-
Recent Comments
DaveWatch on Pure Poison DaveWatch on Pure Poison I’m just calli… on Still a dickhead Lee Murray on Bolt contemptibly uses bushfir… DBD on Bolt contemptibly uses bushfir…
 | DaveWatch on Pure Poison |
| DaveWatch on Pure Poison |
| I’m just calli… on Still a dickhead | |
 | Lee Murray on Bolt contemptibly uses bushfir… |
 | DBD on Bolt contemptibly uses bushfir… |
57 Comments
10 February, 2009 at 8:59 am
He’s an uber hypocrite, on the one hand he’s freaking out on the politicisation of the bushfires by anybody mentioning ‘climate change’ but by making his childish rant he’s doing exactly what he’s claiming others are.
Not to mention his idiot minions blaming Brumby, Rudd and the Greens in general.
“Doesn’t The Age care if reporters have strong, declared sympathies that call into question their ability to report even-handedly?”
He’s a clown, however his idiot fans can’t see this.
10 February, 2009 at 9:23 am
What an idiot. time to hold up the mirror Andrew.
He spewed 11 years of Costello propaganda and leaks through his blog.
10 February, 2009 at 10:15 am
“…if reporters have strong, declared sympathies that call into question their ability to report even-handedly?”
Considering his stance on renewable energy is utterly ideologically driven, thats more than a bit rich.
The fact that windpower is effective and clean is irrelevant to him, he uses his position as a “journalist” to push his bizzare anti conservation agenda.
Add to this list his opposition to grey water irrigation, water recycling, solar power and HWS, rainwater tanks, even to well planned waterwise gardens, and in fact anything that he perceives as part of the ‘green left conspiracy’ regardless 0f how effective they are.
For him to claim that it is inappropriate for journalists to let their personal bias effect their work is just staggering!
10 February, 2009 at 11:15 am
You don’t seem to understand the difference between writing an opinion column – Bolt’s job – and reporting a story in the news pages.
10 February, 2009 at 11:20 am
“Doesn’t The Age care if reporters have strong, declared sympathies that call into question their ability to report even-handedly?”
Perhaps this question could also be extended to certain high ranking UNRWA officials who knowingly tell lies about the Israeli army deliberately shelling UN schools…Makes me wonder what other lies UNRWA have been telling the world media about the conflict there.
I’m looking forward to the retractions from some of the posters here who accused the Israelis of committing a war crime by deliberately shelling this school…
And then of course there’s this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY50cktUKbA
All a bit of a giggle this missile firing game isn’t it — she’s obviously quite happy about being used as a human shield. Doubtless had the Israelis responded by firing on her building they would have been accused of trying to silence the press..Also interesting to note the view of Gaza from her window, cars moving freely, roads intact, no evidence of indiscriminate bombing of buildings to be seen either..
All in all, not a bad looking place for a ‘concentration camp’.
10 February, 2009 at 12:01 pm
Hubert, according to Bolts biography on speaking tour and public appearance agency ICMI* of which he is a client, he is a journalist and full time collumnist.
Somantics will not get him out of this one.
If he is not a journalist, then he should not represent himself as one when advertising himself for public appearances. If he is a journalist then the accusation of hypocracy is entirely appropriate.
(*)http://www.icmi.com.au/Speaker/Media/Andrew_Bolt/Biography
10 February, 2009 at 12:53 pm
“You don’t seem to understand the difference between writing an opinion column – Bolt’s job – and reporting a story in the news pages.”
Oh we understand that he’s a hack who is paid to write the shock jock version of an opinion column, we also understand that he’s a hypocrite of the highest order.
10 February, 2009 at 12:54 pm
Even if Bolt is considered an opinion writer and not a reporter, for him to have a crack like that at The Age shows little insight into the paper he writes for.
10 February, 2009 at 1:12 pm
Yeah, just the other day the Sun’s front page story was Clarke & Kattich’s silly little tiff, right slap bang in the middle of our polies debating over $42 billion, what else have we had on the front page of the Sun this year? Paris Hilton! (and five page specials on Ron Barassi)
I think it’s laughable for anyone who writes for the Herald Sun and slags off the likes of the Excellent ABC and the not so excellent but heaps better than the Sun, the Age.
Didn’t Bolt once work for the Age? I guess the Herald Sun can look out if Bolt ever moves on.
