GERARD HENDERSON’S MEDIA WATCH DOG – ISSUE NO. 315
13 May 2016
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: Saving Meanjin. A Conservative (Modest) Proposal
- Media Fools of the Week: Step Forward Ben Fordham & Dee Madigan
- MWD correction re Jon Faine
- Can You Bear It? BBC Stars Defend BBC; A Crosby-Textor Update; Julian Assange’s Cat; Down and Out in the Q&A Green Room
- The Fitz Files: Peter FitzSimons’ Wesley College Theory Demolished
- Five Paws Award – And the Winners are Tracy Bowden and Monica Doumit re the Royal Commission
- MWD Exclusive: On Gillian Triggs’ “Ill-Informed” Moment
- Correspondence: Jon Faine Helps Out Big Time
A CONSERVATIVE 5 YEAR PLAN TO SAVE THE LEFTIST MEANJIN QUARTERLY
MWD is a big fan of the written word – whether on paper or online – and does not like to see newspapers or magazines fail. Hence MWD’s disappointment to learn, via an account by its editor Jonathan Green, that Meanjin Quarterly will probably not survive beyond the end of the year.
According to reports, the Australia Council in its wisdom has cut Meanjin’s funding with effect from the end of 2016. As Meanjin editor Jonathan Green told The Guardian Australia: “If we can’t replace that money we’ll probably have to close it.” Meanjin’s request to the Australia Council was for $95,000 per year for four years.
Founded in 1940, Meanjin has received a taxpayer subsidy since 1961. Initially from the Commonwealth Literary Fund and later from the Australia Council.
Meanjin has improved significantly under Mr Green’s editorialship – he took over as editor late last year. It is occasionally lively and no longer a pass-the-magazine product written of the left, by the left, for the left.
Even so, Meanjin remains a leftist house journal. So what’s the left going to do to save its product kicked off all those years ago by the academic leftist Clem Christensen?
Here’s MWD’s modest proposal. There are lotsa wealthy luvvies in Australia. Your man Green needs $95,000 per year for four years.
Step forward 300 leftist luvvies to contribute $317 a year for four years. This would give Meanjin $95,100 a year from the beginning of 2017 until the end of 2020. The extra $100 could be used to buy some gin and tonic for the Meanjin fridge.
Go to it leftist luvvies – you have nothing to lose but your Meanjin. If 300 of Australia’s richest socialists cannot find $30 or so a month to kick in to Meanjin, then why should the taxpayer save it?
- BEN FORDHAM’S BOUT OF PELL-PHOBIA
In a highly competitive field, Sydney radio 2GB presenter Ben Fordham has relied on a story first run in the Daily Mail online gossip-paper to conclude that Cardinal George Pell was well enough early this year to undertake a 22 hour flight from Rome to Melbourne.
How does your man Fordham know this? Well, Cardinal Pell was photographed having a meal with a fellow priest in Rome. Not any meal, mind you. Not at all. Rather, it was a meal of steak and chips. Really. Washed down with a glass of beer. Really and truly. The story was broken by Frank Coletta in the Daily Mail Australia and soon picked up by an excited Ben Fordham.
As the 2GB website described this matter:
George Pell Not Too Sick For Steak & Beer
His heart condition must be a thing of the past.
And here is what Mr Fordham had to say on 2GB last Wednesday:
Ben Fordham: Cardinal Pell has been seen eating steak and chips in Rome just three months after refusing to fly to Australia due to health concerns. Didn’t he have a problem with his heart? How do the steak and the chips and the beer go down when you got a heart problem?
Cardinal Pell claimed in February that flying to Australia to give evidence to the Royal Commission Into Child Sex Abuse [sic] would lead to heart failure. Well, he’s made a pretty good recovery. Based on what’s on the plate in Rome, he’s been photographed there. And I’m having a look at his plate right now there’s a giant steak there, a heap of chips and a beer.
Cardinal Pell was required to respond to allegations that he turned a blind eye to child abuse, this is back in Ballarat in the ‘70s and ‘80s, and as a result of his health concerns the 74 year old was allowed to skip the trip back to Australia and provide testimony by video-link instead.
