One of the shorthand criticisms of the internet by the mainstream media is that it is almost wholly populated by paranoiacs, single-issue fanatics, stalkers and sundry geeks. Thank God, they say, for the reasoned professionals in the nation’s newsrooms.

Given what the internet (and bad management) has done to the legacy media business, it’s understandable that some journalists are defensive about ventures outside the mainstream.

But it is such a disappointment when a respected mainstream media journalist like George Megalogenis lazily opines -in his blog no less – that the biggest blight on current discourse is not the professional journalists or their admiring mainstream audiences, but the fringe-dwellers on Twitter and other social mediums.

“The problem isn’t us, or our loyal audiences, but the know-it-all,” George writes. “He, and is almost always a he, is the lefty who complains that journalists don’t get enough time to do the necessary research for serious, witty, policy-focused, investigative reporting anymore. He also tweets that he no longer reads my serious, witty, policy-focused investigative reporting anymore because he won’t give Rupert his credit card details to buy an online subscription.”

One can understand George’s reluctance to sink the boot into his employer, but his bland dismissal of complaints about Murdoch’s misuse of his power (“just don’t buy the papers”) sit oddly with his own excellent record as an economic journalist. Forget about the phone hacking. How does he feel working for an organisation that in its supposedly straight news coverage routinely and wilfully misrepresents policy positions of the governing party to suit the ideological ends of its proprietor?

In keeping with the now legendary “view from nowhere” espoused by so many legacy media journalists, George is careful to slate critics of both the right and left, and position himself in an imagined sensible  middle (the elusive “centre”) that offends no-one.

Indeed, his blog entry reads as a rather desperate rearguard attempt to blame the disintegration of the mainstream media business model on a few “cyber bullies”, as he calls them – crazed keyboard warriors of the extremes whose cap-locked SHOUTING is drowning out attempts by legitimate journalists to tapdance for a loving and largely passive readership.  Has there ever been a better example of an otherwise astute mainstream journalist completely missing the point about what interactive media means?

“Rupert is right about blogs,” George writes. “Those who don’t like what we write should set up their own and see how they go.”

That’s right. If you feel aggrieved by an institution that owns 70 per cent of the metropolitan print media, half the national news agency, much of the nation’s suburban press, a chunk of its monopoly pay television provider, magazine publishing, market  research, film and DVD distribution, you had better just shut up and start your own blog. Either that, or inherit a multi-billion dollar global media and entertainment empire.

Reading Megalogenis’ espousal of a sort of bland neutrality and avoidance of the real issues in media echoes the frequently heard defences by the ABC, which seeks to defuse criticism of its own editorial performance by saying that because it is being criticised by both sides, it must be doing something right. The reality is that it is doing everything wrong, saying nothing, revealing nothing and hiding behind a worthless “objectivity”.

“The View from Nowhere is a bid for trust that advertises the viewlessness of the news producer,” writes US journalism professor Jay Rosen. “Frequently it places the journalist between polarized extremes, and calls that neither-nor position ‘impartial’. Second, it’s a means of defence against a style of criticism that is fully anticipated: charges of bias originating in partisan politics and the two-party system. Third, it’s an attempt to secure a kind of universal legitimacy that is implicitly denied to those who stake out positions or betray a point of view.”

In his recent book, George Megalogenis wrote a coherent narrative of Australia’s recent economic and political history. It is a shame he has such a poor grasp of our political present and the poisonous role of the behemoth that employs him.

George has kindly responded  to my post on his blog.

RECOMMENDED READING:
Tim Dunlop:Don’t Shoot the Messenger, Ban the Reader Instead’ 
Jonathan Green: Media Provoke Hordes, Act Surprised’


22 Comments

Fiona · April 16, 2012 at 12:45 PM

Shorter Mr Denmore: “George, stop being so puerile.”

As for “such a poor grasp of our political present and the poisonous role of the behemoth”, I wouldn't mind betting that he is enduring the consequences of that Faustian bargain so acutely described by Robert J. Lifton.

Roger Wegener · April 16, 2012 at 1:22 PM

I can feel your passion in this post Mr D – and totally agree with it.

Roger Wegener · April 16, 2012 at 1:22 PM

I can feel your passion in this post Mr D – and totally agree with it.

Anonymous · April 16, 2012 at 10:12 PM

It has always fascinated me that people hold up George M as some sort of shining journalistic beacon in the morass that is News. Ltd. To me, he is just another Murdoch hack. To be read and disregarded at my whim.