10 February, 2009 at 1:21 pm
A bit off topic but does anyone here notice that Bolt only provides feedback to comment’s that are easily refuted (lets be honest, many of the silly comments are made from those who OPPOSE what Bolt believes)?
I don’t think he ever challenge’s intelligent comment’s that oppose his view of the world.
All the hallmark’s of a flat track bully (to use a cricketing term).
10 February, 2009 at 1:44 pm
“I don’t think he ever challenge’s intelligent comment’s that oppose his view of the world.”
More often than not any posts that show Bolt for the hypocrite that he is and put him into a corner because he has no rebuttal are simply ‘SNIPped’ for ‘NASTINESS’ or ‘ABUSE’ or some other bullshit reason. When in reality they reason should be something like:
‘SNIPPED BECAUSE THIS POST SHOWS WHAT A GOOSE I AM’
10 February, 2009 at 2:03 pm
RobJ – it should be more like “SNIPPED DUE TO COMMENT PWNING BOLT”
10 February, 2009 at 4:01 pm
I’m hearing crickets and watching the tumbleweeds blowing through regarding the lies told about the IDF by John Ging….I guess being vehemently anti-Israel means never having to admit you’re wrong…
Different topic — check this out for utter lunacy:
http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/news/national/babortion-to-blame-pastorb/2009/02/10/1234028017844.html
10 February, 2009 at 4:20 pm
GavM, this thread is not about Israel but i will say that this is only one of the accusations of warcrimes that have been made againt Israel.
The fact that one accusation has been found to be false is not the end of the story.
There is still the illegal use of WP as a weapon rather than for its intended purpose, the IDF attacks on redcross/crescent ambulances and the withholding of food, medical aid and shelter to civilians caught up in the conflict. All of which are illegal under international law, and will be dealt with in time.
BTW, Did you see Negus’ interview with Israels President on Dateline the other night?
You are right about that so called pastor though, he’s a fucking disgrace.
10 February, 2009 at 4:47 pm
Hello Dbd
Shouldn’t this discussion encompass the integrity of any public figure in a position of influence ? Not just Bolt, who I agree is a rather strange individual.
As you say, there are a number of allegations of war-crimes against the IDF, all of which have been made by sources which hardly can be said to be impartial, including now, John Ging’s UNRWA organisation — anything coming from them has now to be viewed with some scepticism in my opinion…I suspect we won’t hear too much more about them.
Even the Red Cross has said that the WP wasn’t used in such a manner that it would constitute a war-crime, although I agree that to use it in any form in a densely populated area is certainly morally wrong.
I did see Negus’ interview with Peres…I couldn’t help but wonder at Negus’ ignorance of the situation over there…His shock and refusal to accept Hamas’ use of human shields, even though their leader is on public record announcing that they use them, astounded me….
I will admit I don’t think too much of George, I think he’s an apologist for terrorists and generally biased against Israel in all his reporting…Then again, that’s only my opinion.
10 February, 2009 at 5:04 pm
To call Negus an apologist for terrorists is a bit much Gav!
I do think he fucked up on the interview though, there were times when i was literally yelling at the TV! He missed some great opportunities to ask some really tough questions.
My dad, a serious politcal junky, has always said he though Negus was a bit of a lightweight. After that interview im inclined to agree.
10 February, 2009 at 6:00 pm
Gavin M,
You go on latching onto any evidence you can find of misinformation, dubious photographs, exaggerated casualty figures … anything that helps you feel that the IDF has been “victimised” even as it kills over 1000 people, targets police stations and universities, and wipes out whole villages.
Very similar to the shrapnel-riddled ambulance in the 2006 Lebanon war. Dubious! Propaganda! The war didn’t happen! Gee, I feel better now!
10 February, 2009 at 7:05 pm
hypocracy runs thick in bolt-land.
“I’m hearing crickets and watching the tumbleweeds blowing through regarding the lies told about the IDF by John Ging”
i haven’t clicked on your link – don’t need to. for every video that exonerates israelies, one exists that works the other way. it’s a pointless, circular debate that goes nowhere. at the end of the day Israel could end all this tomorrow simply by withdrawing from illegal occupation of palestinian territory, and opening the borders. if we accept the standard definition of hamas as terrorists, and if our expectations of them aren’t therefore high, then why is is it israel who is stooping to their level? it is up to israel to show it is the mature, democratic nation it purports to be by learning to behave as such.
btw, DbD is right that this thread is not about israel, it’s about bolt and hun hypocrisy.
