Bolt is a troll

[Kwality]

Could you please summarise the column for us.

I jusr found it ironic to see that headlibe at a Newscorp which has been leading tne charge in the destruction of journalism for opinion based sensationalism to incite their dwindling following.

Can i assume the article is a well researched column or another rant in support of a non progressive policy?

I'd suggest none of your claims have ever been researched. As you admitted you have no idea.
Go down to your local Council library & read the articles IF you are interested in what Bolt said. Fair dinkum, you'd know what you are talking about.

You could read the Fin Review when you are at the library & understand how NewsCorp is actually performing: for example, see

News Corp profits almost double as subscriptions drive recovery from pandemic losses

Growth at Rupert Murdoch’s media company underpinned by revenue rises at news operations

www.ft.com

'News Corp, the publishing company controlled by Rupert Murdoch, said profits almost doubled in the year to June as growth in digital advertising and subscriptions helped its news operations recover from losses incurred during the pandemic.
The US-listed company, which publishes newspapers including The Wall Street Journal, The Australian and The Times, reported an 11 per cent increase in revenue for the year to $10.4bn and pre-tax profit rose to $812mn compared with $450mn the previous year.'

 

[Home Alone]

I'd suggest none of your claims have ever been researched. As you admitted you have no idea.
Go down to your local Council library & read the articles IF you are interested in what Bolt said. Fair dinkum, you'd know what you are talking about.

You could read the Fin Review when you are at the library & understand how NewsCorp is actually performing: for example, see

News Corp profits almost double as subscriptions drive recovery from pandemic losses

Growth at Rupert Murdoch’s media company underpinned by revenue rises at news operations

www.ft.com

'News Corp, the publishing company controlled by Rupert Murdoch, said profits almost doubled in the year to June as growth in digital advertising and subscriptions helped its news operations recover from losses incurred during the pandemic.
The US-listed company, which publishes newspapers including The Wall Street Journal, The Australian and The Times, reported an 11 per cent increase in revenue for the year to $10.4bn and pre-tax profit rose to $812mn compared with $450mn the previous year.'

Thanks. So one of my assumptions is that is was well researched and you have pointed out that assumption is wrong.

I have no interest in the financial profitability of Newscorp. I do have an interest in journalistic integrity. If you could provide a link to financial succes and journalistic integrity I will make an effort to visit the library.

Actually, i just realised you are arguing against your point.

 

[1990crow]

Bolt could possibly be the worst person in Australia.

 

[kickazz]

I wish I had the exact words, but a senior guy at Sky News (one of Bolt's enablers) in response to a criticism on Media Watch regarding the "factualness" of their news content once said that basically their program was different and designed to appeal to a demographic that wanted a particular kind of content. Or something like that. Stopped short of actually saying they peddled "alternative facts" but was not ashamed in the slightest that, well, that's kind of what they did.

 

[The Cryptkeeper]

I'd suggest none of your claims have ever been researched. As you admitted you have no idea.
Go down to your local Council library & read the articles IF you are interested in what Bolt said. Fair dinkum, you'd know what you are talking about.

You could read the Fin Review when you are at the library & understand how NewsCorp is actually performing: for example, see

News Corp profits almost double as subscriptions drive recovery from pandemic losses

Growth at Rupert Murdoch’s media company underpinned by revenue rises at news operations

www.ft.com

'News Corp, the publishing company controlled by Rupert Murdoch, said profits almost doubled in the year to June as growth in digital advertising and subscriptions helped its news operations recover from losses incurred during the pandemic.
The US-listed company, which publishes newspapers including The Wall Street Journal, The Australian and The Times, reported an 11 per cent increase in revenue for the year to $10.4bn and pre-tax profit rose to $812mn compared with $450mn the previous year.'

You really are just a right wing stooge when it is all said and done, aren’t you?

 

[Kwality]

Thanks. So one of my assumptions is that is was well researched and you have pointed out that assumption is wrong.

I have no interest in the financial profitability of Newscorp. I do have an interest in journalistic integrity. If you could provide a link to financial succes and journalistic integrity I will make an effort to visit the library.

Actually, i just realised you are arguing against your point.

their dwindling following.

So this claim is a throwaway line, not another example of research by your good self.

ITs all there, you choose not to be informed ..... including ' their following' as represented by the scoreboard, the financials that are readily available.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Could you please summarise the column for us.

I jusr found it ironic to see that headlibe at a Newscorp which has been leading tne charge in the destruction of journalism for opinion based sensationalism to incite their dwindling following.

Can i assume the article is a well researched column or another rant in support of a non progressive policy?

The article is about journalists who have received awards for articles that have turned out to have been false, and have been required to pay damages, yet have not been required to surrender their awards (Walkley and Pulitzer).

 

[Saint]

So this claim is a throwaway line, not another example of research by your good self.

ITs all there, you choose not to be informed ..... including ' their following' as represented by the scoreboard, the financials that are readily available.

You've done what all good Newscorp Journos do and conflated revenue of Newscorp as a whole with Newscorp's Australian offerings.

The Herald Sun has 140,000 subscribers

Slow news day: the Herald Sun falls back in the pack

A long-time kingpin in Melbourne print media, the Herald Sun has tumbled to fourth place among News Corp's Australian mastheads.

www.crikey.com.au

Their main mastheads are still dropping readers:

‘The best Australian’ eclipses Eastern States news outlets

Fresh figures show our audience is now even bigger than the Herald Sun in Melbourne and The Daily Telegraph in Sydney.

thewest.com.au

It's not bouncing back, they're shuffling revenue from their successful branches (Fox News) to prop up the flailing Australian News arms (Sky News) and dressing it up as across-the-board success.



This is from their Annual Report.

 

[Home Alone]

So this claim is a throwaway line, not another example of research by your good self.

ITs all there, you choose not to be informed ..... including ' their following' as represented by the scoreboard, the financials that are readily available.

I am happy with the information I have seen to form my opinion on the HeraldSun and other NewsCorp publications.

But if financials are the ultimate determination of success, should the AFL Premiership be awarded to the club with the greatest profit (cause everything else doesn't matter)

 

[Home Alone]

The article is about journalists who have received awards for articles that have turned out to have been false, and have been required to pay damages, yet have not been required to surrender their awards (Walkley and Pulitzer).

Thanks. By 'false', can I guess there is reference (or at least implied) to Pell and Climate Change?

 

[Kwality]

You've done what all good Newscorp Journos do and conflated revenue of Newscorp as a whole with Newscorp's Australian offerings.

The Herald Sun has 140,000 subscribers

Slow news day: the Herald Sun falls back in the pack

A long-time kingpin in Melbourne print media, the Herald Sun has tumbled to fourth place among News Corp's Australian mastheads.

www.crikey.com.au

Their main mastheads are still dropping readers:

‘The best Australian’ eclipses Eastern States news outlets

Fresh figures show our audience is now even bigger than the Herald Sun in Melbourne and The Daily Telegraph in Sydney.

thewest.com.au

It's not bouncing back, they're shuffling revenue from their successful branches (Fox News) to prop up the flailing Australian News arms (Sky News) and dressing it up as across-the-board success.

View attachment 1503522

This is from their Annual Report.

Conflate ?
I'd suggest that we all know media companies are evolving & there is no sign of that changing.
Murdoch has never been afraid of the changing landscape.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Thanks. By 'false', can I guess there is reference (or at least implied) to Pell and Climate Change?

Pell is referenced, Climate Change isn't.

The article focusses more on the "Andrew Laming upskirting" story which received 2 awards for the Nine Network and the "Russia Collusion" story which earned a Pulitzer Prize. Both stories false, no awards withdrawn.

 

[Saint]

Conflate ?
I'd suggest that we all know media companies are evolving & there is no sign of that changing.
Murdoch has never been afraid of the changing landscape.

If you think that the online Herald Sun of today is as valuable as the print Herald Sun of the 90's, then you're in dreamland. But that's the story Murdoch is still trying to sell. I guess he has to, cos that's his business, but nobody believes it.

 

[Saint]

Pell is referenced, Climate Change isn't.

The article focusses more on the "Andrew Laming upskirting" story which received 2 awards for the Nine Network and the "Russia Collusion" story which earned a Pulitzer Prize. Both stories false, no awards withdrawn.

Why is "Russia Collusion" a fake story? Manafort went to jail because of it. Just because they haven't found Trump guilty, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Nixon was never found guilty over Watergate, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen and their awards should be withdrawn.

Does Bolt shed any light on why the story was false with facts or were any facts in the story wrong?

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Why is "Russia Collusion" a fake story? Manafort went to jail because of it. Just because they haven't found Trump guilty, doesn't mean it didn't happen. Nixon was never found guilty over Watergate, but it doesn't mean it didn't happen and their awards should be withdrawn.

Does Bolt shed any light on why the story was false with facts or were any facts in the story wrong?

Because there was never any evidence that Trump colluded with them.

Manafort went to jail for other stuff, not working with Russia to rig an election.

Anyhow, I'm simply answering the question as to what was in the article.

 

[Home Alone]

Pell is referenced, Climate Change isn't.

The article focusses more on the "Andrew Laming upskirting" story which received 2 awards for the Nine Network and the "Russia Collusion" story which earned a Pulitzer Prize. Both stories false, no awards withdrawn.

Thanks again. Personally, I think false is too strong a term. Insufficient, inconclusive evidence to legally prove truth/fact doesn't make it false.

But it isn't for you to justify the story

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

Thanks again. Personally, I think false is too strong a term. Insufficient, inconclusive evidence to legally prove truth/fact doesn't make it false.

But it isn't for you to justify the story

Leaving aside the international stuff, I think if legal processes have required the withdrawal of certain stories, then awards for those stories should be withdrawn.

 

[Saint]

Because there was never any evidence that Trump colluded with them.

Manafort went to jail for other stuff, not working with Russia to rig an election.

Anyhow, I'm simply answering the question as to what was in the article.

You mean apart from the time when he did it on National TV?

Trump asked Russia to find Clinton’s emails. On or around the same day, Russians targeted her accounts

"Russia, if you're listening, I hope you're able to find the 30,000 emails that are missing, I think you will probably be rewarded mightily by our press," Trump said in a July 27, 2016, news conference.

www.pbs.org

Manafort went to jail for multiple crimes, one was not disclosing he was a foreign agent in that he took $18m from pro-Russian Ukrainian politician Victor Yanukovich. He also went to jail for laundering the money.

Also, the Congressional investigation found:
Manafort's presence on the Campaign and proximity to Trump created opportunities for the Russian intelligence services to exert influence over, and acquire confidential information on, the Trump Campaign. The Committee assesses that Kilimnik likely served as a channel to Manafort for Russian intelligence services, and that those services likely sought to exploit Manafort's access to gain insight [into] the Campaign...On numerous occasions over the course of his time of the Trump Campaign, Manafort sought to secretly share internal campaign information with Kilimnik...Manafort briefed Kilimnik on sensitive campaign polling data and the campaign's strategy for beating Hillary Clinton.

There was collusion between Manafort and Russia and Manafort was Trump's Campaign Manager. Manafort then spent time after the election downplaying Russian interference.

No journalist could seriously suggest there was no link between the Trump campaign and Russia. The only thing which hasn't been proven is that Trump knew, and that's just because nothing is in writing because he doesn't read good and Manafort was using Russian intelligence-grade communications security.

 

[Home Alone]

Leaving aside the international stuff, I think if legal processes have required the withdrawal of certain stories, then awards for those stories should be withdrawn.

A reasonable position to take.

I had to look it up, but the Walkley is awarded for 'newsworthiness, research, writing, production, incisiveness, impact, public benefit, ethics, originality, innovation and creative flair — or other relevant criteria'.

If it is false then the newsworthiness and research hurdle hasn't been reached, and the award should be withdrawn. Personally, I don't think the withdrawal of a story through legal processes necessarily invalidates why the award was given.

So I will politely disagree with you.

 

[BruceFromBalnarring]

A reasonable position to take.

I had to look it up, but the Walkley is awarded for 'newsworthiness, research, writing, production, incisiveness, impact, public benefit, ethics, originality, innovation and creative flair — or other relevant criteria'.

If it is false then the newsworthiness and research hurdle hasn't been reached, and the award should be withdrawn. Personally, I don't think the withdrawal of a story through legal processes necessarily invalidates why the award was given.

So I will politely disagree with you.

That’s fine.

 

[E Shed]

The idea that any of Murdoch’s creatures, let alone Bolt have any moral authority to comment on the ethics of journalism is laughable.
He doesn’t really qualify even for the title of journalist these days if he ever did. He has no concern for facts & is incapable of formulating a logical argument.
He writes like a 13yo girl on Facebook. Honestly anyone who’s studied even the basics of logic could deconstruct his “articles” in a few minutes.
As for his concern for the truth? He’s a paid propagandist. Nothing more.
He & his ilk of culture warriors are a cancer on civil society.

