« time to panic? | Main | inventor »

Friday, October 14, 2005


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Yes. It's extraordinary language for a journalist to use and for a subeditor to let pass.

I suppose it's possible that the sub-editor - or someone higher than a sub-editor - actually inserted it. But my guess is that the original story contained even more editorialising which was cut out, leaving this one, powerful word.

Is being anti-feminist the same as being misogynist and anti-women? I don't suppose so. I'm unsure exactly which of these characterises the intent and impact of this word, 'bizarre", in this article, but I think it is definitiely anti-feminist. It's an attempt to denigrate a woman's opinion - more than an opinion, an intellectual theory which she offers to give some context for the man's behaviour. This contextualisation, a feminist contextualisation, is what is under editorial attack. Three days later, I'm still astonished both by the cruelty to the animals and the nastiness of that editorial point of view.

And then of course, there is Jessica in "Who Framed Roger Rabbit"...
I take it that the Australian is a conservative newspaper. Looking at the website it reminds me of Britain's Daily Telegraph where I'm always amazed at just how much they love reporting sensational sex and crime stories. Not in a prurient way, oh goodness me no! So of course, they can't comment on how bizarre it is to give such prominence to a story like that and not prefer a story about something seriously mundane as would actually be appropriate to their morally irreproachable readership. But a bit of 'left-bashing'. They couldn't resist the opportunity.

The Australian is owned by Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation. It sees itself as the Australian equivalent of The Times - a 'quality broadsheet". In the past couple of years it has become ferociously rightwing, especially as regards foreign policy and world politics - it is very pro the war in Iraq, for example. [It probably was always rightwing but I've noticed it more in these years.] Murdoch's tabloid paper here is called The Telegraph too - but from memory the English Telegraph is not owned by him...?

The comments to this entry are closed.