Anonymous · April 16, 2012 at 10:12 PM

It has always fascinated me that people hold up George M as some sort of shining journalistic beacon in the morass that is News. Ltd. To me, he is just another Murdoch hack. To be read and disregarded at my whim.

Mr D · April 16, 2012 at 10:37 PM

He is a good journalist, anonymous, and he resists the News Ltd group think better than the rest of them. But not on this occasion unfortunately.

Mr D · April 16, 2012 at 10:37 PM

He is a good journalist, anonymous, and he resists the News Ltd group think better than the rest of them. But not on this occasion unfortunately.

Damien Miller · April 17, 2012 at 1:52 AM

The comment sections of the major news outlets (Fairfax, News and even the ABC) are universally awful.The NYT does a slightly better job, but it still very far from the state of the art.

Somehow they have managed to avoid learning any of the lessons of the last 15 years on how to operate fora open to public posting while surfacing good commentary and burying the troglodytes. I don't understand how they can get it so wrong; perhaps it is Dunning-Kruger syndrome at work and they think they are doing a bang up job, but perhaps they like their little boxed windows onto the unfiltered hoi poloi to remind themselves of how much better they are.

Damien Miller · April 17, 2012 at 1:52 AM

The comment sections of the major news outlets (Fairfax, News and even the ABC) are universally awful.The NYT does a slightly better job, but it still very far from the state of the art.

Somehow they have managed to avoid learning any of the lessons of the last 15 years on how to operate fora open to public posting while surfacing good commentary and burying the troglodytes. I don't understand how they can get it so wrong; perhaps it is Dunning-Kruger syndrome at work and they think they are doing a bang up job, but perhaps they like their little boxed windows onto the unfiltered hoi poloi to remind themselves of how much better they are.

Mr D · April 17, 2012 at 1:55 AM

Damien, it's because they give the job of comments moderation to the work experience kids usually.

Mr D · April 17, 2012 at 1:55 AM

Damien, it's because they give the job of comments moderation to the work experience kids usually.

Jane Bovary · April 17, 2012 at 5:18 AM

Another great piece to get me thinking Mr D.

I haven' t read the piece (jeeze, I can't be bothered) but it's not hard to see where George's perspective might be coming from…after all the key-squashing, internet bloggers are indeed one of the biggest threat's to mainstream journalists. Why read an objective account of the news (even a pretend one) when you can seek and find an online writer clearly brandishing a version of your own perspective and thus have your particular biases comfortably confirmed…(that's why I read you, Mr D!)

I agree with your remarks about Murdoch, hypocrisy and the 'disintegration of the mainstream media business' but I do also see some dangers in the 'new sources' that have arisen to replace it. One example I can think of is the climate change debate. The sceptics make no pretence of objectivity and indeed they're not objective – yet they have a prominent online presence and stuff their articles with shady pseudo science that scores of people happily digest, probably because they want to believe what they want to believe. Of course, there are also plenty of online writers with a greater grasp of the science but the point is, in a new medium where old-fashioned notions of objectivity are a rarity, misinformed 'experts' can rise to prominence and significantly murky the waters of rational debate.

'Course I could have it wrong. After all, I just write a fluff blog myself…

Jane Bovary · April 17, 2012 at 5:18 AM

Another great piece to get me thinking Mr D.

I haven' t read the piece (jeeze, I can't be bothered) but it's not hard to see where George's perspective might be coming from…after all the key-squashing, internet bloggers are indeed one of the biggest threat's to mainstream journalists. Why read an objective account of the news (even a pretend one) when you can seek and find an online writer clearly brandishing a version of your own perspective and thus have your particular biases comfortably confirmed…(that's why I read you, Mr D!)

I agree with your remarks about Murdoch, hypocrisy and the 'disintegration of the mainstream media business' but I do also see some dangers in the 'new sources' that have arisen to replace it. One example I can think of is the climate change debate. The sceptics make no pretence of objectivity and indeed they're not objective – yet they have a prominent online presence and stuff their articles with shady pseudo science that scores of people happily digest, probably because they want to believe what they want to believe. Of course, there are also plenty of online writers with a greater grasp of the science but the point is, in a new medium where old-fashioned notions of objectivity are a rarity, misinformed 'experts' can rise to prominence and significantly murky the waters of rational debate.

'Course I could have it wrong. After all, I just write a fluff blog myself…

Mr D · April 17, 2012 at 5:34 AM

Madame Bovary,

You're right about all the astro-turfing out there pretending to be straight analysis. There are seem deep pockets invested in giving people a bum steer on climate change (and other issues – like pokies, the resource tax etc;).