Now the photographs that have been released show Cardinal Pell enjoying a hearty serving of steak and chips and washing it down with a nice cold beer. I don’t think that’s too good for the heart. I’m no cardiologist, but I think Cardinal Pell should probably have a chat to one because whenever I’ve heard cardiologists speak on these matters don’t they always say you’ve got to avoid red meat? And back off the beers a little bit? And I don’t know what the plate of chips would do. I don’t think it’s a good look for Australia’s most senior Catholic and one of the Vatican’s head-honchos.
Is it a little hypocritical to say your heart is too fragile to fly but you’re okay to chow down on steak and chips and beer? I imagine if you’re too ill to handle a plane trip then you probably should be sticking to a healthier diet. But I say again, I’m no cardiologist.
You can say that again. As far as MWD is aware, Mr Fordham has no medical qualifications whatsoever. According to medical evidence provided to – and accepted by – the Royal Commission Into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse, Cardinal Pell suffers from a medical condition which could induce heart failure due to the depressurised environment of long air travel. This is not an uncommon condition in people aged in their mid-70s. Which is why it can be difficult for over-70s with heart conditions to obtain travel insurance. Mr Fordham might learn about such matters some time.
Yet, in his abysmal ignorance, Mr Fordham reckons there is no difference in the medical consequences of having a meal of steak and chips, followed by a beer, in Rome – and undertaking a long air journey from Rome to Melbourne (during which passengers also happen to eat and drink).
In any event, Cardinal Pell gave evidence by video-link from Rome without a technical hitch. Moreover, he was just one of many witnesses – not resident at where the Royal Commission was sitting – who appeared via video-link at the Royal Commission. Yet the foolish Ben Fordham reckons he has unearthed a scandal.
- DEE MADIGAN – MUCH (PELL) HATE BUT LIMITED VOCABULARY
And here’s how Dee Madigan reacted to the big news:
Dee Madigan also has no medical qualifications. But she knows how to spell “f-cker”. Ms Madigan is a graduate of Loreto Mandeville Hall in Melbourne’s Toorak and the daughter of a former Catholic priest. Which demonstrates the value of a privileged Catholic education under the teaching of the Loreto sisters.
[Or perhaps not. I suggest that Ms Madigan enrol in Nancy’s courtesy classes and also learn to widen her somewhat limited vocabulary – MWD Ed]
ABC Radio 774 broadcaster Jon Faine – he of the Mornings with Jon Faine – got mightily upset with last week’s MWD. So much so that he threatened to engage m’learned friends to settle the matter. All this is documented in MWD’s hugely popular “Correspondence” segment this week.
Now let’s get this out of the way. MWD apologises to Mr Faine for any offence caused by the claim that he “goes out of his way to defend Islamists or any other group who are hostile to Western societies”. MWD did not intend to imply that Mr Faine would defend terrorists. Despite the fact that the overwhelming majority of Islamists are not terrorists, MWD is happy to apologise to Jon Faine for any offence and will amend the reference online. [OMG – ain’t some journalists precious. I hope this matter got aired in your correspondence with Mr Faine? – MWD Editor]
- THERE’S NO INTEREST LIKE SELF-INTEREST: BBC STARS PRAISE THE BBC AT THE BAFTAS
Believe it or not, there are BBC types in London who do more special pleading for the BBC than Australia’s very own Virginia Trioli does for Australia’s very own ABC.
At the BAFTA awards last Sunday, BBC-type after BBC-type stepped up to the microphone and lectured an essentially BBC audience about the benefits of the BBC. Without even a hint that a degree of self-interest might be involved. It was a conga line of leftist luvvies as the likes of Peter Kosminsky (Wolf Hall), Mark Rylance (Wolf Hall), Dominic Treadwell-Collins (EastEnders) and Adam Woodyatt (EastEnders), Ian Hislop (Have I Got News For You) and James Nesbitt (The Missing) all bagged UK Culture Secretary John Whittingdale who is looking at slowing down the inexorable growth of the public broadcaster.
