Gerard's article today is amusing and accurate - particularly his account of how Howard haters can get through the day only hearing their opinions being echoed back to them.
I read Hendersons article and I couldn't help reflect on the broad and reflective view of life on the right where all aspects of a problem are dealt with in such a balanced way.
His caricature of the left works just as well on the right - same idea - people only listening to what they want to hear (like the bizarre antiglobal warming viewpoints you seem to find.)
Of course I could see your main criticism coming when I wrote the post. I suppose I could have tried to pre-empt it, but I was in a bit of a hurry.
Anyway, I think you take Henderson and me too seriously. Yes it is a bit of a caricature, but a funny one. I did use the word "amusing". To apply the same caricature to those on the right is rather harder though, because the Right does not have as much different media covered as the Left. Let me explain.
Of course it would have to be ackowledged that anyone interested in politics on the left or right who reads the papers is exposed to opinion falling on either side. Furthermore, quite a lot of rightish bloggers have some links to leftish bloggers (and vice versa), because they like to know what the other side is saying so we can disagree with, or ridicule, it as appropriate.
However, the main point of Henderson's article is that criticism of Howard is so often so over-the-top and of an emotional bent that it loses credibility. And his secondary point is that there is so much of that type of critique out there every day that it is easy for one to only ever hear that, day in, day out, in all forms of media. That is the sense in which I meant he is accurate. Moreover, don't you think that people who say they have never met anyone who has voted for Howard deserve some ribbing?
I think it is beyond dispute that left leaning commentary on the ABC far outweighs right leaning commentary, especially on Radio National. Giving Michael Duffy a one hour show, and having one right wing panelist on "Insiders" hardly balances up the known views of the hosts of nearly all other commentary shows. And how many ABC identities have the left the job to become conservative parliamentarians?
The Left credentials of Fairfax are also strong. Sure, News Corporation generally runs Right; but they have their strange moments like the campaign they are running re the AWB inquiry.
As for the Arts community, well, I don't need to go on do I?
I think that what you will find behind many Howard supporting bloggers is not that they think he is God almighty, in the way that Labor deifies Whitlam or Keating, but that they do tend to support him when they find him being vilified in an unfair and highly emotional way. Henderson himself makes that point quite often. He has criticisms of Howard, and worked quietly on assisting migrants in detention. But he thinks some on the Left are routinely shooting themselves in the foot by the way it choses to attack Howard as the devil incarnate.
You might also note that Tim Blair and others on the Howard supporting blogosphere (including me) admit readily to voting Labor in the 1980's and agreeing that the reforms it made then were appropriate. You also have the obvious fact that many who vote for Howard federally must vote for Labor in the States. Now that I think about it, isn't that somewhat compelling evidence of "balance" on the part of a substantial part who vote for Howard?
Finally, you really misunderstand me on global warming. I have mentioned a couple of times that I am officially a fence sitter on this issue. It is complicated and there is so much material out that I have not read that I do not hold a clear opinion overall. I linked to Devine's article, but did not say I supported it wholeheartedly. In fact, I linked to Lambert's site in the certainty that he would critique it. He has.
I sometimes make jokes about trees causing trouble, etc, but this is not to be taken as official ridicule of all thinks pro global warming.
What I do tend to do, though, is link to articles that indicate that things may not be as bad as the worst alarmist scenarios indicate. I think these sort of studies get overlooked in the press, because headlines like disaster, and people often don't get far past the headlines.
Although I rarely mention it, I am not a Kyoto supporter because it is the politics of the superficial and useless gesture. That does not mean that I am convinced that global warming is not an issue to be concerned about.
I'm never quite sure with Henderson when he is trying to be funny but I have found myself agreeing with him on many points over the years.
Didn't you think the coverage of the tenth anniversary of Howard tended towards deification at times.
My point is not that some lefties aren't in their own universe but that it is not in the least a problem limited to them. It is possible there are having Gerard on when they tell him they knew no-one who voted for Howard. The inverse version of Henderson story starts with the a business breakfast at the Hilton learning new tax avoidance measures. A chaffeured ride to the club reading the Bulletin and Time. They might be lucky to catch some Fox News before going along to lunch with some other CEOs where they can complain about the lazy bastards who work for them etc etc. Funnily enough they never meet anyone who says they voted labor.
I read Fairfax because it is not completely trivial and while it veers to the right it has at least voices from more than just the right wing. The ABC is currently a necessary counterweight to the predominately right wing media.
Currently my disgust level with all politicians is back at maximum.
Labor appears full of fools.
The Nats and Libs come across as moral gymnists, able to simultaneously send our troops to fight the people they were happy to simultaneously bribe for business.
Polls seem to suggest Australians accept that their government should be deceitful. I know the Nats would have no trouble with this but you'd think some lib in the cabinet would have asked their Canadian friends for the real dirt.
All sad...
BTW I do read your blog and enjoy your thoughts. There was a nice piece on blogging and wiki etc on "A World of Possibilities" - that rabidly left wing podcast, that had some interesting observations on the phenomenon.