 

[E Shed]

Bolt would do well to study a piece like this. Literate, tragi-comic, beautiful structure & based on verifiable facts. Lots of hyperbole (in a good way) & gets the point across in spades yet conveys somehow a little of the best & worst of humanity.

Oh & it’s got this gem of a line

It’s a shame Lear didn’t have the Brexit-boosting, offshore-billionaire-owned British press to back his bullshit, their eyes on a bigger prize. King Lear may have divided the country in two and turned it against itself, encouraged rivals to squabble at the expense of national unity, alienated even his own favoured daughter, and set in motion a chain of events that led to an old man’s eyes being thumbed out of their bloody sockets like a “vile jelly”, but like World King Boris, maybe King Lear “got all the big calls right”.

How will history recall the reign of Bad King Boris? | Stewart Lee

King Lear may have divided the country in two and turned it against itself but perhaps, like the outgoing Tory leader, he ‘got all the big calls right’

www.theguardian.com

 

[Happy Mastenator]

The idea that any of Murdoch’s creatures, let alone Bolt have any moral authority to comment on the ethics of journalism is laughable.
He doesn’t really qualify even for the title of journalist these days if he ever did. He has no concern for facts & is incapable of formulating a logical argument.
He writes like a 13yo girl on Facebook. Honestly anyone who’s studied even the basics of logic could deconstruct his “articles” in a few minutes.
As for his concern for the truth? He’s a paid propagandist. Nothing more.
He & his ilk of culture warriors are a cancer on civil society.

Bolt has never been a journalist. He’s only ever been an opinion writer/blowhard.

 

[E Shed]

Bolt has never been a journalist. He’s only ever been an opinion writer/blowhard.

It doesn't surprise me, I just thought I read once that he actually started out in an actual newsroom.
It must cut deep what he's become, if he ever has any actual moments of introspection.
He has less dignity and purpose than a sports mascot, geeing up his crowd of sad, angry people to ignore the man behind the curtain and watch the puppet show.

 

[Schneebly11]

He writes like a 13yo girl on Facebook. Honestly anyone who’s studied even the basics of logic could deconstruct his “articles” in a few minutes.

This is true. Bolt (and Murdoch columnists) don’t write for people with half a brain. They write for unintelligent, unquestioning, uncritical people who want their beliefs very simply confirmed and their emotions validated. These columns are delivered in a very emotional style, always degrading the target, always making the reader believe their positions is 100% ridiculous. Very short sentences which can be easily turned into talking points.

I took this recent Ben Fordham column about the jobs summit as an example:

You could see this coming.

Next week’s Jobs Summit is going to be hijacked by Unions.

The two day event has been coined as a way of “bringing Australians together to discuss economic challenges”

But in reality- it’s shaping up as a way for Unions to launch a new set of demands.

Sally McManus has already started.

The boss of the Trade Unions is proposing a crazy agreement for foreign workers.

She says bosses should be forced to pay skilled migrants a minimum wage of...

$91,000 a year

Sally McManus has told the ABC:

“I think that’s fair.

“That’s our claim.

"We’re putting it forward.”

If ever there was a chance to get a crazy idea across the line, this is it.

A minimum wage of $91,000 for a skilled migrant would break businesses.

At the moment - the threshold is $54,000.

Sally McManus wants every single one of these workers to be paid closer to $100K!

Does Sally realise how unrealistic this is?

And the impact it would have?

Businesses will go broke.

They’ll shut the doors.

And workers will be sent packing - back to where they came from!

Innes Wilox- the boss of the Australian Industry Group says:

“This would wreck the visa program.

“It would probably knock out as many as 70% of the business applicants.”

The Australian Chamber of Commerce and Industry agrees.

CEO Andrew McKellar says:

“This type of increase would kill Australia’s migration program overnight.

So that’s one of Sally's ideas….

And here’s another one she’s got - for Albo's jobs summit.

The ACTU boss wants to make it easier for workers to go on strike!

She wants entire workforces - even in the nation’s largest businesses - to have the right to strike.

That was not written for an intelligent person.