Gerard Henderson redux, as leftist readers lash out in a frenzy

(Above: a portrait of Hamlet by Delacroix, designed to elevate the tone of this site as we contemplate the shock and horror of left wing journalists controlling the media in Australia, much to the surprise of Chairman Rupert).

It's delectable, even delicious, to follow up on the Sydney Morning Herald's brave decision to expose Gerard Henderson to direct feedback from readers.

While there were only eight comments offered up to Henderson's piece today, Rudd avoids jobs for mates, one hundred per cent of them could be said to be critical.

Oh the joy of no longer having to sit in silence, or scribble in fury a letter to the editor, and having to find a stamp and an envelope and then a letter box, all along knowing that it's likely to be trimmed or not published at all. Ain't the intertubes grand.

Now if you keep it polite, you can give the prattling Polonius a hard time within nanoseconds of experiencing the suffering he's just dished out.

Thus reader Dapto accuses Henderson of having an axe to grind, and only being separated from Glenn Milne by Milne's having a two foot thick hide. Was that a polite way of saying Henderson's thin skinned?

Another accused him of having an inane conspiracy theory regarding journalists, the third comment accused him of jesting, and told him to stop whining and fellow traveling with the Howard remnant tail in Canberra (a motley mob like the ghost which doesn't know it's dead).

Another rebutted Henderson's suggestion Labor was being super sensitive by calling Milne the Liberal party's journalist of choice. I suppose on the basis that you can hardly make a case for undue sensitivity if it's the truth.

Yet another called his argument the thinnest they'd come across in some time, and wondered if Henderson was expecting government ministers to send Henry Ergas a bunch of flowers or a cut lunch to keep him going. That was followed by a comment berating Ergas for getting a number of things wrong, from Telstra to his business to a taxation report the Liberal party seems reluctant to discuss.

The penultimate comment talked of Henderson's vindictive hero, John Howard, while the last to joust explained how their reading of Daily Terror editorials had increased as a result of the hilarity and entertainment value on offer.

Yep, it was eight-zip, which in soccer would be a handsome score on any day.

Well at least there was no one writing in to complain that they'd got so bored reading Henderson's column, they nodded off, fell in front of a speeding train and found themselves in heaven, where surprisingly they discovered that Christ had leftist tendencies.

Of course when Gerard Henderson's Media Watch Dog dishes out media commentary (the latest issue, no. 28, hit the tube on 18th September 2009) there's no room for comments at the bottom of the page.

But if you go off there to see how he broods about the media, you can catch a whiff of sulphur about Catherine Deveny, Tony Roberts, and sundry others who've offended his delicate sensibilities by suggesting there are more ways to look at the world than his own righteous vision.

Naturally Henderson continues to maintain the rage about Professor Gans, whose research work contended that the ABC newsroom had shown bias towards the coalition. Gans had the quaint notion of using statistics and data and an actual headcount of the output of publications, and so was clearly incapable of understanding that you only need the lean nose of a ferret to sniff out a leftie in the media.

Naturally Henderson uses the quaint old device of berating associated research to piss on Gans and his media research from a great height.

Gans wrote a paper on urinal protocol vulnerability, but perhaps that's only of interest to Republican senators like Idaho's Larry Craig, who perhaps should have read Gans' tract before blocking the door with his rolling suitcase, adopting a wide stance, tapping his right foot, and running his left hand several times underneath the partition dividing the stalls. (here).

Whatever. If slagging off one paper is a way of demolishing another, then Henderson can certainly become a compelling novelty act in academic circles.

Oh yes, it's all good fun, and the best fun will be seeing how well Henderson stands up to being soiled by all those leftie readers of the Herald who've turned rabid leftie over the years after repeated exposures to the musings of Miranda the Devine, Paul Sheehan, and Henderson himself in the Herald.

But if you want to pick a bone, make sure you get in quick. After Henderson copped sixteen comments for Nazi remarks go way over the top, only a few of which might generously be interpreted as positive, a little note has turned up down the bottom saying "Comments are now closed".

Sob, no chance to sneak in later, and leave a little verbal stink bomb. Clearly they know how devious and recalcitrant ratbags are in this country when given a chance to monster our very own prattling Polonius.

Nope, you have to do it right away. If only I could summon the energy ... but suddenly I'm feeling so wan and filled with a deep ennui ...

Thinking about Gerard Henderson twice in a day, it's too much. Like all that really boring footage they put back into Apocalypse Now Redux. Oh well, time to savage a chicken ...