The main egregious speech of the evening was that of Wolf Hall’s director, Peter Kosminsky. Going well over the allocated time, Kosminsky sermonised that the BBC was “not a state broadcaster where the people who make the editorial decisions are appointed by the government”. He added: “As they do in those bastions of democracy, Russia or North Korea.”
How self-indulgent can you get? In Russia, some journalists get murdered. North Korea is a communist totalitarian state in which there is no freedom of speech. And Wolf Hall’s director who has profited handsomely from the BBC, reckons that David Cameron’s government is a dictatorship at best and possibly a Stalinist regime.
Needless to say, the leftist Peter Kosminsky received a standing ovation – that is, S.O – from the BBC-heavy audience. All present obviously believe that the BBC should be able to trample over its commercial rivals with the assistance of a tax (i.e. licence fee) raised by the government and hand it over to Comrade Kosminsky and his ilk. Can you bear it?
- YOUR MAN TEXTOR’S TEXTING TWEETS
What a dynamic team is the Crosby-Textor team starring Lynton Crosby and Mark Textor.
As Nancy’s (male) co-owner sees it, when the conservative side of politics, in Australia or overseas wins, well – it’s all due to Crosby-Textor. But when the conservatives lose, it’s usually someone else’s fault.
Last year David Cameron led the Conservatives to victory in the British general election. Thanks to Crosby-Textor, which worked on the campaign. Last week, Zac Goldsmith led the Conservatives to a dismal loss in the Lord Mayor of London elections. Don’t blame Crosby-Textor, since the British-based Lynton Crosby had little to do with the campaign.
Indeed The Telegraph in London on Saturday carried a colour photo of Mr Crosby being knighted by Prince Charles. Arise Sir Lynton.
Meanwhile it seems that the Australian-based Mark Textor has not been too busy of late. How could he have been? Since, this week, Mr Textor sent out the following tweets concerning the fact that Cardinal George Pell had a steak plus chips for lunch in Rome last month.
How trivial can a serious man get? Can you bear it?
- JULIAN ASSANGE GOES TOTALLY FELINE
News from London is that leftist-luvvie hero Julian Assange has a cat who is, so far, nameless.
According to a report in The Telegraph last Monday, Mr Assange’s children thought that their old man, who jumped bail and walked into the Ecuador Embassy in London in June 2012 claiming political asylum, needed company. Hence the cat – whom MWD will call Cat.
Some years ago, Nancy’s male and female co-owners visited the site of Comrade Assange’s redoubt in London. It is from the balcony at the Ecuador Embassy that your man Assange has delivered occasional – and increasingly delusional – sermons to the assembled masses. Most of whom turn out to be journalists or shoppers on their way to Harrods round the corner.
In view of the WikiLeaks founder’s Australian heritage, MWD reckons that the RSPCA should investigate whether Cat has become a political prisoner. For the truth is that Cat – unlike Mr Assange – never voluntarily went into the Ecuador Embassy in London and he/she does not need to remain there to escape the British or Swedish legal system.
And then there is the matter of Cat’s feline rights. To be locked up with Julian Assange 24/7 – and having to listen to his rants about the evils of the Imperial United States – would surely be a form of torture. If the RSPCA won’t handle this – how about Professor Gillian Triggs and her comrades at the Human Rights Commission.
- DOWN & OUT (ON WELFARE) IN THE Q&A GREEN ROOM
What a wonderful effort by Q&A executive producer Peter McEvoy to put Duncan Storrar in the audience last Monday.
The most telling comment in the analysis of the farcical event was the taxpayer funded broadcaster’s response to the controversy – as reported by Caroline Overington in The Australian viz:
An ABC spokesman said Mr Storrar’s appearance on the show “went through the normal audience selection process”.
Yep. That would be correct. The very same “normal audience selection process” that saw Zaky Mallah invited on to the ABC set – after which ABC management tightened security with respect to all visitors to the ABC. Except, apparently, Mr Storrar. CanCan you bear it?
