Bromberg's judgement on Bolt is worth a read.
So many have commented without doing so.
My take is that he could have made no other judgement on the basis of the legislation.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Rewriting history
Apart from being priceless viewing, gentle reader, this grab illustrates pretty clearly the consequences of a ham fisted attempt to rewrite ...
-
Fascism as a political movement exhibits four basic criteria. First, fascism it is not an ideology, but an activity. Secondly, it... -
Pic courtesy Fraser Coast Chronicle I’ve blogged before about history rhyming, rather than repeating itself. Having said that, f... -
Pic courtesy The Atlantic The media is having a field day with its coverage of the pandem...
2 comments:
Bolt shoots from the hip from time to time and in doing so his blog lacks attention to detail with spelling and grammatical errors unbecoming a professional journalist.
It is also quite clear that he did not do his homework and many of the things he said about the ‘professional aborigines’ were factually incorrect.
David Marr coined this as ‘sloppy journalism’, and I think he is right.
I believe the Herald Sun will appeal (they are footing the legal bills after all)and the decision will be overturned as it is madness for the legal system to affirm one person’s right to be ‘offended’ by the opinion of another person.
Cav
I agree with your summary, but I can't see that gratuitous offence has any place in public debate, especially when it's conducted by a "professional".
What is madness is reducing the public discourse to rancour and cliche.
We need a body for the press such as the Law Council which strikes off anyone in the profession who infringes against the standards. It works for the Law and Medicine. Teachers (in Queensland) have the College of Education. The Press Council has no teeth.
Post a Comment