10 February, 2009 at 9:49 pm
I’ve said it before and I will say it again. Bolt and his idiot followers simply have the emotional maturity of young children with no manners. Hence the ridiculously absurd and child-like hypocrisy.
Of course we have another clear example of this with his shrill over people bringing climate change into the discussion of the terrible bush fires. Despite his own repeated despicable manipulations of tragic events to push his ideologically tribal agendas. Who could forget his revolting baby in the green bag effort.
The difference is that people who are raising the topic of climate change regarding the bush fires, ostensibly are doing so because of a concern that it will have the impact of bringing more destruction and loss of life. Bolt on the other hand brings the climate change issue into things, simply to push his ideology because it represents his ideology to rail on against concern about it and other environmental issues. This anti-environmentalism simply for the sake of it, has become the new religion for ideological orthodoxies like Bolt.
10 February, 2009 at 11:52 pm
Gavin M I agree. I despise this ideological cheerleading from different camps when it comes to the Israeli Palestinians issue. With ideologues siding with either group based on preordained ideological views, glorifying the position of either group and demonising the other, misrepresenting facts and applying no objectivity or rationality to their appraisals of the situation in the process.
The fact is rights and wrongs exist on both sides, as do lies and distortions. Black and white cheerleading for either group does nothing to resolve the situation. Sadly agendas and politics do exist within the United Nations, yet I am still glad that the body does exist. As Confessions points out though, it’s a circular things, and for every misrepresentation against the Israelis you could probably find just as many in support of them
11 February, 2009 at 8:14 am
The difference is that people who are raising the topic of climate change regarding the bush fires, ostensibly are doing so because of a concern that it will have the impact of bringing more destruction and loss of life
People that are trying to link climate change with the recent bushfires are just capitalising on the death & destruction to further their cause. There is NO evidence linking the bushfires with climate change. Especially given that bushfires, far more destructive than this have been a part of Australia’s history for thousands of years. The bushfires in the 1850’s and in 1939 were far more destructive that the latest one.
These people trying to link climate change to the fires are nothing more than vial vultures.
11 February, 2009 at 8:36 am
I think you mean “vile”, unless you have a fetish for test tubes Pipper.
Notwithstanding this blog is about the hypocrisy of Bolt in criticising others for what he himself does. Can you not see that?.
Stop with the strawmen and address the issue.
11 February, 2009 at 9:06 am
Hello Confessions..
Please don’t accuse me of being a supporter of AB, I think you’ll find plenty of examples of me criticising him on various blogs on this and Jeremy’s site…
Yes, he’s a hypocrite — I don’t think he’s stupid though, I think he is pandering to an audience who wants to hear what he’s saying.
I’m not sure that Israel withdrawing from the West Bank would end these attacks, given that Hamas’ stated aim is the destruction of Israel, but one thing is certain, peace could certainly be achieved tomorrow if Hamas ceased its rocket attacks and suicide bombings.
Lee,
I’m not “latching onto” any misinformation at all, John Ging knowingly lied, simple as that. He told a deliberate lie that resulted in world condemnation of Israel for an offence that he has now been forced to admit they never committed.
Perhaps you need to stop latching onto “evidence” and disinformation that comes from the other side.
As to the 1000+ dead, as I’ve said before in other posts, I’ll wait until independent assessments are made, and unfortuneately that now excludes John Ging’s organisation, they are no longer a trustworthy source, given that there are now claims of around 500 dead – including militants-from other outside sources, we may never know for sure the real figure.
Its interesting that you bring up the Lebanese ambulance attacks…This was proven to be false a long time ago.
Chris,
I agree with you, there is definitely right and wrong on both sides, the problem will always be finding the compromise that is acceptable to both parties, unfortuneately I reckon thats a long way away.
11 February, 2009 at 9:06 am
“These people trying to link climate change to the fires are nothing more than vial vultures.”
Didn’t Bolt try to blame the spike in heat-related deaths to the Greens?
11 February, 2009 at 9:13 am
Hi DBd,
I reckon your dad’s right too….you’re probably right about me being a little harsh for accusing him of being an apologist for terrorists , but I do think given that Peres is probably one of the more Liberal Israeli politicians, when he says that Israel had been finally pushed to far, those of us living in the safety of Australia should probably take some notice.
