People who strut the public stage must expect “intrusions” into their lives. It does David Flint no credit to seek to defend the loudmouth, thoroughly obnoxious Jones who should be able to defend himself if he feels the need.

No mature person with a life of their own to lead would be the slightest bit interested in paying for a book by a mediocre reporter about another media boofhead.

For once I agree with Leigh, except for the bit about the usual quality of Masters' journalism. Also, I expect that the book will be interesting reading: not so much for its revelations about the odious parrot, but rather in its description of the extent of his influence.

As for this - Flint: "...Jones's constant flaying of the rich and powerful..." - surely that's the sort of thing the parrot would like to keep private? Mind you, I'd like to know whom among the "rich and powerful" it is that Jones "constantly flays"... ;)

Maybe Masters could write a biography of the fragrant professor as his next project?

David you are on the public record as a supporter of Alan Jones. How can your defence of Jones be seen as anything other than biased? This book will do little to damage Jones.

It happens to be an interesting book for precisely the reason that CJ Morgan has given. Jones' influence is extraordinary. Especially so when you consider how blatantly (designedly?) ignorant he is on so many topics.

Who Cares,

Its been pulled off the shelves because they realised they where out of line and Jones had them over a barrel on some things that where unproven that they where attempting to publish.

Forget the legal standing, it is wrong for someone to write a book on you without your permission, unless your dead. If someone is a leech enough to write a book on you without your permission attempting to profit, they are lowlifes.

I am 25, not located in Sydney and too young to be a listener or a fan of Alan Jones, but good on you Alan for sticking it to him when he was out of line. You dont have to put up with that crap.

Mr.Flint
Methinks he doth protest too much.

I am in harmony with many here.

Flint comes to the aid of JOnes too often - however Masters made a mistake when he dealt with Jones sexuality in the manner he did - which surprises me as I think he is a fine journalist ( if Leigh thinks he is mediocre let us know the name of a better one).

Most Australians dont care overly much about his or any ones sexuality - inspite of some discriminatory legislation - we are too out come focused to worry about who does what with whom.

I think he can talk about it sure - describe the nature of the relationship with young men as best he can objectively - we'll draw our own conclusions - ( those who bother to buy extraordinarily over priced books in this country ) - he had no need to as Bolters stated to go down the nudge nudge wink wink path -

although I must admit I tihnk the former leader of the National parties revelations about Jones conduct does give some weight to Masters' inferences.

The saddestr thing about shock jocks and indeed some of the more polemic opiners in the press is that they foster an environment where the average punter abbrogateds his responsibiltiy to think for themselves - the commentators sum up the arguement and the mug punter regurgitates all over the place - like in these pages for example