Facebook Inc being exposed as placing advertising revenue ahead of safeguarding democratic election campaign processes

https://youtu.be/1iCVn_JvOiQ

The New York Times, 30 October 2019:

At the Capitol last week, Mark Zuckerberg didn’t have much of an answer to a question about addressing lies in political ads on Facebook.Credit...Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images

Not in the Cold War, not during Vietnam, not during Watergate did I ever fear more for my country. 

If America's worst enemies had spent years designing a plan to erode our greatest strengths, they could not have done better than what some of our fellow citizens are doing to the country every day for short-term financial or political gain. 

Prominent figures in government, politics and commerce are behaving in ways that are so destructive of the core institutions and norms that underpin our democracy, one can only assume that they take the country's stability as a given -- that they can abuse and stress it all they want and it won't break. 

They are wrong. We can break America, and right now we're on our way there. Not in the Cold War, not during Vietnam, not during Watergate did I ever fear more for my country. 

This moment "is like Wall Street before the financial crisis, when everyone just took for granted that the system was forever stable," remarked Gautam Mukunda, research fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School and author of "Indispensable: When Leaders Really Matter." 

"So they kept taking bigger and bigger risks and pushing it harder and harder -- until they pushed too hard and it crashed and the government had to step in and rescue everyone. If they keep acting like this, Trump and his allies will keep getting short-term wins until the system crashes. Only there won't be any government to step in and rescue them, because they'll have broken it -- and the country along with it." 

What am I talking about? I'm talking about a president willing to sink to banana republic governing norms, including withholding aid to Ukraine to compel its leadership to investigate his political rival. 

I'm talking about Republican lawmakers who know that the president's Ukraine machinations are indefensible and impeachable, particularly after Tuesday's disclosures by Lt. Col. Alexander Vindman, the top Ukraine expert on the National Security Council, that he personally heard President Trump appeal to Ukraine's president to investigate Joe Biden. 

Republicans now have a clear choice: let the constitutional impeachment process proceed or attack the process, i.e., our legislative-judicial order. Alas, a majority seem to be opting for the latter. 

They justify it with daily new conspiracy theories amplified by Fox News. They even stormed a secure room in the Capitol to mislead the public into thinking these hearings are totally one-sided -- when in fact both Democratic and Republican lawmakers and lawyers from the relevant committees are doing the questioning. 

In attacking all the diplomats, intelligence officers and civil servants who have stepped forward, at great professional risk, to bear witness against Trump, they are attacking the people who uphold the regulations -- and provide the independent research and facts -- that make our government legitimate and the envy of people all over the world, where many people have to bribe government workers for service. 

And, finally, there's the internet barons who for too long ignored the weaponization of social media, which is turning our free press into a house of mirrors, where citizens can no longer cognitively discern fact from fiction and make informed judgments essential for democracy. 

I watch it all and wonder: "Are you really doing that? Do you all go home at night to some offshore island where the long-term damage you're doing to America doesn't matter?" 

And what's even more frightening is that there are now so many incentives in place in media and politics -- from gerrymandering to unlimited campaign contributions to data systems that can ever more perfectly define us, divide us and subdivide us -- to ensure that these people will keep on hammering our system until they smash it to pieces. 

Look at Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg, who was questioned last Wednesday at a House hearing by Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. A.O.C. was trying to grasp why Zuckerberg thinks it's O.K. for politicians to run political ads that contain obvious lies, as the Trump campaign has already done in a Facebook ad about Biden viewed by some five million Facebook users. 

This is all about money for Zuckerberg, but he disguises his motives in some half-baked theory about freedom of the press -- so half-baked that he couldn't explain it even when he knew he would be asked about it by a congressional committee. 
Read it and weep: 

A.O.C.: "Could I run ads targeting Republicans in primaries saying they voted for the Green New Deal?" 

M.Z.: "Can you repeat that?" 

A.O.C.: "Would I be able to run advertisements on Facebook targeting Republicans in primaries saying they voted for the Green New Deal? If you're not fact-checking political advertisements, I'm trying to understand the bounds here of what's fair game." 

M.Z.: "I don't know the answer to that off the top of my head." 

A.O.C.: "Do you see a potential problem here with a complete lack of fact-checking on political advertisements?" 

M.Z.: "Congresswoman, I think lying is bad. I think if you were to run an ad that had a lie, that would be bad. That's different from it being -- in our position, the right thing to prevent your constituents or people in an election from seeing that you had lied." 

A.O.C.: "So you won't take down lies or you will take down lies? It's a pretty simple yes or no." 

M.Z.: "Congresswoman, in most cases, in a democracy, I believe people should be able to see for themselves what politicians they may or may not vote for are saying and judge their character for themselves." 

Yeah, right, as if average citizens are able to discern the veracity of every political ad after years of being conditioned by responsible journalism to assume the claims aren't just made up. 

Just once I'd like to see Zuckerberg look into a camera and say: "I will take Facebook stock down to $1 if that is what it takes to ensure that we're never again an engine for the perversion of democracy in any country, starting with my own. Facebook is not going to accept any more political ads until we have the resources to fact-check them all." 

I doubt he'll do that, though, because his priorities are profits and power, and he seems quite ready to hurt American democracy to get them......

Every time Australian lobby groups supporting the fossil fuel industry open their mouths just remember this video

4mins that you *must* watch.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez grills former Exxon scientists on Exxon’s startlingly accurate climate change predictions from late 70s & early 80s...

... and Exxon’s subsequent campaign to seed climate change doubt/denial.

pic.twitter.com/Wo9T5Ep6t0

— Mike Galsworthy (@mikegalsworthy) October 26, 2019

Australian Royal Commission into Aged Care Quality and Safety’s Interim Report has found the aged care system fails to meet the needs of its older, vulnerable, citizens, does not deliver uniformly safe and quality care & is unkind and uncaring towards older people

Australian Royal Commission Into Aged Care Quality and Safety - Interim Report Media Release, 31 October 20... by clarencegirl on Scribd

https://www.scribd.com/document/432911173/Australian-Royal-Commission-Into-Aged-Care-Quality-and-Safety-Interim-Report-Media-Release-31-October-2019

The 3 volume Interim Report can be downloaded here.

Burke on why facts matter

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0bXuv1Amck&feature=youtu.be

The Guardian (Australia) pledge on climate change reporting

This pledge is at the bottom of a number of The Guardian webpages: 

We will not stay quiet… 

...on the escalating climate crisis. This is the Guardian's pledge: we will continue to give global heating, wildlife extinction and pollution the urgent attention and prominence they demand. The Guardian recognises the climate emergency as the defining issue of our times. 

Our independence means we are free to investigate and challenge inaction by those in power. We will inform our readers about threats to the environment based on scientific facts, not driven by commercial or political interests. And we have made several important changes to our style guide to ensure the language we use accurately reflects the environmental catastrophe. 

In Australia, we commit to delivering the most comprehensive environmental reporting in the country. We will hold those in power to account for their inadequate national response and keep our focus on the actions of the Morrison government. Guardian Australia will continue to pursue deep investigations into the most important environmental issues. 

The Guardian believes that the problems we face on the climate crisis are systemic and that fundamental societal change is needed. We will keep reporting on the efforts of individuals and communities around the world who are fearlessly taking a stand for future generations and the preservation of human life on earth. We want their stories to inspire hope. We will also report back on our own progress as an organisation, as we take important steps to address our impact on the environment. 

The Guardian made a choice: to keep our journalism open to all. We do not have a paywall because we believe everyone deserves access to factual information, regardless of where they live or what they can afford. 

We hope you will consider supporting the Guardian’s open, independent reporting today. Every contribution from our readers, however big or small, is so valuable.

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison brings shame on all of us who arrived in the country from 1778 onwards

And Jenna Price* expresses that shame for us all......

The Canberra Times, 25 October 2019:

It's the only night legendary Australian band the Go-Betweens are playing in Sydney and the audience is keyed up. A woman gives a very moving Acknowledgment of Country - you know, the ones which are more than just the nod to elders past, present and emerging. The ones which talk about rivers and sky, kin and skin. It's Wiradjuri woman Yvonne Weldon, chair of the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council, whose ability to hold an audience is epic.

Midway, a bloke in the audience starts heckling. Get a move on, he says, and worse.

"I paused. And then I said, 'This is exactly for you, we are the oldest living cultures of the world'," Weldon remembers.

There was a moment of silence before people started telling him to shush - but in stronger language. Weldon continued. Her aim, she says, was to address a big-mouthed, small-minded person.

Now the Prime Minister is doing his own interrupting, colonising these acknowledgments with his own version. Last Saturday, at a Liberal function at Parliament House, he acknowledged the Ngunnawal people. And then he said: "Can I also acknowledge, as is my habit, anyone who is serving in our defence forces and certainly those who are veterans, and simply say on behalf of a very grateful nation, thank you for your service."

It's his own thing. Six words about the traditional owners and entire sentences about everyone else. He didn't just do it at the Liberal Council. He also did it at the Migration and Settlement Awards and at the Prime Minister's Literary Awards. Morrison has decided to add non-Indigenous people to the acknowledgments without reflecting on what that means and how it diminishes Aboriginal people.

Wurundjeri elder Aunty Joy Murphy-Wandin performs
a Welcome to Country and Acknowledgment of Country
beforea State of Origin game in Melbourne. Picture:
Getty Images

Why does this matter? We know we are on Aboriginal land. We know Australia wasn't blank earth when colonised 200 years ago. Since the arrival of Cook and company, Aboriginal people have been raped and murdered, stolen from their families, had their cultural practices and beliefs erased. They earn less, learn less, die early. There is a lot we can do to redress that, but the very least we could do is to acknowledge that we are on Aboriginal land. It's a couple of minutes out of our respective days and might even encourage a tiny bit of reflection on the part of those of us who are listening. It's not a big ask to be part of a ceremony that has its traditions going back thousands of years (yes, yes, they didn't have exactly this before white people arrived, but Aboriginal people had their own ways of welcoming to country). 

In the aeons before, the Welcome to Country was a sign of peace. And it's this which irks D'harawal scholar Gawaian Bodkin-Andrews, a professor at the University of Technology Sydney (I work there too), the most. Bodkin-Andrews, who has researched Welcome to Country controversies, says the Prime Minister has appropriated an act of peace and embedded war. 
Bodkin-Andrews reminds us that Welcome to Countries (delivered by traditional custodians) are about Aboriginal people sharing their histories and their connections to Country. Acknowledgments (given by Aboriginal people who are not custodians of the land or by non-Aboriginal people) should respect this. 

"It's asking for understanding and demonstrating that our arms are open to you. Military personnel can be agents of war and Morrison's comments are warmongering in a symbol of peace. That is ultimately disrespectful." 

It's also puzzling. Why acknowledge that particular category of Australian?

"It's reflective of his mentality and the party he stands for."

NOTES

* Jenna Price, BA (Communications) (NSWIT), MA (UTS), PhD (Sydney), Senior Lecturer, Journalism Program, University of Technology Sydney.

Meet some of Meet Scott Morrsison's "indulgent" environmental "anarchists" as they sing about 200 weeks of continuous protest

Terrifying bunch aren't they? One can just see they have molotov cocktails in their back pockets and are planning violent chaos. 

Scott Morrison is such a fool.  

Sign the petition below if you want to be alerted when the Narrabri Gas Project is referred to the IPC for a public hearing and a decision. And here's the Knitting Nannas in Martin Place today - 200 wks of protests! Sign the petition: https://t.co/F1iJfSj9HO?amp=1

— Lock the Gate (@LockTheGate) November 1, 2019

Cartoon of the Week

The Cathy Wilcox

Quotes of the Week

"Even inside the Liberal party, there is some discontent with what MPs say is an increasingly dictatorial style of Mr Morrison. One described the Prime Minister as ‘‘Caesar’’.  
[Political Editor Phillip Coorey, writing in the Financial Review on 23 October 2019]

“Last year, a Royal Commission found that a Pentecostal leader covered up the abuse of a seven-year-old. Yesterday, Scott Morrison wilfully shared a stage with him. His apathy toward victims is painfully clear”  [Dr. Jennifer Wilson writing in The Big Smoke (Australia), 11 July 2019]

Australia 2019: freedom of speech and the citizen's right to know

In 2019 it is not hard to hear and read evidence of politicians and industry leaders publicly telling blatant lies or deliberately misleading in an effort to deceive the general public and voters in particular.

Often this evidence of lying comes straight from the horse's mouth so to speak - via live radio or to camera interviews. 

Other times the veil of secrecy is lifted by mainstream and social media.

It has become so increasingly common over these last twenty years that it seems that the majority of those who are elected to govern on our behalf at federal, state and local government level now see deception and deceit as being the pattern card of a successful politician.

Indeed, even certain industry and ideological lobby groups are apparently contaminated by this warped pattern card.

The ability for media or private individuals to fact check all the fake news currently in the public domain falters before its sheer volume.

