In probably the deepest, darkest hour yet in the life of The Australian paywall, bubbly spritzig Emma Jane and her dancing prose has been hidden behind it, and the punters, already stricken after a foreigner won the Melbourne Cup, are being asked to stump up to read her sparkling burgundy insights.
Why it's little short of blackmail, a case of demanding money with menaces, of keeping the cork on the champers, as the punters thirst for a taste of the foamy, spumy, beady, effervescent wordsmith ...
Hang on, hang on what's that you say? Over at the sozzled Punch you can imbibe an entirely different story by Emma Jane titled Waiting for God only knows what, in an airport from hell?
And it begins ...
Oh dear, has The Punch become a leaker, a strike breaker, a quisling scab ready to cross picket lines? And even worse, when you read Emma Jane and read her set of Inconvenient Air Travel Truths, there also comes an equally Inconvenient Paywall truth ...
Pay for Emma Jane? Tell 'em they're dreaming ...
Meanwhile, on the principle that paying for nonsense only encourages them, the more serious news surrounding the lizard Oz features a bizarre discussion about the number of lives that might be lost if a scoop were to be published.
The story's done in detail by Margaret Simons at Crikey, with associated pdf documents, under the header The Oz editor bargained over lives in AFP raid, and it's a great read, especially as in the interest of a free press, everybody involved had previously tried to cover it up.
Fairfax also had the story, under the header Editor's bargain with police, and thought it worth a digital splash:
What's most interesting is that the asker of the "reprehensible question" is now the editor of the Daily Terror in Sydney, well down the path of becoming a most reprehensible tabloid ...
Today the rag is beating the "Rudd returns" drum yet again, with an "exclusive" dubbed November coup plotted on Julia Gillard - pressure on Kevin Rudd to push for top job.
No need to read the actual "exclusive" when the header says it all, but I guess it's November, so all the "exclusive" Murdochian stories about the October coup by former chairman Rudd had to be spiked ...
Will the Murdoch press ever rest until their mischief making is consummated by a change of government and Tony Abbott elevated to the throne? Likely not, since there's not much point having a political agenda if you don't pursue it with vigour ...
But pay for Christopher Pearson to pen a story like Julia Gillard - pressure on Simon Crean to push for top job? Tell 'em they're dreaming ....
Enough of the perfidious Murdochians and their porous paywall, leaking Emma Janes all over the place ... for today we have the bizarre spectacle of Paul "Generally Grumpy" Sheehan showing his softer side, by scribbling about Khloe and Kim Kardashian in Keeping up with a narcissist's divorce.
Up until the Sheehan scribble, the pond had been blissfully unaware that the Kardashians had done a dash to the antipodes to flog a line of handbags (Single Kim Kardashian keen on an Aussie handbag).
Yep, the generally grumpy Sheehan, it turns out, when not dealing with high matters of state and climate science, is a common gossip, down there with the fishmongers and the butchers and the backbiters and whisperers and the Daily Terrorists, disdained in the bible, and bracketed alongside the fornicators, the wicked, the covetous, the malicious, and those full of envy, murder, deceit and malignity. As Romans 1:29 put it in the NIV:
Though traditionalists might prefer Proverbs 18:8 in the King James version:
Why it turns out that there's even a wiki dedicated to the notion of gossip, and there's nothing so tragic as a commentariat scribbler in search of copy who turns to gossip ...
But of course a respectable commentariat member will naturally seek to find extraordinary insights in common gossip, and so it is with Sheehan:
Why do most people marry? Because they assume good sex will translate into lasting companionship? Because they conflate good looks with good character? Because they want children and think being parents will keep a couple close? So many marriages are built on such shaky assumptions that 40 per cent of them end in divorce and many of the rest end up in great compromise.
Oh dear, marriage, that dreadful state of wedlocked chains and suffering. It hardly seems worth the bother, though some see it as some kind of foundation stone, and some are outraged that gay people might place gay marriage high on the agenda.