I'm hoping though that the quality will float to the top and word of mouth about who's to be trusted and who not will force a sort of market discipline on the blogging micro industry.

As you quote so well, “believe those who seek truth, doubt those who find it.”

Mr D · April 17, 2012 at 5:34 AM

Madame Bovary,

You're right about all the astro-turfing out there pretending to be straight analysis. There are seem deep pockets invested in giving people a bum steer on climate change (and other issues – like pokies, the resource tax etc;).

I'm hoping though that the quality will float to the top and word of mouth about who's to be trusted and who not will force a sort of market discipline on the blogging micro industry.

As you quote so well, “believe those who seek truth, doubt those who find it.”

Notus · April 17, 2012 at 11:58 AM

George, like a few other journos I used to respect has been sipping the green cool aid of News Ltd. I understand that you need to toe the line with the guy who pays your salary, but when you become part of the problem of driving the business into oblivion, it's time to move on.
George, join the journalist equivalent of the public service, (their ABC) you may need to take a pay cut but you will have more job security and less moral compromises.

Notus · April 17, 2012 at 11:58 AM

George, like a few other journos I used to respect has been sipping the green cool aid of News Ltd. I understand that you need to toe the line with the guy who pays your salary, but when you become part of the problem of driving the business into oblivion, it's time to move on.
George, join the journalist equivalent of the public service, (their ABC) you may need to take a pay cut but you will have more job security and less moral compromises.

Anonymous · April 17, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Poor old George. I see him as the Winston Smith of Ltd News. And this article is probably the one he had to write to keep Big Brother off the scent.

At home, in the security of a room swept free of spy ware, George is busy scribbling “I hate the Emperor, I hate the Emperor, I hate the Emperor……..”

The sooner the Empire falls, the better. It will release George Mega from Rupert's thrall.

Great post as usual, Mr Denmore.

Anonymous · April 17, 2012 at 12:27 PM

Poor old George. I see him as the Winston Smith of Ltd News. And this article is probably the one he had to write to keep Big Brother off the scent.

At home, in the security of a room swept free of spy ware, George is busy scribbling “I hate the Emperor, I hate the Emperor, I hate the Emperor……..”

The sooner the Empire falls, the better. It will release George Mega from Rupert's thrall.

Great post as usual, Mr Denmore.

Anonymous · April 17, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Great post as normal, it's worth the weekly wait.

It is sad to see a man of obvious intellect and principle having to tow the company line with such a vapid analysis of the emerging social networks. While we immediately think of Facebook et al, it is inevitable that other social networks of greater intellectual seriousness will arise that will play a significant role within society, Get Up and Crikey being two obvious players in a very young medium.

I don't really know about George but it is fairly plain to me that with more people being allowed to have their voice the greater the diversity and creativity within society even though that voice has to learn some lessons of civility. Perhaps that is what Rupert et al are afraid of, the great unwashed finally having their say more than the obligatory once in three years for basically a meaningless result that numerically doesn't mirror the voters' intentions.

There could be a peaceful social revolution in the offing brought about by this inevitable expansion in social consciousness and that is what perplexes those and their loyal satraps currently in power. But it is perplexing that a man like George can't see the trend and ride the wave, maybe even help to shape it instead of letting himself be swamped as he appears to be now.

Anonymous · April 17, 2012 at 3:25 PM

Great post as normal, it's worth the weekly wait.

It is sad to see a man of obvious intellect and principle having to tow the company line with such a vapid analysis of the emerging social networks. While we immediately think of Facebook et al, it is inevitable that other social networks of greater intellectual seriousness will arise that will play a significant role within society, Get Up and Crikey being two obvious players in a very young medium.

I don't really know about George but it is fairly plain to me that with more people being allowed to have their voice the greater the diversity and creativity within society even though that voice has to learn some lessons of civility. Perhaps that is what Rupert et al are afraid of, the great unwashed finally having their say more than the obligatory once in three years for basically a meaningless result that numerically doesn't mirror the voters' intentions.

There could be a peaceful social revolution in the offing brought about by this inevitable expansion in social consciousness and that is what perplexes those and their loyal satraps currently in power. But it is perplexing that a man like George can't see the trend and ride the wave, maybe even help to shape it instead of letting himself be swamped as he appears to be now.

Craig Thomler · April 19, 2012 at 6:13 AM

Interesting – George may be referencing my tweet that I can't read his articles because of the pay wall.

The rest of his judgement is wrong however, and I actually do have quite a well read blog, but not on politics.

Leave a Reply

Avatar placeholder

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *