The pond just wanted to note the passing of Richard Ackland from the world of Fairfax.
Now some might find the battling reptiles more fun, but frankly The Graudian's report Mail Online chief in clash with Australian reporter over copyright is just a tragic comedy, and childish to boot. It says a lot about the Daily Quail but just as much about the paranoid castle that the lizard Oz has become.
As usual, you're better off reading about the Ackland matter in The Graudian, which ran Richard Ackland parts ways with Fairfax after writing column for rival. Or Crikey's Richard's choice: SMH editor on Ackland sacking (may be paywall affected)
Now Ackland has rarely turned up on these pages.
He wrote sensible pieces, usually but not always on legal matters, and there was simply no room for him on loon pond, not even when he got up the noses of raving ratbags like Gerard "that prattling Polonius" Henderson.
But now the pond has found a truly suitable inhabitant for the deeper end of the loony pond.
Come on down, Darren Goodsir, Editor-in-chief of Fairfax la la land, which is to say editor of the ruination of Fairfax.
Show us how to scribble nonsense in Richard Ackland: statement from the editor-in-chief, as portentous a header for a piece of puffed-up nonsense as the pond has seen in recent times:
Our long-time respected columnist Richard Ackland has taken to Twitter to claim he has been sacked.
I just wanted to make a few points in response.
I was informed by Richard last Friday by email after lunch that he was doing a regular column for The Saturday Paper.
Given Richard had worked as a regular columnist for the SMH for 17 years, I felt - perhaps naively - that he would have sought my thoughts prior to committing to this work - not AFTER the fact.
At the time of his email, that edition of The Saturday Paper had already been printed.
A few days ago, I told Richard that he needed to make a decision on whether he wanted to continue contributing regularly for the SMH - or whether he wanted to work for The Saturday Paper.
I could not countenance both - especially given that the Saturday Paper deal was done prior to me getting a chance to properly consider how arrangements might have worked. If I had been approached by him before the deal, I might have been able to strike such an arrangement.
I have been negotiating with Richard for a few months on a contract which would have allowed him to undertake alternative commissions - but obviously with my prior approval and in circumstances where his role as a long-standing SMH columnist were properly credited.
I have wished Richard well with the Saturday Paper - while still encouraging him to pitch his ideas, as a freelancer, to our op-ed pages and all other relevant sections of the newsroom.
He has been an outstanding columnist for the SMH for nearly two decades.
I have not sacked him. He has made his own decision.
The net result? The stupid Fairfaxians have lost one of their best columnists ... And on what basis?
Some stupid notion that the rag owned Ackland body and soul on the basis that he contributed a single column a week?
There goes another reason for the pond to give the Fairfaxians a hit.
Meanwhile, the rag trots out the likes of Peter "send in the hounds Smithers" Reith? And they keep Paul "magic water man" Sheehan on their list? And yet they routinely allow Sheehan to pollute the ABC, and most particularly The Drum? Such that the pond never watches The Drum because you never know when you're going to run across magic water tripe ...
Now the pond has never much bothered with The Saturday Paper - the very notion of an actual tree killer in the paw strikes the pond as fanciful - but hey, who'd have thought Latin was the way to prepare children for the brand new world of big Mal's super fast NBN ...
Oh we keed, we keed, but when you head off to read Richard Ackland as the "diarist-at-large Gadfly" for the Saturday tree killer, the chit chat that's on view in Gadfly: Dogging the ABC is completely distinct to what Ackland wrote for Fairfax, and in no way poses a threat or a distraction to anything he might have written for Fairfax in the future ...
Unlike Sheehan or Reith or such like traversing exactly the same turf as they roam wild and free on the media range.
You fukt up Darren, you fukt up big time ... so welcome to the pond.
But we do look forward to you securing an exclusive contract with Peter Reith. And Sheehan too.
You do know Reith's all over the place, like a media gadfly?
And in the process he parades the old, well known news that he's an inherently offensive and hypocritical twit.
Every time he does it, he defames and demeans the Fairfax brand.
Routinely he turns up on the ABC, while at the same time proposing that the ABC shouldn't exist ... such that even Errol Simper cried enough already as he Simpered amongst the reptiles with Reith wrong about ABC (behind the paywall because you can't have Simpering in public without payment).
We have nothing here against Reith. He is frequently a lively, thought-provoking commentator for News24’s 6pm The Drum and he frequently displays the intestinal fortitude to advance relatively unfashionable views without apology. He’s coherent and articulate.
Oh dear. But do go on:
Sadly, his SMH column was an advocacy for cultural and intellectual vandalism.
Well what do you expect from a Visigoth accustomed to sending in the hounds?
He should spend a solid week listening to Radio National, then watch a handful of the ABC’s more thoughtful documentaries. Then he should ask Kerry Stokes, Lachlan Murdoch, James Packer, David Gyngell and Gina Rinehart precisely where they’d place it all in their ideal commercial broadcasting schedule.
We can’t, unfortunately, recommend that Peter and John Reith argue it out on a special edition of Q andA. The latter Reith has been deceased for some 43 years. Which is a great pity. Qand A would, to borrow a phrase from commercial television, have rated its socks off.
Yes, there you go, Darren, he's all over the place, and who knows he might just propose abolishing Fairfax, seeing as how it makes room for a few genuine liberals, though these days they seem to be dropping off like flies.
Never mind, look, you can bank this great advice from the pond.
Put Reith and Sheehan on exclusive contracts, nail them to the masthead, make sure they never stray, and make sure they never ever turn up on the ABC.
What have you got to lose? And that way the pond can risk watching the ABC, and will only have Fairfax to ignore.
Oh and did we welcome you to the pond?
And finally, while we're on the media wars, good on Crikey for publishing a letter by Professor Daube, which the reptiles refused to run in full. You can find it in full here.
It's easy to see why the reptiles showed what they really thought of freedom of speech - a bit like what Stalin thought about Pravda:
As part of The Australian’s campaign against plain packaging, [Tuesday]’s editorial refers to Friday’s front-page article as a “perfectly reasonable report”. That article was based on a secret report apparently provided by tobacco interests with comments only from the tobacco lobby. The report remains secret, so it is impossible to analyse it or to understand why the conclusions differ from official figures.
The Australian asked me for comment on Friday morning — after the article had appeared — but refused to provide the report. On Tuesday afternoon, after the ABC’s Mediawatch segment, a reporter and photographer from the Australian arrived at my office without warning, saying they wanted to ask questions about statistics. I said that I would comment if I could have a copy of the report, but they were unable to provide this. An hour later, the reporter ‘phoned to say that he could send me the report. Half an hour after this he ‘phoned back to say that he had been told he could not provide the report — only a graphic that had appeared in The Australian.
Even setting aside the rest of The Australian’s campaign (so far three front pages, two editorials and multiple articles), it is hard to see how all this can be described as “perfectly reasonable” journalism...
And so on ...
The rest, as noted is at Crikey, but Daube struck the pond as being a tad optimistic in expecting a reptile to be reasonable. In the pond's experience, at least with the goanna under the tank stand, they're cold blooded creatures with a nasty set of claws ...
(Below: and so to oldie by Pryor showing that the Reithian way had been around for a long, long time, and more Pryor at the NLA here)