In my last post on Wednesday, I said it was time to draw a line against racism and, among other things, to boycott Sky until it cleans house thoroughly. As it turned out, I had to put up or shut up on this, much sooner than I expected. Yesterday, I was invited (by one of the few decent commentators on Sky) to take part in a debate on the National Energy Guarantee. As readers will know, I’m keenly interested in this topic, and would have liked to have my say, but I had to decline. If this happens enough, perhaps Sky management will take notice.
Of course, as commenters have noted, it’s not just Sky but the whole Newscorp machine that is now pushing racism[fn1]. Jason Wilson has a good piece on this.
Also as noted by a commenter, I omitted to mention that Sky’s neo-Nazi talent was invited by Adam Giles, former Chief Minister of the NT. and therefore, until a couple of years ago, a member of COAG. It appears that none of his former colleagues on the conservative side of politics has uttered a word of criticism of this appalling behavior. In fact, the only criticism I’ve seen from the right has come from none other than Andrew Bolt. I assume that he was trying to put some distance between Cottrell’s diatribes and the almost identical views he published around the same time.
Some good news is that advertisers are feeling the heat, with Huggies, Specsaveras and American Express withdrawing advertising. Virgin has apparently launched an investigation into whether the interview aired in its lounges, but I’ve seen nothing from Qantas and had no reply to my protest.
!. Or rather, “white nationalism”. As I noted back in 2004, the only genuine instance of political correctness in Australia is that you are never, ever, allowed to call anyone a racist. Even Cottrell, who has openly declared himself a racist, and has been convicted of race hate crimes, is often referred to by euphemisms such as “far-right activist”.
19 thoughts on “Drawing the line”
looks like Vic rail has pulled the plug.
Vic rail has pulled the plug after they were there told to by the (Labor) Victorian Minister for transport.
The (Liberal) NSW Minister for Transport has said that Sky News can stay in Sydney train stations.
Who said the major parties are effectively the same? (The Greens, that’s who.) Here, at least, there is a big difference.
“decent commentators on Sky”
They all draw pay cheques from Sky. How decent can they be?
Unfortunately this controversy will probably be good for Sky, just like Fox.
Hopefully the WA Transport Minister will follow the Victorian example and tell the WA Public Transport Authority to switch off Sky in its train stations. Its presence there has been irritating me since well before the recent far-right trashfest.
Increasing economic inequality serves the interests of a wealthy minority. That minority needs votes from some of its intended economic victims in order to get an electoral majority.
Among those most persuadable to vote against their economic interests are xenophobes, religious fundamentalists and racists. Pitches to these prime sales prospects have become essential to the Libs’ political survival as their policies continue to promote ever-increasing inequality.
It seems that the Giles interview was not shown within the Vic metro system as it is a different program. So it seems the decision to “ban” was made in haste.
Surely Sky must pay to use the screens within the Metro, it’s a form of advertorial infotainment, so it could represent a financial loss to the Metro.
Either way – it is inappropriate to invade what should be a public space for this brain-damaging garbage. The question should be why was Sky ever allowed in the train stations in the first place.
rog – I’d assumed that taxpayers were actually paying for the content rather than the other way around. I doubt that Sky would provide it for free. A question of fact so no point in us arguing about it…
John, on you point that Bolt was the only person on the right to condemn Sky for airing the Cottrell interview. From memory Bolt’s issue wasn’t the actual content of the interview, but that having a Nazi air his views made his side of politics look bad. His fawning treatment of Lauren Southern comes to mind…
Rog: Cottrell was only the point at which the line was drawn. It’s silly to argue about whether rail commuters say that exact piece of racist garbage or some other bit.
Why was Sky ever allowed in the train stations in the first place? The answer is ……..profit.
There are any number of alternatives to Sky News in train stations, such as ABC News 24. It beats me in any case why people need to watch TV for the 5 minutes they are waiting for a train. It’s a sad reflection of the times. People just have to watching a screen of some kind during every waking moment.
Well I guess the argument is more broad; should travellers be subject to sound and moving images via screens without their consent?
Does this constitute an invasion of privacy?
In public places we do seem to come under a barrage of sounds and sights.
In NSW they have quiet carriages, presumably for those seeking relief from this incessant clatter.
Most people use their devices for infotainment, with earpieces.
The Oz’s main point was that the guy had also been invited onto and appeared on the ABC. Nobody seemed concerned about this.
Actually people were concerned about Cottrell’s appearance on the ABC.
““Welcome to Hack Live. Well, almost Live,” ABC2 host Tom Tilley told viewers last night.
“Tonight’s topic is so divisive that ABC management have asked us to bring you this show on a slight delay,”
It was easy to see why management were nervous about the no-holds-barred debate on the recent resurgence in Aussie patriotism. What followed across the one hour broadcast were heated opinions, shouting, aggression and a truckload of disrespect.”
There seems to me to be not only a difference in the way these ‘alternative’ views of the far right were presented by the ABC and Sky but also a difference in the motivations that determined the choice that the ABC made and that made by Sky news to give him a platform to have his freedom of speech.
Julie, interesting post and link. How does it work? The ABC has often been accused of being ‘left biased’ and it must be ‘balanced’ in its presentation of ‘views’. Showing incredible skills in managing what IMHO are ‘unbalanced’ elements within the spectrum of ‘views’, the argument now is ‘the ABC did it too’. Well no. IMHO this is a wake-up call to not allow the ABC to be managed into having to deal with unbalanced views to begin with. Maybe I am totally wrong in my reading of this episode of media management(s).
A young thing, tagged as a conservative commentator, was on Sky saying that the decision to pull Sky off Vic Metro was akin to fascism.
This event has developed a life of its own.
Today the Leader of the Opposition, Bill Shorten, and the Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull (in this sequence) drew a line in Parliament, both condemning Senator Anning (Australia Party, former One Nation Party) for his speech calling for a referendum on re-introducing the white Australia policy and suggesting a ‘final solution’ regarding immigration of Muslims.
They also acknowledged their agreement and they acknowledged other parliamentarians who have spoken out.
Turnbull and Shorten shook hands across the table in Parliament when the ABC stopped transmitting. I assume Bill Shorten’s motion will pass or some joint motion to the same effect will pass.
IMHO, both Shorten and Turnbull made the clearest and most meaningful statements on Australian values, particularly when combining the nuances of both. It was good to watch and listen.