Graham,

Yes I agree, journalists should have been interrogating them big time but these are the same journo's that didn't question Howard and Reith’s spin on children overboard. Editorial decisions are obviously made higher up on specific news topics in the Murdoch Empire. I think we would both agree that this unwarranted and unhealthy for Australian democracy. Well, what's left of it.

Arjay, I have no proof that you are not a member of an extreme right wing political group. In my personal assessment your writings certainly indicate that you could be. I won't apologise for making a calculated guess based on this evidence.

I've been reading extreme Right wing fiction in my professional life as a researcher for years and your style of writing and ideas bear all the prosaic characteristics found in extreme Right wing political literature. The only thing missing is a testimony from yourself about an alien abduction.

But more importantly, did you miss me ol buddy?

Graham

Going to have to agree to disagree that "And the reason that I chose this example is because it is so unambiguous" Seems to me that there is a lot of ambiguity from the research I have done and from the posts to this thread.

And now it is too late for the media to come clean - so to speak.

Not to worry, someone, somewhere will try to pull the wool over the public's eyes and hopefully it will be nice and simple with no grey areas. Kind of like Johnny's core and non-core promises.

Dear GrahamY-are-you-getting-so-angry? ... I think the fact that there are an equal number of posts debating the evidence of the ramming in either direction on this page is enough to show that fault is still ambiguous at best. In ref. to your comment "Attempts to explain it away do not reflect well on anyone.", well I'd like to stand up for all those that disagreed with your article here and simply say that attempts to staunchly take one side or the other don't reflect well on anyone either.

Let's face it - bagging the media for "that reporters and publishers are doing a particularly poor job in separating out the spin, bull..t and obfuscation from reality" (neatly summed by the cathy-sartre of OO) is just a smoke screen really. Particularly when the source of the criticism is a gate-keeping lite media outlet itself, defending another gate keeping-lite media outlet. OO wouldn't exist if people didn't have a burning desire to debate the 'facts' as they see them. Which means it's ultimately the reader that's having to do the sifting - only morons allow the media to deliver them the facts.

Amazingly Cathy, I still have my job. Just got promoted too!

I think your claim that only those who don't "staunchly" take a position come out of this well smacks more than a little of post-modernist solipsism. So if I don't take a position on the fact that it's day, I am more correct than the person who says it is 7:00 a.m. in the morning and therefore it must be day?

Honestly, who gives a rats?
Anybody who's ever motored a boat around knows they dont steer like cars
Two ships in close proximity with unclear 'right of way' with one harassing the other (apologies to Greenpeace - I'm sure they see the reality & danger) - Im surprised there isnt more contact. The smashed nose on the GP ship means nothing except there was a 'right of way' argument.
Greenpeace are a major contributor to the wellbeing of this planet. Let them do what they do well..
Nuff said..

Audrey,

When you say “it’s ultimately the reader that has to do the sifting - only morons allow the media to deliver them the facts”, I think you are accepting that our media is “doing a particularly poor job in separating out the spin, bull..t and obfuscation from reality".

I ask you how I find the time and expertise to become acquainted with and sift the facts of the many, varied and complex goings-on every day .I cannot and in most cases must rely on media reports to form an opinion or to cast a vote. My choice is then to be a moron or to be honest and disenfranchise myself.

Seriously, people have turned away politics, from debating issues, from casting meaningful votes because they know they are being fed spin not facts, they are not morons. Without facts they realize it is all a waste of time and energy.

I have concluded that those that defend the media and accept the status quo may be realists but more probably they come from the camps that have the tamest journalists/editors, with the most to gain for what they believe in.
Those suggesting that the media needs to be encouraged to report facts that the morons can rely on are pushing more than their ideologies, they can see the damage poor media does to our democracy and are arguing to correct it.