Like Paul Sheehan, scribbling furiously about the Greens in Green by name, flaky by nature (warning forced video at end of link):
Same-sex marriage is now the No.1 issue of the hard left in Australia; therefore it has become the No.1 issue for the Greens. Bandt, a lawyer and academic, was a member of the Left Alliance and his doctoral thesis involved a consideration of Marx. His decision to make gay marriage his top priority reflected his electoral base, where concerns for the environment are subservient to the obsessions of the left.
Yes gay marriage involves the hard left, Marxists and doctoral theses determined to undermine western civilisation, and to hell with the environment.
Now it turns out that any kind of marriage is a complete waste of time:
Only about one in three married couples achieve genuine, long-lasting compatibility. Many pronouncements of undying devotion, said with certainty to a public audience on marriage day, end up in estrangement and legal papers. The best wedding speech I ever heard moved me to tears but the marriage was over within a few years. The brilliant speech was made by a friend who has had a brilliant career. But his quick mind was offset by a quick temper.
Okay gay people with a hard left Marxist doctoral agenda, move along, nothing to see here, except a vale of tears, and a publicity stunt or three. Unless you happen to be an incurable romantic:
A torrent of speculation has swirled that the wedding was a business deal made with little concern for love. This seems excessively cynical. Kim probably did fall in love.
A torrent of speculation has swirled that the wedding was a business deal made with little concern for love. This seems excessively cynical. Kim probably did fall in love.
Oh isn't that sweet, it was love after all.
Dear sweet absent lord, here we are reading, and then writing about Paul Sheehan's stunning insight that Kim probably did fall in love. As if he had the first clue as to what really went down and why, and is better informed than OMG!
OMG, has it come to this in the pond?
Rather, this debacle looks like a classic clash between a narcissist and a non-narcissist, compounded by a clash between the self-grandiosity of reality TV and the more humbling complexities of real life. Never bet against a narcissist placing their self-interest first, with brutal efficiency. Narcissism always wins. Always.
Well as they used to say in my old school, it takes a narcissist to spot a narcissist. Always.
And there's nothing more humbling than reading Sheehan grumble away in a grandiose way about the futility of marriage, while rambling on elsewhere about the hard left Marxist doctoral threat gay marriage poses to the universe.
Indeed, and perhaps even more tragic is reading Sheehan back in the day, in I married an Ascham bully:
Gossip has become even bigger than porn on the internet. Much bigger. Facebook is largely gossip. So are the other big social networking sites. Millions of eyeballs also go to gossip sites like Go Fug Yourself, devoted to fashion and celebrity putdowns.
Gossip has become even bigger than porn on the internet. Much bigger. Facebook is largely gossip. So are the other big social networking sites. Millions of eyeballs also go to gossip sites like Go Fug Yourself, devoted to fashion and celebrity putdowns.
Yes, you know, naughty celebrity putdowns, like calling people you might not know, might not have ever met, narcissists.
Because the internet is so unfiltered and so vast, it has become a far more accurate reflection of the human condition than the traditional mass media. The self-portrait that has emerged is not flattering. The explosion in productivity, transparency, community and knowledge has been accompanied by largely unfettered pettiness, vituperation and schadenfreude. This is the encompassing public medium of the young. This is their stage and their minefield.
Ah, the wretched young and the hideous full to overflowing intertubes. Or should that be the wretched young, the hideous intertubes and the narcissist Sheehan indulging in largely unfettered pettiness and schadenfreude ...?
Oh dear, all this raises deep and murky and profound philosophical questions. Like should the pond be paying for Emma Jane instead of reading grumpy Sheehan for free?
Fortunately, being a narcissist, there can be only one answer ...
(Below: meanwhile, we think this twitterer tweets to the nub of Sheehan's thinking).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments older than two days are moderated and there will be a delay in publishing them.