11 February, 2009 at 9:14 am
“Didn’t Bolt try to blame the spike in heat-related deaths to the Greens?”
Exactly – this thread is about Bolt’s hypocrisy, slagging off others for what he does himself. This entire Blog is about the idiots known as Tim Blair (totally insignificant though he is) and Andrew Bolt, that others may be hypocritical or even idiotic is not relevant, besides others being idiots or hypocrites doesn’t alter anything about Bolt & Blair (ya know, two wrongs don’t make a right).
11 February, 2009 at 9:17 am
“given that Hamas’ stated aim is the destruction of Israel, ”
In 2006 Hamas said they would be prepared to accept an Israel within the ‘67 borders, do you have any evidence that Hamas have changed their minds. (I linked it in a previous thread)? As far as I know that’s still Hamas position.
Ooops I’m off topic.
11 February, 2009 at 9:18 am
Don’t worry now Bolt is trying to back peddle out of his position by blaming a lack of logging and locking up forrests for the Bushfires.
11 February, 2009 at 10:10 am
The Apprentice Idiot aka RadMatt seems a little subdued this year. After claiming that “these people trying to link climate change to the fires are nothing more than vial (sic) vultures”, and having it subsequently pointed out to him that Bolt had recently blamed environmentalists for deaths during Victoria’s heatwave, he’s gone all limp. That’s not the Apprentice Idiot we know and love – he always used to come back for more, no matter how comprehensively he got done over. What’s happened to you RadMatt?
11 February, 2009 at 10:12 am
Dan Buster, it should be perfectly obvious to any reasonable person that if there wasn’t any bush, there’d be no bushfires.
11 February, 2009 at 10:13 am
I meant Dam.
11 February, 2009 at 10:52 am
Gavin M,
The Red Cross stands by its Lebanon ambulance story — to say that it’s a proven lie is simply incorrect.
John Ging, from what I can make out, stands by his original statements re the UN school, though the specifics certainly seem to have been distorted. This doesn’t take away from the fact that other schools were bombed and other propaganda disseminated: see
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1054009.html .
The “UN lies” story originated in Canada’s far-right Globe and Mail, a notorious Arab-bashing rag.
That the IDF is guilty of war crimes is almost irrefutable, though that’s not to say they’re worse than other armies in the world. The real crime is the prosecution of the war itself on a largely defenceless and dispossessed people, while other opportunities for peace-making (e.g. withdrawing to ‘67 borders) are consistently swept under the carpet.
Re fatalities, the IDF itself boasts that over 1000 people were killed. In any case, to say that “only 500″ died is a smaller scale version of saying “only a million died in the Holocaust”.
11 February, 2009 at 11:13 am
“Please don’t accuse me of being a supporter of AB, I think you’ll find plenty of examples of me criticising him on various blogs on this and Jeremy’s site…”
i wasn’t aware i had?!?
“Don’t worry now Bolt is trying to back peddle out of his position by blaming a lack of logging and locking up forrests for the Bushfires.”
it’s amazing, isn’t it? only those whose idealogical opinions (ie AGW) differ from andys are said to be “crowing over the fires”. but the nutty pastor who really is offensive and off the planet gets a feather-whip tsk tsk from bolt and told he is entitled to have his say.
what’s even more amazing is bolt’s readers continue to defend him, happily taking as fact anything andy chooses to rant about each day, even when he contradicts himself. unthinking. blind. faith.
11 February, 2009 at 11:39 am
Hi Confessions,
Sorry about that, I think I misunderstood your opening sentence, I thought you were referring to me as part of “Bolt-land”.
I reckon anyone trying to score political mileage out of these fires is just below contempt, to blame it on global warming is ridiculous as is blaming the greens…Bushfires have been part of the Australian landscape since the year zero, and will continue to be so.
Lee,
Please…the ambulance story from Lebanon is so full of holes you could strain soup through it..It’s been thoroughly discredited.
Also quoting Haaretz is hardly convincing, a paper that is known as a left-wing anti-government publication.
Of course in war propaganda is used by both sides, neither tell the full truth..It’s best not to believe anything until independent assessment has been made.
As to Ging, he lied to the world media, he knew that the Israelis did not shell the school and yet he made no attempt to correct the reports that they had, and he stated that the people were killed inside the school grounds, his organisation also forbade its employees who were at the site, witnessed the event and could have corrected the error from speaking to the media — I wonder why and so should you.
