Down in the gutter and the sewer with the trolling commentariat ...

(Above: a few jokes from the Hamster lads).


At last the balance has been restored. Mere anarchy won't be loosed on the world.

Last night the Hamster lads made mention of Gerard Henderson - apparently he likes aggressive women - and so Henderson's status in the commentariat has been restored. He no longer feel deprived and slighted, and can maintain the rage. (You can catch up on his fleeting cameo appearance here, at least until the show drops off the wheel, and discover that the best bits are probably the most old-fashioned, the joke about the ABC's and David Hill's war to get the rights to broadcast lawn bowls and the in-jokey obituary of Mark Scott).

The lads celebrated the Slipper affair, and devious behaviour on left and right in relation to the Jones affair, and gave Michael Kroger a deserved serve, and discovered cyber-communism, and along the way indulged in a grand celebration of the triumph of the Daily Terror in its fearless battles against the trolls.

It occurred to the pond that it was simply a vehicle for trolling, in a very old-fashioned corner of social media. Why would anyone troll in a blog when they can troll tweet and text and Facebook and YouTube and MySpace ...

MySpace? You mean there's a corner of social media that can't be ruined by Rupert Murdoch? Perhaps there's something to be said for blogging ...

Except of course that Bob Ellis is also a blogger, but then he has a private blog on the intertubes that no one reads ...

Even so, the pond was chastened, and in its eagerness to learn, it went off to see how a professional delivered a calm, rational assessment of recent proceedings, in a calm rational tone.

Come on down Paul Sheehan, show us how to score 536 comments with Gillard reveals true nature in playing gender card (forced video at end of link), by using decent temperate language and a humane regard for others.

Please allow the pond to select some of the highlights:

ugly, ugly. ugly ...

... two attack dogs, Gutter and Sewer, do the dirty work ... two political zombies, Insufferable and Unspeakable, the Minister for Innuendo and the Compromise ... the politics of hate.

Translation? Robert Oakesthott is Mr Insufferable and his fellow regional zombie Tony Windsor is Mr Unspeakable. The member for the Gutter is Anthony Albanese, Wayne Swan is the member for Sewer, Tanya Plibersek the Minister for Innuendo and Nicola Roxon the Compromise-General.

This is a most excellent discourse, completely free of the politics of hate. Perhaps suffused with fear, loathing, contempt, venom and vile abuse, but really, absolutely free of the politics of hate. But do go on.

Someone had to set Gutter and Sewer loose. Someone directed Innuendo and Compromise to play the gender card. 

Who might it be? Has Sheehan, with his tone of feral abuse, set loose the Gutter and the Sewer?

Of course not, it's that wicked witch Julia Gillard. What's she done?

Why tip a bucket of bilgewater into a fierce wind?

Now you might feel that Tony Abbott with his reference to dying of shame crossed a line. You might even be startled to discover Alan Jones thought it was a little off and better not said. You might even find yourself agreeing with Tory Shepherd:

At the end of yesterday, Mr Abbott looked like either an arsehole for his comments or a clown for forgetting he said it or not realising their significance. (here)

A clown or an arsehole? Oh dear those Murdoch bloggers know how to lower the tone.

Let's return to the elevated, pristine world of generally grumpy Paul Sheehan's discourse. It's a poignant  though somewhat lazy wrap up, because he resorts to quoting Julia Gillard's speech, as if it all somehow damns itself.

Sheehan seems to be particularly offended by everything, including this outrageous claim by that red-headed hussy:

"I was offended when the Leader of the Opposition went outside the front of the Parliament and stood next to a sign that said 'Ditch the witch'. I was offended when the Leader of the Opposition stood next to a sign that described me as a 'man's bitch'. I was offended by those things. 

What a pathetic wimp. Offended at being called a bitch and a witch? What a spoilsport, what a whinger.

Isn't she aware Tony Abbott didn't see a single sign? They were all behind him, except for the plentiful ones in front and on both sides of him? Doesn't she understand social blindness can affect anyone? Why does she peddle this vile hate, and instead lower her discourse to talk of Mr. Gutter and Mr. Sewer. Gutter Abbott and sewer Sheehan, who seem to find nothing wrong with such signs ...

Anyhoo, at the end of it all came this intriguing footnote:

Editors Note: This story was changed post-publication and, in the 9th paragraph, a reference to the Prime Minister was deleted. 

What, the piece was so calm and rational, either the editor or the lawyers took a view, perhaps with regard to defamation or perhaps with regard to the sewer tone of the potty mouth down in the gutter?

The funny thing about all this? Sometime down the track Fairfax hopes to introduce a paywall where punters pay for thoughtful, considered, insightful opinion. It can only be opinion, because news is free and abundant.

If you want, for example, to read about the follies of Tony Abbott and power bills, playing fast and loose with figures, it's a tad hard to find, but Goggle is your friend, and you'll soon land on an Oz report outside the paywall, Labor calls Tony Abbott out on power bill. 

And if you want to learn of the convoluted illogical explanation of why Tony Abbott will accept Peter Slipper's vote but scuttles from the house at the sight of Craig Thomson, why the Oz offers this outside the paywall, After calling for him to quit as Speaker, Tony Abbott seeks Peter Slipper's vote (and apparently he wasn't above seeking Craig Thomson's vote either).

“There is a big difference between someone who is facing criminal charges, who allegedly stole $500,000 of Health Services Union member money,” Mr Pyne said.

Criminal charges? Who, what, how, when? Are criminal charges the same as civil proceedings?

So opinion must be the driver, informed and expert comment, at least for a generalist rag unable to offer and charge for more specific information, such as the kind the AFR offers.

The pond's eyes already glaze over at the sight of the Australian's gaggle of crusaders. Shanahan, Avva, Sloan, Macklin? Pay for this? Look at all those gold bars ... Include the pond out, exclude the pond in ...

But the same applies to Fairfax, and Paul Sheehan's frothing and foaming is typical of the problem they will face in their paywall days. Sure he generates hits, but so did the HUN with the Bolter, and look at how it's paywall has gone ...

Fairfax don't have a strong commentariat - they've downsized and lost the likes of an Annabel Crabb channel - and so the question remains, why would anyone pay for a trip through the verbal gutter and the splenetic bilious choleric sewer with Sheehan? Where abuse and hate is doled out in spades, ostensibly on the basis of dealing with the politics of hate. A column so feral even the editor seems to have thought it needed amendment, moderation, amelioration ...

Right at the moment, the pond wouldn't cross the road to pick up a copy of the Sydney Morning Herald  on which to polish its shoes, let alone pay for the pleasure of supporting the grumpy Sheehan in his crotchety old age.

Hmm, time to begin an exercise in cyber-terrorism with an online petition?

Silly old bugger, Bob Hawke once said, and suddenly blogging doesn't feel like trolling, it feels like joining in the discourse at the level offered by the mainstream media ...

(Below: is a joke about taking ten minutes still allowed? All this fuss, and still the United States outplays us. More Doonesbury here).