THE RED-BANDANNAED ONE – AN UPDATE IN WHICH YOUR MAN FITZY’S THEORY IS DEMOLISHED
As avid readers will know, the Sun-Herald’s Peter FitzSimons reckons that Cardinal George Pell “lives in a $30 million mansion in Rome”. Despite Sydney Morning Herald editor-in-chief Darren Goodsir’s protestations that the SMH and the Sun-Herald correct all errors, your man Fitz has still not been able to name the location of this alleged Vatican mansion. MWD looks forward to this advice since Nancy’s (male) co-owner would love to take a selfie outside the (alleged) “$30 million dollar mansion in Rome”.
MWD is full of anticipation for next Sunday’s The Fitz Files. The question is whether the Red-Bandannaed One – whom Mr Goodsir claims came from working class stock as a builder’s labourer – will clarify his previously held view that the Protestant Wesley College is replete with young gentlemen who seem to have been influenced by Nancy’s Courtesy Classes.
Flashback to 2012 where your man Fitz had this to say about Wesley College:
▪ Fitzy on Wesley College – 2012
In my [Wesley] college experience, no such rituals involved heavy sexism as – I kid you not – for the last 40 years Wesley has been noted as a place where strong women abound and we Wesley blokes weren’t allowed to be too sexist. Not surprisingly, the worst of the excesses over the years have come from the all-male colleges, as the cocktail of undiluted testosterone mixed with too much alcohol and sudden liberation from school discipline has long been a fraught one.
▪ And Now Some Reality – 2016
The news.com.au website on Thursday:
The Wesley College Journal dishes out awards for “Best Ass”, “Best Cleavage”, “Biggest Pornstar” and “Kinkiest Collegian”, while claiming to identify the woman who has allegedly slept with the most men. A page entitled “The Rackweb” features a spider diagram allegedly identifying inter-college “hook-ups”. The title of “Mrs Rackweb” is awarded to the woman the journal claims has slept with the most men.
“We might be sexist, but you lovely b***hes and hoes should know we’re trying to correct this,” reads one page. Another explains that Freshers are known primarily for their “drunken debaucherous behaviour”, “willingness to put out for their seniors” and for “enabling all the hook-ups a sleazy, p***y-hungry adolescent could dream of.”
Students at Wesley College told Aparna Balakumar, editor of student union publication Pulp, that the journal was designed to make them look like “sl*ts.”
The Wesley College Journal was produced by the university’s only co-ed campus in 2014 and published last year.
Well there you are – or not.
STEP FORWARD 7.30’s TRACY BOWDEN AND CATHOLIC TALK’S MONICA DOUMIT
This week’s most prestigious gong is shared between 7.30s Tracy Bowden and Catholic Talk’s Monica Doumit.
▪ Last Tuesday Ms Bowden revealed what the ABC and Fairfax Media had consistently failed to report. Namely that David Ridsdale, one of Cardinal George Pell’s principal accusers, is himself a convicted pedophile. This story was broken by John Ferguson in The Australian on 27 February 2016 and has been covered in MWD. However, until this week, the censors at the ABC had considered that this matter should not be brought to the attention of the Australian public. 7.30 also indicated that David Ridsdale had been remiss in not previously explaining in full the details of his past offending to his fellow victims of clerical child sexual abuse. This matter is of some significance since the likes of Tara Brown on 60 Minutes and ABC reporters have accepted in full David Ridsdale’s accusations about what he allegedly said to George Pell some two decades ago on another matter.
▪ In the current issue of Catholic Talk, Monica Doumit reveals how the Courier Mail in Brisbane illustrated a story about the sexual abuse of a sporting official with an illustration of Cardinal Pell. The Courier Mail’s FaceBook page rationalised its decision – even though it acknowledged that unlike, the sports official, Cardinal Pell has not been charged with any offence of any kind.
Just how on top of this issue the Courier Mail’s Facebook page is, became evident when, on two occasions, it referred to Cardinel [sic] Pell.
Tracy Bowden and Monica Doumit – Five Paws each.
SHOCK-HORROR GILLIAN TRIGGS HERSELF WAS ILL-INFORMED ON THE LAW
While on the topic of Gillian Triggs and all that, Nancy’s (male) co-owner had a Gillian-Triggs-Experience when recently flying from Sydney to Washington DC.
