Mark Latham, the Nine network, and a hearty dose of Sondheim's Send in the Clowns ...

(Above: a fairy story for youngsters).

In the three ring circus that's politics, you always need more than one clown.

What's interesting is the media's response to said clowns.

In The Australian, Sid Maher tries to get on the back foot and present a solid defensive bat (I'm told John Howard would approved of that metaphor), with Mark Latham confront Julia Gillard over 'complaint' about his role as a TV reporter.

Inverted commas are always controversial, but in this case we can assume the 'complaint' was Latham's complaint about the alleged ALP complaint about his right to act as a goose, or as a 'reporter' for the Nine network.

Questioned by journalists, Mr Latham lamented modern politicians not answering questions.

He said “it was almost surreal” and showed no respect for the viewers of current affairs television programs.

“If they ask me about Rudd, I don't talk about the price of bread, I'll tell you about Rudd,” Mr Latham said.

He also asked journalists: “So has the campaign got any more real in the past five days?”

Mr Latham then encouraged journalists to “blow the house down” in a looming press conference over the government's limitation of access to today's key meeting between Ms Gillard and Mr Rudd.

Latham defending the role of the media?

Why am I reminded of the good old days, when John Howard described Latham as dishonest, devious and slimy? (which you can read about here).

Or perhaps the many times that Latham took shots at the press, like this:

MARK LATHAM, OPPOSITION LEADER: Recently a party elder said to me that the history of the 2004 election would be written in books rather than in newspaper articles.

He said the history wouldn't be written in newspaper articles, it would be written by authors and recorded in a great number of books.

Well, thank goodness for that.

You can imagine my relief to learn that future historians and political science students will be able to study something more substantial than a long series of anonymous quotes. (here)

Oh dear, such a cheap shot at his new colleague Laurie Oakes.

Meanwhile, over at The Punch, Australia's most awkward conversation, Tory Maguire finds the circus metaphor irresistible, but the search for clowns resistible, though in Gillard's campaign debacle she does give a clue:

The confrontation has capped a day of chaos for the ALP, and also gave a reminder of the same macho approach Latham took as Labor Leader when he almost crushed John Howard’s hand with an aggressive handshake at a radio studio on the eve of the 2004 poll. Latham today leant into Gillard and waved his finger at her demanding she answer his unproven allegations of a complaint.

So wouldn't a better header have been Latham's campaign debacle?

In recent weeks, the mainstream commentariat commentators have taken to quoting Latham fondly, and praising him for his incisive brilliance in analysing the internal feuds, ructions and factions of the Labor party. Yes come on down Janet Albrechtsen, you're the leader of the pack.

Labor has never been able to manage Latham. His invective-laden insights had enough merit to hurt Labor, whether it was exposing the Left's vacuous claims to social justice or exposing the Right's obsession with personal aggrandisement at the price of sound policy development.

Now it seems like Nine has never been able to manage Latham. Set a dog loose and you really need to know it's going to round up the sheep rather than turn on them and savage them.

But boofhead is as boofhead does, and as boofhead has been for many a long year, and the real question is why the media has empowered, encouraged and incited so many boofheads?

What were the Nine network thinking by appointing Latham to some kind of job as roving reporter for a 60 Minutes segment?

I know, I know, 60 minutes has been an unwatched, irrelevant joke for years, so the idea of employing clowns to ginger up the circus is just another way of showing up the irrelevance.

But it suddenly seems to have dawned on Nine that even clowns have their limits, and that some in the audience might take a view, as shown in Nine apologises to PM over Latham act:

The Nine Network has apologised to Prime Minister Julia Gillard over her treatment by former Labor leader-turned-journalist Mark Latham on assignment for its flagship current affairs program.

Nine Network CEO David Gyngell said in a statement issued to AAP on Saturday he had personally apologised to Ms Gillard for the approach by Mr Latham while she was campaigning in Brisbane.

Mr Gyngell said the approach lacked proper respect.

Actually Gillard - in the footage to hand - acted quite well, and it was Latham doing his legendary firm hand shake bovver boy routine who came off second best, along with all the commentariat commentators who've invited him in to their tents in recent weeks.

But the real loser is Nine. Oh yes, that's right, thanks for reminding me, as already total dropkick losers, what have they got to lose?

Still it seems that the special report Latham was preparing might be in limbo:

A Nine spokesman said a decision about the footage, including if and when it will go to air, had not yet been made.

Actually I'd love to see the report. Perhaps they should put it to air next Sunday - it seems that this week they'll re re-enacting Bligh's journey across the Pacific. The Sunday after that it'll be too late to influence the election, and reveal Latham's shattering insights on all the many and varied ways politicians manage to lose elections. It could be quite autobiographical ...

Laurie Oakes and Mark Latham. What a team. Why do I feel a little Sunday music coming on?

Oh okay, here's a legitimate version of the Sondheim classic, with synched lyrics as the picture: