch – just pronouncements by a leftist presenter like Paul Barry who lays down the (media) gospel much as a religious leader presents (religious) truth. Fox News’ MediaBuzz, on the other hand, does encourage debate – in that there is a clash of opinions between conservative and left-liberal commentators.
In his Media-Sermon-from-the-Leftist-Mount last Monday, Paul Barry had this to say:
Back in 2003, a 21 year old medical student Izhar ul-Haque was picked up by ASIO agents near his Sydney home. They had no permission to detain or to question him. But the NSW Supreme Court later heard …
For almost 10 hours, he was detained, threatened and interrogated, with an Australian Federal Police officer taking notes on the side…. In a damning judgment, Justice Michael Adams said the two ASIO officers “committed the criminal offences of false imprisonment and kidnapping at common law”. — Sydney Morning Herald, 13th November, 2007
The implication in Paul Barry’s attack on ASIO is totally false. The fact is that no ASIO agent was convicted of – or even charged with – committing the criminal offences of false imprisonment and/or kidnapping at common law with respect to the ul-Haque case. Not one.
Yet Mr Barry’s false comment was not contested – since no debate is allowed on Media Watch program.
MWD has never quite recovered from the ABC’s decision not to renew Deborah Cameron’s contract some years ago. You see, Mornings with Deborah Cameron on ABC Radio 702 in Sydney provided brilliant – just brilliant – copy for Nancy’s (male) co-owner under the heading “A Deborah Cameron Moment”. So much so that Hendo organised an Occupy Ultimo demonstration to demand that Nice Mr Scott return Ms Cameron to her early morning (leftist) gig on the taxpayer funded public broadcaster. Hendo thought that he was in with a chance since it was rumoured that ABC managing director Mark Scott was involved in recruiting Ms Cameron from the Sydney Morning Herald and giving her a prominent slot on ABC Metropolitan Radio.
Alas, not for the first time, MWD’s protest failed. However, motivated by Leon Trotsky’s (alleged) maxim that “worse is better”, MWD will keep up its demand that the ABC remains a Conservative-Free-Zone. And, as such, continues to provide great material for MWD each Friday – after lunch, of course.
In the (hopefully) temporary absence of Deborah Cameron, MWD has had to run with “A Linda Mottram Moment” – Ms Cameron’s replacement in the ABC 702 Mornings slot in Sydney. Today – in response to hundreds of thousands of avid MWD readers – “A Linda Mottram Moment” returns and covers the gap since this special feature previously appeared.
● BONGE LETS LOOSE
6 October: Mornings with Linda Mottram resumes after what journalists like to term a Well Earned Break – or, occasionally, just a break. Workers, on the other hand, take holidays.
On Thursday 9 October, since it was a Thursday, Channel 10’s national editor Paul Bongiorno rocked up to do his weekly commentary on Australian national politics on 702 Mornings. When the Conservative-Free-Zone that is the ABC needs an outsider to do a gig, it invariably invites a man (or woman) of the left to do the job. Like your man Bonge.
Yesterday Linda Mottram allowed Mr Bongiorno to do a leftist rant-to-microphone. He described Australia’s commitment to support Iraq against attacks from the so-called Islamic State (or IS) as “farcical” and “nonsensical”. This commitment is supported by Bill Shorten and the Labor Opposition – but not by the Greens. Bonge supported the views of former prime minister Malcolm Fraser – currently the pin-up star of the Green Left that support for the government of Iraq’s military campaign against IS will not work.
Bonge also criticised Lateline’s Emma Alberici for her interview the previous night with Hizb ut-Tahrir spokesman Wassim Doureihi. Bonge reckoned that Ms Alberici was just too tough when Doureihi refused to answer the question as to whether he approved of young Sunni Muslim boys holding the severed heads of their fathers’ Sh’ia Muslim victims. Bonge failed to tell listeners that, in fact, Wassim Doureihi refused to answer any questions that were put to him by Ms Alberici – a fact which avid MWD reader Julian Burnside AO QC noted and tweeted about.
Then, when Bonge said that Australians with stupid ideas are not thrown into jail, Linda Mottram interjected with a quick “Yet”. So, according to Ms Mottram, Australians will be jailed for controversial opinions when the new natural security legislation comes into effect. Really.
● JILLY GIBSON INTERRUPTED
16 September: Linda Mottram interviews Jilly Gibson, the Major of North Sydney. Ms Mottram interrupts and talks over Mayor Gibson – who is opposed by Green Left types on the North Sydney Council.
● JEAN HAY INTERRUPTED – BUT NOT TERRY
15 September : Linda Mottram interviews Jean Hay, the mayor of Manly, concerning the proposal to build a 760 car parking station under the Manly Oval and abolish a 50 year old ugly existing car park. The Manly Council’s proposal has been costed by KPMG and is considered viable. It’s opposed by the Green Left set down Manly way.
Linda Mottram obviously does not like the project and kept interrupting and talking over Mayor Hay. Then Ms Mottram spoke to a listener named “Terry” – who “is opposed to this plan”. Terry bagged Jean Hay and the proposed development without any interruptions or talking over by Ms Mottram. The conversation concluded.
Linda Mottram: Thanks for bringing your point of view today.
“Terry” : Thank you very much.
Thank you Linda. Thank you Terry.
● KEITH SUTER’S SOFT INTERVIEW
6 August: Linda Mottram interviews Keith Suter, he of the one-man think tank titled Global Directions [Gee, it sounds impressive. Ed].
Dr Suter (for a doctor he is) receives a series of soft questions from Linda Mottram and declares that:
▪ more Americans die because they fall off ladders than because of terrorism. [Perhaps the US Air Force should bomb ladder-making companies].
▪ we’re moving more and more towards a police state.
▪ Bin Laden wanted to destroy the Western world but needed the co-operation of Western governments to do it. To which Ms Mottram declared: “Fascinating, fascinating take”. Not really. Just tosh. The West has not been destroyed and Bin Laden is stone-motherless dead.
● BARRACKING FOR THE KAISER
4 August: Linda Mottram interviews American author and journalist Adam Hochschild concerning World War I. Mr Hochschild is introduced with a clip from the TV series Blackadder which mocks the strategy and tactics of the Allies’ war against Imperial Germany in 1914-1918.
Linda Mottram agreed with Adam Hochschild that the military leaders in the First World War were hopeless. Absolutely hopeless. Ms Mottram declared “extraordinary, extraordinary” in response to one comment by Hochschild and introduced a Blackadder clip. Mr Hochschild ran the familiar howlers that the leading British generals were all cavalry chaps who were trained on horses and did not come to terms with technology. Mottram agreed. Neither Mr Hochschild nor Ms Mottram mentioned that the Allies’ alleged hopeless leaders won the war in November 1918.
Soon Mottram, again in agreement, declared , “Gosh no – absolutely no” in excited response to one of her guest’s comments. [Gosh, gosh. Ed]. Then Hochschild declared that “if the leadership had been really smart, they would not have fought the war at all”.
Gosh. But they did. Both Mottram and Hochschild seem to forget that in 1914 Germany conquered neutral Belgium and then invaded France. Asked for his hero of 1914-1918 conflict, Hochschild nominated the pacifist Alice Wheeldon in Britain and Eugene V. Debs in the United States. Then Mottram described the First World War as “insanity” and concluded by describing her guest’s book To End All War as a “fabulous book”.
So according to Mottram and Hochschild, the Kaiser Wilhelm’s Imperial Germany should have been allowed to invade and conquer France, Belgium and Russia without resistance. In other words, the strategy of the Allied leaders in August 1914 should have been something like this. Step One: Ask the Kaiser what he wants. Step Two: Give it to him. Step Three: Peace in our time.
All up, verily many a Linda Mottram Moment. Here’s hoping for more.
Until next time – keep morale high.
“Good morning. All the gooder for being attacked (for thousandth time) by silly Gerard in the Oz”
– Phillip Adams via Twitter, 27 September 2014
“What troubles me most is that he [Gerard Henderson] shows such low journalistic standards, yet he is politically quite influential. He is often on Insiders. It’s hard to see why: he comes across as a crank.”
– Kate Durham as told to Crikey, 16 September 2014
“The unhinged but well spoken Gerard Henderson….”
– Bob Ellis, Table Talk blog, 10 August 2014
“Gerard Henderson and Nancy are awful human beings.”
– Alexander White, Twitter, 25 July 2014
“This is my regularly scheduled “Oh Gerard” tweet for every time he appears on #insiders”
– Josh Taylor, senior journalist for ZDNet, Twitter, 20 July 2014
“…that fu-kwitted Gerard “Gollum” Henderson….”
– Mike (“I’ll pour the gin”) Carlton, via Twitter, 12 July 2014
“[Gerard Henderson is a] silly prick”
– Mike (“I’ll pour the gin”) Carlton – tweeted Saturday 27 June 2014 at 4.15 pm, i.e. after lunch
“If Gerard Henderson had run Beria’s public relations Stalin’s death would have been hidden for a year and Nikita [Khrushchev] and co would have been shot”
– Laurie Ferguson via Twitter – 22 June 2014 [By-line: Mr Ferguson is a member of the House of Representatives who speaks in riddles.]
“[Gerard Henderson] is the Eeyore of Australian public life”
– Mike Seccombe in The [Boring] Saturday Paper – 21 June 2014
“Without in any way wanting to breach anyone’s human rights or free speech – why do people write emails to Gerard Henderson?”
– Katharine Murphy, Twitter, Friday 6 June 2014
“[Gerard Henderson is] an unhinged prick”
– Mike Carlton, Twitter, Thursday 12 June 2014
“There’s no sense that Gerard Henderson has any literary credentials at all.”
– Anonymous comment quoted, highlighted and presumably endorsed by Jason (“I’m a left-leaning luvvie”) Steger, The Age, 31 May 2014
On boyfriend’s insistence, watching the notorious Gerard Henderson/@Kate_McClymont Lateline segment. GH: What an odd, angry gnome of a man.
– Benjamin Law, via Twitter, Thursday 17 Apr 2014, 11:21 pm
Can’t believe I just spent my Thursday evening with a video recap of Gerard Henderson. I’m a f-cking moron.
– Benjamin Law, via Twitter, Thursday 17 Apr 2014, 11:23 pm
“[Gerard Henderson is an] unhinged crank”
– Mike Carlton, via Twitter, Saturday 29 March 2014, 4.34 pm
Complete stranger comes up to me: that Gerard Henderson’s a xxxxxx.
– Jonathan Green via Twitter, 8 February 2014
“[Gerard Henderson is] a sclerotic warhorse, unhelpful to debate, unwilling to think…a wonderful study in delusion…ideologically-constipated.”
– Erik Jensen, editor of Morry Schwartz’s The Saturday Paper [forthcoming], 23 November 2013
“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.