Before boarding his flight, Hendo picked up two magazines at the lounge. Namely, The [Boring] Saturday Paper – there seemed to be more give-away copies available than there were passengers all through the day. And also the May 2016 edition of CPA Australia magazine INTHEBLACK which has a photo of the learned professor on its cover and contains an interview with the Human Rights Commission president and Australia’s leading media tart of the accountancy kind – a certain Alex Malley.
Australians who follow such matters are well aware of your man Malley’s personal story – since he has told it so often per courtesy of paid CPA outlets. You know, that he was once suspended from his Sydney private school and went on to become – Yawn, Zzzzzzz. Gillian Triggs’ story is also well known. Born in Britain, she arrived in Australia at age 12 following a ship passage though the Suez Canal and went on to become Miss University or Miss Law – or whatever – at Melbourne University half a century ago. Yawn. Zzzzzzz. See MWD Issue 254 which contains a fine portrait of your Miss (as she then was) Triggs in her undergraduate days.
It seems that Dr Triggs (for a doctor she is) has been doing the celebrity interview round of late. Who could forget the Human Rights Commission president’s soft interview with leftist luvvie Ramona Koval in The [Boring] Saturday Paper of 23 April 2016. In this interview, Gillian Triggs:
▪ declared that: “Australians don’t even understand their own democratic system…they have no idea of the separation of powers and the excessive overreach of executive government.”
▪ boasted that: “One can be astonished at the very simplistic level at which I need to speak to Australian parliamentarians.” Yes, One can – can’t One?
▪ asserted that “Our parliamentarians are usually seriously ill-informed and uneducated…they don’t even understand what democracy is…they need to be better educated” and
▪ claimed that “when you are an elected parliamentarian…you are expected and required to read my reports”.
How egotistical can you get? In view of the fact that Professor Triggs seems of late to have thrown the switch to narcissism, MWD offers the following exclusive which reveals that – on some occasions, at least – the Human Rights Commission president is not as well-informed as she likes to pretend.
Professor Triggs addressed The Sydney Institute on 26 November 2013. Her topic was “Freedom of Speech: How can it be balanced with racial vilification” and included comments concerning Justice Mordy Bromberg’s judgment in the Eatock v Bolt case. After the talk, Gerard Henderson commenced the question/discussion period as follows:
Gerard Henderson: Just leading off, I haven’t read the Eatock v. Bolt for about a year. But, as I recall, in the Federal Court the judge expressed concern about Mr Bolt’s “tone”. In other words, he [Justice Bromberg] wasn’t commenting so much on what Andrew Bolt said – but the way in which he said it. So, in other words, not the words themselves but the kind of tone of the discussion. That seemed to be – I know the case was not appealed – but that seemed to be a kind of contentious area where the objection was not to what he [Andrew Bolt] said but how he said it.
Gillian Triggs: Yes I think the word, I believe, that Justice Bromberg used was the “manner”, the “manner” in which he [Andrew Bolt] had gone about it. And I have certainly taken that to mean that if you get your research wrong, where the fundamental facts about the people he was attacking were wrong, in terms of their heritage, their connection with Australia, et cetera – then the protection that you would normally get as a journalist is lost. And that was the key point that Bromberg was making.
Now, I know that there has been discussion afterwards about a variety of facts that were right or wrong and, as you say, what would normally happen in this sort of instance would be that you appeal. And matters of this kind are not usually left with one judge of the Federal Court. And it may be that those facts will be differently viewed by an appellate court, but it’s very unusual for an appellate court to overturn on the basis of facts. So I think the key point that the judge wanted to make was that there was inaccuracy and it was not fair comment in light of that inaccuracy and in light of what he believed was ultimately not good faith.
As the transcript demonstrates, Professor Triggs rejected Gerard Henderson’s claim that Justice Bromberg referred to Andrew Bolt’s “tone” in his Herald-Sun column which led to action against him in the Federal Court under the provisions of Section 18(c) and 18(d) of the Racial Discrimination Act. Rather, Professor Triggs asserted that the judge had referred to the “manner” of Mr Bolt’s comments. This is quite a different matter and Professor Triggs’ error was serious.