Checking veracity is complicated by the fact that News Corp (through its online/print newspapers & televised news outlets such as Sky News and Fox News) as well as social media giant Facebook Inc (which has a company policy of allowing politicians to lie repeatedly and unchecked on its digital platform) derive considerable income from disseminating demonstrably false information supplied by vested interests.

Thus in Australia, along with the U.K. and U.S.A., we are now beginning to drown in all that fakery and lying - our democratic processes are threatening to become highly dysfunctional.

Whilst freedom of speech is implied in the Australian Constitution it is not clearly spelt out - leaving a great deal of wriggle room for governments of the day to bully both the media and the private citizen whenever they have the temerity speak out against deceit or corruption.

This bullying, which often begins as an abuse of parliamentary privilege, appears to be an attempt to protect those perpetrating ongoing deceit and whatever is the political malfeasance or financial fraud cover-up of the day.

When 'doxing' an individual, phone calls from ministerial aides, emails expressing displeasure or legal letters threatening defamation do not work, these days the next step is for governments to use the federal police to raid media or union offices and the homes of journalists/whistleblowers in a further effort to intimidate.

A growing pile of legislation now exists at federal and state level which establishes a 'right' for government to bully, intimidate, coerce and ultimately silence those journalists, whistleblowers and ordinary citizens who do speak up.

Rather belatedly mainstream media is beginning to express its concerns about the path government is now treading.....

The Singleton Argus, 28 October 2019, excerpt from Voice of Real Australia: 

Meanwhile, elsewhere in Scotty Morrison's Chamber of Secrets, everyone's been donning invisibility cloaks in the all-seeing-no-talking halls of the magical-mystery castle of Hogwash:

Home Affairs is being investigated for its failure to process Freedom of Information requests within the legally required time limits.

Australia's cyber security agency has confirmed it pressured organisers of a major conference to drop two speakers, one a noted whistleblower.

And a report into a computer hack at Parliament House might not be released, even in redacted form.

A week after the unprecedented all-media #righttoknow campaign was launched with the front pages of the nation's daily newspapers symbolically censored with a redacted government document, Coalition MPs and Senators have for the most part lined up behind the Prime Minister and his "no one is above the law" rhetoric, while Labor has used the press freedom push to bash the government (despite its earlier support for some of the laws in question).

Thankfully, there have been some independent voices speaking up, and sensibly, from the cross-bench. And, yes, that includes Senator Jacquie Lambie.

The front pages of ACM's 14 daily newspapers featured an example of a "redacted" government document to highlight to increasing restrictions being placed by government and goverment agencies on the release of information the public has a right to know.

Here's what some of Australian Community Media's leading journalists and columnists have had to say on the issue over the past week:

Newcastle Herald journalist Joanne McCarthy:

"I've spent more than 13 years challenging powerful Australians, including churchmen, who thought they were above the law. Too many politicians, for too long, stayed mute.

"I know hundreds of quiet Australians - women abused and abandoned by our health system, and people sexually abused and betrayed by churches and other institutions. Many were betrayed again when they sought help from powerful churchmen who counted prime ministers as friends.

"The quiet Australians I know were the silenced Australians. Until they spoke to the media and found their voices."

Read Joanne's opinion here.

Canberra Times commentator Jack Waterford:

"The problem is bigger than excessive secrecy and inadequate accountability in matters loosely connected with national security.

"Once we have agreed to restrict our liberties by increasing the powers of those in the national security state, the slippage begins.

"Soon cops and others will have access to bugging, tapping, interception and coercive powers - extending all the way down to parking fines."

Read Jack's full analysis here.

The Border Mail columnist Zoe Wundenberg:

"If you see something, say something. Or so we are told by our government in the fight against terror on our home soil. Dob in your neighbour. Report your colleague. Be the eyes and ears of the government.

"Unless, of course, you aim your telescope at Parliament House."

Read Zoe's comments here.

Australian Community Media is part of Australia's Right To Know, the coalition of 20 media organisations and industry groups leading the #righttoknow campaign. Read more here.

James Joyce

Executive Editor, Australian Community Media

A record high of 200,000 Newstart recipients only had a partial capacity to work in December 2018 & by June 2019 the figure was higher still

The Guardian, 24 October 2019:

Official government statistics have underreported the number of sick and disabled Newstart recipients by as much as 40% or as many as 80,000 people.

Guardian Australia revealed earlier this year that Newstart recipients with partial capacity to work has reached a record high of 200,000 in December 2018 as people increasingly languish on the unemployment payment, now for an average of three years.

But new data for June 2019, released on Wednesday, provided different figures, showing 284,900 on Newstart had “partial capacity to work” in December 2018.

The figure for June increased to 289,489, of a total of 686,000 people on Newstart. It means 42% of recipients now have an illness or disability that prevents them from working full-time. In September 2014, the figure was 25% using the new figures.

Notes provided in the updated quarterly statistics report confirmed the previous data only included people who had been assessed as having a “partial capacity to work” within the past two years. This is also stated in the previous reports.

But it means sick and disabled people who have been languishing on Newstart for years but had not been reassessed in the past 48 months were excluded from the statistics.

The new statistics are significant because welfare groups have long argued changes to the disability support pension would result in a large number of people languishing on Newstart because they were too sick to work.

“It’s shocking that 40% of people on Newstart have an illness or disability,” said the Australian Council of Social Service chief executive Cassandra Goldie.

“No one can survive on $40 a day and it’s even tougher if you’re sick or have a disability. It’s heartless and negligent.”……

The Department of Social Services’ Nathan Williamson rejected that the previous data contained “errors”, saying the department had found a “better way, a more fulsome way” to report the statistics.

People with a partial capacity to work are considered not sick or disabled enough to be granted the disability pension as a result of the tightening of disability support pension eligibility. They are assessed as being able to work more than 15 hours a week but less than 30 hours a week.

The Howard government introduced “partial capacity to work” for people on Newstart in a bid to get more people into work and reduce spending on the more generous disability support pension.

On Monday, Guardian Australia revealed that people on Newstart were spending an average of 40% longer on the payment than they were in 2014.

Approval for a controversial rezoning that could allow a second boat-building yard in the Clarence River estuary must come from the NSW Berejiklian Government

The Daily Examiner, 26 October 2019, p.3: 

Approval for a controversial rezoning that could allow a boat-building yard for Palmers Island must come from the State Government. 

At its Tuesday meeting, Clarence Valley Council voted in support of a motion that effectively washed its hands of making any recommendations, handing decision-making for the proposal which has split the local community to NSW Planning Minister Rob Stokes. 

Boat-building firm Yamba Welding and Engineering has applied to have a 20ha block of land in School Rd, Palmers Island, rezoned from rural to industrial usage. Company owner Bill Collingburn said expanding his operation to Palmers Island would allow him to triple the size of his operation. 

The community has flooded the council with 183 submissions (131 against and 52 for) and two petitions – one with 689 signatures supporting the proposal and another with 445 names against it..... 

Instead of following a staff recommendation on the handover, which referenced legal advice which could have ruled the planning proposal invalid, Cr Andrew Baker sought to be “neutral”, with a wide-ranging motion covering what the council had done to date on the matter. 

Deputy Mayor Jason Kingsley successfully amended the motion, to make it more neutral. 

This was not enough for some of the residents. 

Resident Peter Sutton said the attempt to be “neutral” was misleading. “Cr Baker has twisted words and included issues that are no longer valid,” Mr Sutton said. 

But Mr Collingburn was pleased to see the council take an even-handed approach. 

“It’s just people squealing,” he said. “You talk to most people and they want to see jobs and growth in the region.”

Administrative staff advice before Clarence Valley councillors on 22 October 2019 included the following:

183 submissions were received. This included two petitions and four submissions from Government Agencies including an objection to the loss of primary agricultural land from Department of Primary Industries. The submissions have been assessed by an external planning consultant (Planning Resolutions) to provide independent advice. The consultant has provided a summary report of matters raised in the submissions and a summary of the key issues at Attachment B. 

The report by Planning Resolutions concluded that: ‘The support for the Planning Proposal is almost entirely and simply support of the business/boat building industry rather than supporting a change in zoning for this particular site. The submissions objecting to the Planning Proposal provide compelling evidence as to the adverse site impacts and comprehensively dispel the reasons put forward by the proponent for not locating the business on Harwood Island. Council has completed a proper strategic planning process that establishes Harwood Island as a suitable Marine Precinct’. [my yellow highlighting]

Council has been advised by the Minister for Planning and Public Spaces that it is not the local plan-making authority for this Planning Proposal and has no legal power to determine this application. 

Two separate legal advices confirm that the Planning Proposal in its current form is in conflict with State Environmental Planning Policy 55 - Remediation of Land due to a tractor storage area on the property being a potentially contaminated site. Whilst this matter is resolvable, a rezoning may not be considered in any form when such conflict with a state policy exists. Therefore on this issue alone the Planning Proposal is likely to not proceed.

It is noted that on or about 3 April 2019 Council was in receipt of Northern Joint Regional Planning Panel Gateway Review Advice Report which found among other things that: "The zoned land at Harwood is not practically available for the proposed use due to land ownership, access limitations, and operational requirements of the planning proposal".

It is further noted that there is an existing marine precinct relatively close by at Harwood Slipway.

Over the years Yamba Welding and Engineering has met with NSW government ministers on a number of occasions in pursuit of its business expansion.

As recently as 18 June 2019 the company, along with Nationals MP for Clarence Chris Gulaptis, met with the NSW Deputy Premier and Minister for Regional New South Wales, Industry and Trade John Barilaro concerning its development plans in the Clarence Valley.

The drying of Australia is beginning to bite its capital cities in 2019

Australian Bureau of Meteorology, Water Storage Summary, 27 October 2019:

Thirty-five days days out from the start of the Australian summer and in the third year of another severe drought -  as of 26 October 2019 - Hobart had 24.8% less stored water than the same day in 2018, Darwin 22.5% less, Brisbane 16.5% less, Sydney 14.9% less, Canberra 12.4% less, Perth 7.7% less, Adelaide 2.4% less and Melbourne 0.6% less.

Current storage levels in the capital cities are:

Australia wide total water storage stood at:

While Rural Water Storage Systems stood at:

Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison caught misrepresenting climate change facts to the United Nations

The Australian, 24 October 2019:

At the United Nations during his US trip, Scott Morrison said that when it came to per capita investment in clean energy, Australia spent more than “anywhere in the world”. Not a lot of ambiguity there. He repeated the claim last week in parliament, but instead of referring to clean energy the PM narrowed the description down to renewables.

Both claims are false, the latter more so than the first.

The Australia Institute decided to look into the claim, which was based on a Bloomberg study which revealed yes, Australia has the highest per capita investment in clean energy of 14 countries it looked at. The Prime Minister’s office confirmed to me that was the source for his UN claim.

Where to start …

I suspect most readers, along with the PM, realise that there are more than 14 countries in the world. Quite a few more actually. You don’t have to be Einstein to know that. Which means relying on a 14 country study to make the wild claim that we spend more per capita on clean energy (we’ll forget when the PM misspoke in the parliament about “renewables”) than “anywhere in the world” is pretty silly. Yet that’s what Morrison did, on the world stage. It’s rather Donald Trump like.

It turns out beyond the 14 countries in that study there are other nations that invest more per capita than we do — in clean energy broadly and in renewables more specifically……

But if the PM wants to crow about something his government has criticised in the domestic political setting that’s his choice.

However it was plain wrong to claim we are first. And unnecessary, given we do so well despite not being first.

When I first flagged this inaccuracy by the PM last Friday in a news package for Network Ten his office were quick to accuse me of being misleading and complained that when calling out the inaccuracy I didn’t specifically refer to the report which showed we were number one.

Never mind that the PM didn’t refer to the 14 country study either in his 15 minute speech. Apparently I should have done so in my one minute ten seconds package. Weird to expect me to cite a source the PM didn’t cite when making a claim the source didn’t make…….

The next tactic in the PMO complaints was to attack the credibility of the Australia Institute — which yes we can categorise as a left leaning think tank. Reminiscent of John Howard’s “who do you trust” campaign in 2004, I was asked (though it wasn’t really a question) which organisation do I trust more: the highly credible Bloomberg which did the 14 country study, or the ideologically compromised Australia Institute.

But the Australia Institute report didn’t contradict the Bloomberg study. It accepted it, simply pointing out it only examined 14 countries. The criticism for inaccuracy was levelled at the PM, who misused that study to claim first place over every single country across the globe, not Bloomberg. So which organisation anyone thinks is more or less credible just isn’t relevant. It is a red herring.

This is just one example of the way political spin doctors try and challenge entirely fair and reasonable reporting and commentary. Or the way some do, anyway. The funny thing is they become like the boy who cried wolf when they do so this way. Of course journalists and commentators make mistakes and misjudgements. Meaning that there is always a place for the media guardians of a PM or any politician to (politely) complain or correct.

But when they do so on flimsy ground, or no grounds like in this example, they make journalists and commentators instantly cynical of the next time they whinge, just like the boy who cries wolf.