Steven
ReplyDeleteI read Hendersons article and I couldn't help reflect on the broad and reflective view of life on the right where all aspects of a problem are dealt with in such a balanced way.
His caricature of the left works just as well on the right - same idea - people only listening to what they want to hear (like the bizarre antiglobal warming viewpoints you seem to find.)
Geoff(not anonymous)
Geoff,
ReplyDeleteOf course I could see your main criticism coming when I wrote the post. I suppose I could have tried to pre-empt it, but I was in a bit of a hurry.
Anyway, I think you take Henderson and me too seriously. Yes it is a bit of a caricature, but a funny one. I did use the word "amusing". To apply the same caricature to those on the right is rather harder though, because the Right does not have as much different media covered as the Left. Let me explain.
Of course it would have to be ackowledged that anyone interested in politics on the left or right who reads the papers is exposed to opinion falling on either side. Furthermore, quite a lot of rightish bloggers have some links to leftish bloggers (and vice versa), because they like to know what the other side is saying so we can disagree with, or ridicule, it as appropriate.
However, the main point of Henderson's article is that criticism of Howard is so often so over-the-top and of an emotional bent that it loses credibility. And his secondary point is that there is so much of that type of critique out there every day that it is easy for one to only ever hear that, day in, day out, in all forms of media. That is the sense in which I meant he is accurate. Moreover, don't you think that people who say they have never met anyone who has voted for Howard deserve some ribbing?
I think it is beyond dispute that left leaning commentary on the ABC far outweighs right leaning commentary, especially on Radio National. Giving Michael Duffy a one hour show, and having one right wing panelist on "Insiders" hardly balances up the known views of the hosts of nearly all other commentary shows. And how many ABC identities have the left the job to become conservative parliamentarians?
The Left credentials of Fairfax are also strong. Sure, News Corporation generally runs Right; but they have their strange moments like the campaign they are running re the AWB inquiry.
As for the Arts community, well, I don't need to go on do I?
I think that what you will find behind many Howard supporting bloggers is not that they think he is God almighty, in the way that Labor deifies Whitlam or Keating, but that they do tend to support him when they find him being vilified in an unfair and highly emotional way. Henderson himself makes that point quite often. He has criticisms of Howard, and worked quietly on assisting migrants in detention. But he thinks some on the Left are routinely shooting themselves in the foot by the way it choses to attack Howard as the devil incarnate.
You might also note that Tim Blair and others on the Howard supporting blogosphere (including me) admit readily to voting Labor in the 1980's and agreeing that the reforms it made then were appropriate. You also have the obvious fact that many who vote for Howard federally must vote for Labor in the States. Now that I think about it, isn't that somewhat compelling evidence of "balance" on the part of a substantial part who vote for Howard?
Finally, you really misunderstand me on global warming. I have mentioned a couple of times that I am officially a fence sitter on this issue. It is complicated and there is so much material out that I have not read that I do not hold a clear opinion overall. I linked to Devine's article, but did not say I supported it wholeheartedly. In fact, I linked to Lambert's site in the certainty that he would critique it. He has.
I sometimes make jokes about trees causing trouble, etc, but this is not to be taken as official ridicule of all thinks pro global warming.
What I do tend to do, though, is link to articles that indicate that things may not be as bad as the worst alarmist scenarios indicate. I think these sort of studies get overlooked in the press, because headlines like disaster, and people often don't get far past the headlines.
Although I rarely mention it, I am not a Kyoto supporter because it is the politics of the superficial and useless gesture. That does not mean that I am convinced that global warming is not an issue to be concerned about.
I'm never quite sure with Henderson when he is trying to be funny but I have found myself agreeing with him on many points over the years.
ReplyDeleteDidn't you think the coverage of the tenth anniversary of Howard tended towards deification at times.
My point is not that some lefties aren't in their own universe but that it is not in the least a problem limited to them. It is possible there are having Gerard on when they tell him they knew no-one who voted for Howard. The inverse version of Henderson story starts with the a business breakfast at the Hilton learning new tax avoidance measures. A chaffeured ride to the club reading the Bulletin and Time. They might be lucky to catch some Fox News before going along to lunch with some other CEOs where they can complain about the lazy bastards who work for them etc etc. Funnily enough they never meet anyone who says they voted labor.
I read Fairfax because it is not completely trivial and while it veers to the right it has at least voices from more than just the right wing. The ABC is currently a necessary counterweight to the predominately right wing media.
Currently my disgust level with all politicians is back at maximum.
Labor appears full of fools.
The Nats and Libs come across as moral gymnists, able to simultaneously send our troops to fight the people they were happy to simultaneously bribe for business.
Polls seem to suggest Australians accept that their government should be deceitful. I know the Nats would have no trouble with this but you'd think some lib in the cabinet would have asked their Canadian friends for the real dirt.
All sad...
BTW I do read your blog and enjoy your thoughts. There was a nice piece on blogging and wiki etc on "A World of Possibilities" - that rabidly left wing podcast, that had some interesting observations on the phenomenon.