Being a courteous kind of guy, Hendo did not correct the Human Rights Commissioner’s factual error at a public forum. However, he did take up her erroneous statement in a private letter written on 4 November 2013. Here it is:
Dear Professor Triggs
Many thanks for giving generously of your time at The Sydney Institute last week.
Your public address created considerable attention and the feed-back from those who attended the “younger types” dinner was most positive.
Anne Henderson will be in touch with your office concerning the publication of your talk in The Sydney Papers Online.
Thanks for becoming one of the Institute’s associate members. It’s a great way to keep in touch.
One minor point, I checked the decision in Eatock v Bolt. Justice Bromberg did use the word “tone” when discussing Andrew Bolt’s Herald-Sun article – see, for example, paragraphs 54 and 413.
The Sydney Institute
On 16 January 2014 Gillian Triggs wrote the following letter to Gerard Henderson:
A belated thank you for including me in your Sydney Institute Speakers programme. I enjoyed the opportunity to speak at some length and develop my theme and especially relished the Q&A with your dinner guests.
Yes, I apologise. Justice Bromberg did use the word “tone” I had missed this. Thank you for the precise reference.
The freedom “wars” continue, though I believe the Attorney will settle for some kind of compromise on 18-c+d.
Best wishes to you and your wife for the New Year.
Normally Gerard Henderson would regard the admission of such an error as private. However, since Gillian Triggs has taken to lambasting politicians as ignorant and simplistic, seriously ill-informed and uneducated – it is appropriate to point out that even Human Rights Commission presidents can get legal matters wrong.
What’s more, this was no simple error. Justice Bromberg’s criticism of Andrew Bolt’s “tone” did mean that the Federal Court ruled against Mr Bolt on the basis of what he didn’t say – not specifically on the basis of what he did say. If Professor Triggs is intent on lecturing others about their lack of education in general and legal knowledge in particular, she should be across such important legal cases as Eatock vs Bolt. Here MWD stands.
This overwhelmingly popular segment of Media Watch Dog usually works like this. Someone or other thinks it would be a you-beaut idea to write to Nancy’s (male) co-owner about something or other. And Hendo, being a courteous and well-brought up kind of guy, replies. Then, hey presto, the correspondence is published in MWD – much to the delight of its readers.
There are occasions, however, when Nancy’s (male) co-owner decides to write a polite note to someone or other – who, in turn, believes that a reply is in order. Publication in MWD invariably follows. There are, alas, some occasions where Hendo sends a polite missive but does not receive the courtesy of a reply. Nevertheless, publication of this one-sided correspondence still takes place. For the record and in the public interest, of course.
As MWD readers are aware, The Guardian Australia’s deputy editor Katharine Murphy put out the following tweet on 6 June 2014 at 4.33 pm – when that issue of MWD was “hot off the press”. Here is Ms Murphy’s tweet: “Without in any way wanting to breach anyone’s human rights or free speech – why do people write emails to Gerard Henderson?” It’s a very good question. Thankfully, not everyone follows Katharine Murphy’s wise counsel – not even Ms Murphy herself (See MWD Issue 297).
- GERARD HENDERSON AND JON FAINE
As avid readers are aware, last Friday MWD published a transcript of ABC Radio 774’s Mornings with Jon Faine on 5 May 2016 when Mr Faine took a call from a certain “Damien”. Sally Warhaft was a co-presenter of this segment – in which Jon Faine described the reported support by an Australian Rules Football loving Sunni Muslim for the stoning of adulterers as – variously – “bizarre”, “weird” and “wacky”. Er, that’s all.
Your man Faine got mighty upset about Hendo’s criticism and sent an angry missive to MWD. Thanks Mr Faine. The correspondence is published below. Now read on:
Text from Jon Faine to Gerard Henderson
Someone has drawn my attention to an item about me on your Mediawatchdog blog – Got a good laugh about wearing sandals and thankx but –
To say I defend “Islamists” is to imply I support terrorists and is first plain wrong second offensive and third defamatory.
I ask you to immediately apologise and delete or amend the publication. Failing immediate action I will not hesitate to sue.
Text from Gerard Henderson to Jon Faine
I know how sensitive some left-wing journalists are and I am always willing to make corrections and/or delete references to anyone who feels offended by anything I write on my MWD blog. I did so recently with your colleague Jonathan Green.
I am in London at the moment and will deal with this on Monday or Tuesday.
I do not accept your interpretation of what I wrote in MWD last Friday but I will do as I said above.
I will email you in a couple of days.
Text from Jon Faine to Gerard Henderson
Change “Islamists” to “Islam” and I do not have an issue. Islamists=terror and to say I support Islamists is rubbish – Enjoy your trip.
Gerard Henderson to Jon Faine
I refer to your two texts and my response to your initial text.
As promised, I will amend a reference to you and apologise for any offence caused to you. This is my usual practice whenever oh-so-sensitive left-wing journalists who specialise in criticising others, get oh-so-upset when someone criticises them.
In response to what has become a controversy, I make the following points:
▪ As you will be aware if you recall your George Orwell, the term “sandal-wearer” is a political statement not necessarily a reference to footwear use.
▪ You refer to the following comment in last Friday’s MWD viz:
Jon Faine, who hosts Mornings with Jon Faine on ABC Radio 774 in Melbourne, is your typical guilt-ridden, sandal-wearing, inner-city-living leftie member of the left intelligentsia. So he goes out of his way to criticise conservatives at home and in such nations as the United States and Israel abroad. And he is forever looking for an excuse to defend Islamists or any other groups who are hostile towards Western democracies.
▪ You allege that it is “plain wrong” for me “to imply” that you “support terrorists”. As the quote cited above demonstrates, I did not refer to “terrorists” or “terrorism” with respect to your views. You just made this up.
The fact is that some Islamists are terrorists but most are not. I regard Hamas as a terrorist organisation; others rationalise attacks on that part of Israel which is inside the Green Line as mere self-defence. In any event, Hamas is an Islamist organisation – even though it is not known to currently launch terrorist attacks on Western democracies.
▪ Your assertion that “Islamists = terror” is simplistic. Many Islamists who preach in mosques/prayer halls have not engaged in terrorist activities – or even got involved in encouraging terrorism – both activities are criminal acts, as you know, and would result in charges being laid.
▪ Your statement that my comments are “offensive” to you demonstrates your evident double standards. You spend a lot of your time as an ABC contractor on the taxpayer funded public broadcaster offending others – most recently the Prime Minister whom you (falsely) accused of evading tax. You provided no evidence for this assertion.
This suggests that you are quite willing to give offence but not to accept (alleged) “offensive” statements with respect to yourself.
▪ I reject your assertion that my comment in MWD to which you took offence was in any respect “defamatory”. I also note the sensitivity of a journalist who threatens to sue for defamation.
Even so, as previously advised, I will apologise to you and amend my comments to accommodate your wishes. The taxpayer funded courts have better things to do than accommodate a taxpayer subsidised journalist suing Nancy’s (male) co-owner.
In conclusion, I note that you have not apologised for, nor amended, your claim that Islamists’ stoning of (overwhelmingly female) adulterers is merely “bizarre”, “weird” and “wacky” – a description concerning which your co-host Sally Warhurst did not concur.
Perhaps you should have a chat to Rosie Batty about male aggression towards females. Better still, why not enrol in Nancy’s increasingly popular Courtesy Classes? – which are about to expand to accommodate increasing demand.
Keep morale high – and look forward to your apology in next Friday’s MWD.
Jon Faine to Gerard Henderson
Thanx for attending to the correction
About the rest I make no comment as I have a show to do today and am busy keeping the ABCs reputation intact
Gerard Henderson to Jon Faine
Thanks for your email.
I note for the record, that you refuse to apologise for – or correct – your rationalisation of the stoning of (primarily female) adulterers.
This, I have to say, is an unusual way to keep “the ABC’s reputation intact”. But – there you go.