The claims of the ambulance (in Gaza) being attacked by the Israelis were also made by the UNRWA, and given that they have already been shown to be unreliable with evidence, I can’t help but be sceptical about anything they claim.
11 February, 2009 at 12:00 pm
to blame it on global warming is ridiculous as is blaming the greens…Bushfires have been part of the Australian landscape since the year zero, and will continue to be so.
Exactly. I would also add that the conditions Melbourne experienced on Saturday were not all that different from the conditions experienced in 1909, 1919, 1926, 1939 that lead to Black Friday and 1983 which was known as Ash Wednesday. So for those to claim that somehow the latest bushfire conditions are a sign of climate change are forgetting that our history has shown that we experience these very conditions on a regular basis.
11 February, 2009 at 12:04 pm
Hello Rad,
Yes, you’re exactly right.
11 February, 2009 at 1:54 pm
“Also quoting Haaretz is hardly convincing, a paper that is known as a left-wing anti-government publication.”
An interesting summation of a newspaper that regurlarly has contributions from all sides of politics. I guess you just dont like the fact that a newspapers function is to criticise governments and to hold them accountable for their actions. You sound eerily similar to a Dutch-born contributor of a Melbourne newspaper when you say things like that.
11 February, 2009 at 2:00 pm
Frank campbell said it perfectly in his piece in The Age;
Contrary to current hyperbole, Black Saturday was not the worst fire day ever. Ash Wednesday’s wind speeds ranged from 70 to 120 km/h. A savage south-west front led to most of the deaths and property loss, whereas Saturday had a modest wind change.
Nor was the area burned in the latest fires exceptional. About 300,000 hectares is the likely total, compared with 1.5 million on Black Friday 1939, several million on Black Thursday 1851, 260,000 on Red Tuesday 1898 and 230,000 on Ash Wednesday. Note that the days of the week have mostly been used up already. Every 10 or 20 years there is a bushfire disaster. This isn’t going to change.
South-eastern Australia is perhaps the worst fire vortex in the world
11 February, 2009 at 2:01 pm
Yeah, I was always under the impression that Haaretz was one of the more reliable news sources. I read it a lot at the start of the current Iraq war. But hey, if one is going to label Negus a terrorist apologist then I guess one’s judgement of what may or may not be reliable news source may be a bit skewed.
Fox is a shit source of news, as is the Herald Sun, totally crap.
11 February, 2009 at 2:08 pm
A note of caution, Apprentice: the maximum temperature for the day exceeded the previous February record by a whole two degrees. Let’s not get too carried away with the idea that none of this is unprecedented. I know you’re trying to learn the Idiot caper from Bolt, but not everything is about taking sides and winning arguments. Sometimes we just want to work out what’s going on, so that we can do all we can to manage it.
11 February, 2009 at 2:22 pm
Pipper,
This topic is about Bolt’s hypocrisy, not about whether AGW is responsible for the disaster.
Stick to the topic. If you feel like defending Bolt then do so, but do it based on the topic. Enough of the strawman arguments. It’s childish.
11 February, 2009 at 2:31 pm
Shane, the Apprentice isn’t the only one off topic here. How the hell did we get onto the behaviour of the Israeli Defence Force?
11 February, 2009 at 2:34 pm
Just a thought: aren’t “strong, declared sympathies” preferable to strong, undeclared sympathies?
11 February, 2009 at 2:42 pm
BadBob, I agree with you. Too many off topic posts.
As you know Rad is a serial offender in this area, as it is his only means of backpeddaling.
Now we are off topic too! ;)
11 February, 2009 at 2:54 pm
I think most here are agreed that Bolt is a hypocrite…once you get full agreement, discussion on a topic normally becomes pretty well pointless…Hence the introduction of side topics branching off the main one to keep a conversation going…
As to Haaretz having contributions from all sides of government, so what ? so does the “Hun” as people here like to call it, doesn’t make it any less editorially biased overall.
Rob,
As I said to DBd, I was perhaps a little harsh on Negus with the terrorist apologist remark, which is why upon reflection, I agreed with him that George is more just a lightweight on the political scene.
Out of interest, did you see the interview with Peres ?
I agree with you about FOX and the Sun being pretty much useless news sources, but then again, it’s pretty hard to find a news source that doesn’t have any political bias, the perception of that bias just depends on which way the reader/listener leans..
I think practically all journalists now seem to think fit to inject reports with their own opinions.
11 February, 2009 at 9:11 pm
Rad Pipper said ”
Frank campbell said it perfectly in his piece in The Age “Contrary to current hyperbole, Black Saturday was not the worst fire day ever.”
You’re taking the piss, right? 183 deaths (so far) is not the worst fire day we’ve seen?
After last weekend I would have expected you denialists to have crawled away and died of shame.
11 February, 2009 at 11:58 pm
“Also quoting Haaretz is hardly convincing, a paper that is known as a left-wing anti-government publication.”
hmmm. on lateline tonight they interviewed someone called Tom Segev(?), a contributor for Ha’aretz. in one of the most jaw-dropping statements i’ve heard on late night current affairs segev said that the election of Obama meant that israel no longer had shared values with the US, something that had underpinned the relationship for decades and he seemed to be implying that israel no longer held respect for the US. it seemed to me them was “fighting words” from segev in the face of expected US ambivalence towards what is tipped to be a far-right coalition govt in israel – not that the alternative was any better in my view. if Segev’s statement are left-wing anti-government sentiment then clearly i’m living in boltland.
12 February, 2009 at 6:55 am
After last weekend I would have expected you denialists to have crawled away and died of shame
Comedy Gold! LOL
You’re taking the piss, right? 183 deaths (so far) is not the worst fire day we’ve seen?
The worst day as far as loss of life yes but not the worst day as far as bushfire. Even though the 1851, 1939 and 1982 bushfires didn’t kill as many people, they were far more destructive as far as how much bushland was destroyed.
I am just speechless at how far Climate Change evangelists will go to salivate over the death & destruction to try and further their cause.
12 February, 2009 at 8:52 am
“I am just speechless at how far Climate Change evangelists salivate over the death & destruction”
Three examples, please, or exactly what you claim. Or even one. You repulsive bag of flesh passing as barely human.
12 February, 2009 at 9:03 am
And here is Rad, salivating over the deaths to push his own twisted small-minded agenda.
12 February, 2009 at 9:09 am
Confessions,
As I said above…The Sun has left wing contributors too, doesn’t alter the editorial bias towards the Right, same goes for Haaretz.
I don’t know who Segev is, from your post it sounds like he’s one of the hardliners that both sides have and who are probably the major reason the situation between Israel and the Palestinians isn’t likely to be fixed any time soon.
As an aside, it’s a pity you don’t take the forty seconds or so it takes to view the video I linked…It shows, aside from the news presenter laughing at the fact she’s actually being used as a human shield, a view of Gaza that you don’t see too often in our media, no ruined buildings or debris clogged streets..
12 February, 2009 at 9:13 am
“As an aside, it’s a pity you don’t take the forty seconds or so it takes to view the video I linked…”
Why don’t you link it in the other thread? This thread is about Bolt’s utter hypocrisy.
12 February, 2009 at 11:21 am
Hello Rob,
I think the other thread is dead…no point linking it there.
I also reckon this one is just about on life support now too…No-one seems to be arguing the point that Bolt is a hypocrite — as I said above, once everyone involved in a discussion agrees with each other, there isn’t much point continuing it, unless we all just want to back-slap each other over how clever we are in reaching that agreement.
12 February, 2009 at 11:37 am
Gavin,
I’d be surprised if you couldn’t make a comment on a thread so recent.
“there isn’t much point continuing it, unless we all just want to back-slap each other over how clever we are in reaching that agreement.”
No reason to take it off topic (yes I realise I sometimes wander off on a tangent myself).
12 February, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Hi Rob,
Initially I didn’t really intend for it to go so far off topic — I was basically intending to talk about the importance of integrity for people who have a public forum and therefore are in a position of some influence…..it sort of took off on its own, as we know the subject of the Mid-East is wont to do……I must admit I got a bit carried away though ;)
13 February, 2009 at 2:43 pm
GavinM
“As to Haaretz having contributions from all sides of government, so what ? so does the “Hun” as people here like to call it, doesn’t make it any less editorially biased overall.”
So what if it shows bias against the government from time to time? A newspapers function is just that. To keep the bastards honest.
19 February, 2009 at 9:40 am
No Mike,
A newspaper’s role is, or at least should be, to report the news without any bias whatsoever…
Of course it is acceptable for bias in opinion columns, as long as those columns aren’t presented as anything other than the views of the writer.
Comments are closed.