Until next time – keep morale high.
My oh my. Poor, blithering Gerard “Gollum” Henderson will be incandescent with rage after that Media Watch. The silly prick.
Mike Carlton via Twitter, 15 Feb 2016, 9:44 PM
Gerard: You are hopeless…
– David Marr, 12 February 2016
ABC is a weakened and flawed institution for sure but it is a vital balance to ranting prejudices of Gerard Henderson’s boss@rupertmurdoch
Quentin Dempster via Twitter, 10 Jan 2016,
Poor mad Gerard is obsessed. I expect he had an unhappy childhood, always the last to be chosen…
Mike Carlton via Twitter, 25 Oct 2015, 3:27 AM
Sometimes I think of Gerard Henderson like a Japanese holdout, lost in the jungles of Borneo, still fighting the war 20 years after it ended
– Erik Jensen,via Twitter, 16 Oct 2015, 4:50 PM
Gérard Henderson brain missing. Small reward
– Phillip Adams, via Twitter, 10 Oct 2015, 11:16 AM
I’ve been shot at by the Viet Cong. I once met Gerard Henderson. I can take any shit thrown at me…
Mike Carlton via Twitter, 9:22 PM – 9 Sep 2015
Gerard. You are an idiot #insiders
Bevan Shields via Twitter, 9:46 AM, 23 August 2015
“[Gerard Henderson is a] professional filing cabinet”
– Leftist scribbler Jeff Sparrow, Crikey, 13 August 2015
Leaving the house to avoid listening to GHenderson on @774melbourne
– Jonathan Green via Twitter, 31 July 2015
“gerard henderson trending on twitter, omg [looks out window, where the sun is eclipsed and the sky blood-red] oh yeah that makes sense”
– Adam Brereton via Twitter, 31 July 2015
Gerard Henderson on @891adelaide right now & I find myself shouting at my radio. What a morning”
– Louise Pascale via Twitter, 31 July 2015
“oh hell why is Gerard Henderson trending? Has boredom become the new black.”
– MNihilon via Twitter, 31 July 2015
Told I made the late Gerard Henderson’s little blog today. Read it. What a rancorous, nauseating, humourless little turd he is.
– Mike Carlton via Twitter during Gin & Tonic Time on 12 June 2015.
“On Sunday before Insiders…I was giving you a rich and full account of what a weird shit I think you are…”
– David Marr to Gerard Henderson, 1 June 2015
To #swf2015 this morning. Sunlit harbour, fabulous crowds radiating civility. And no Gerard Henderson ! It doesn’t get any better.
– Mike Carlton, via Twitter, 1:48 PM – 21 May 2015
Gerard Henderson’s friday self-harm update is here
– Adam Brereton, via Twitter, May 15, 2015
[Gerard Henderson’s Media Watch Dog is] batshit mad.
– Guy Rundle in Crikey, 14 May 2015:
I’m in the sort of mood that if I saw Gerard Henderson in the street I’d hit him with his own umbrella
– Ben Pobjie, via Twitter, 8 May 2015
It’s a glorious day when Gerard Henderson has a go at you
– Adam Gartrell, via Twitter, 8 May 2015
Meeting of Gerard Henderson Appreciation Society tonight Sydney Opera House phone booth
– Phillip Adams, via Twitter, 28 April 2015, 1.36 pm (after lunch).
“Gerard’s condescension levels high on #insiders this morning”
– Lenore Taylor, via Twitter, 22 February 2015
“Gerard Henderson and David Marr are on #Insiders this week. Like a political Felix and Oscar.”
– Mark Scott via Twitter 19 February 2015 at 1.10 pm
“I once called Gerard Henderson `a complete f%^wit’. I deeply regret that. I was being much too harsh on f%^wits.”
– Malcolm Farr via Twitter 14 February 2015 at 10:14 am
“Oh Gerard. You total clown.”
– Jonathan (“Proudly the ABC’s Sneerer-in-Chief”) Green on Twitter, Friday 3 October 2014, 4.31 pm [Mr Green must be an obsessive avid reader to respond so soon. – Ed]
“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