Dear sweet long absent lord, in the pond's absence, the reptiles have been planning a digital makeover and now the front page of the digital edition looks like this ...
The reptiles seem to have shifted the commentary section into the extreme far right, "top of the digital world ma" spot, which means the propaganda that passes as news is on the sinistra side, while the pick of the reptile commentary (the pond uses "pick" ironically), propaganda that passes as propaganda, has been given a back-handed promotion to the far right, though in effect it's such a jumbled, messy look it's really a downgrade.
Was it because no one bothered to scroll down to the comments section in the old format?
Most likely it's a pitiful attempt by the reptiles to beguile vulgar youff into reading the rag on a mobile device, but as a result, there's much emptiness on the far right (that's space as well as any challenge to the mind).
The tree killer edition seems to have escaped the change over and keeps harping on about renewables in the usual reptile way ... see yesterday v. today ...
The layout of the stories has changed too, and not for the better, and again seems designed mainly to suit mobile devices ...
It seems like a pitiful attempt at relevance, and so the pond will ignore the bouffant one's use of "rat in the rank" to describe a politician voting on principle when it comes to one of the current genocides (the sociopathic war in Ukraine seems to be largely ignored by the reptiles these days).
The pond decided it would take a step back and revert to Mein Gott's outburst yesterday ...
They must take "personal charge" and drill, baby drill?
Is there no end to the new reptile enthusiasm for government intervention? First Dame Groan, now Mein Gott?
Speaking of which, the pond read the keen Keane yesterday (the other one with an "e" in Crikey yesterday: Under big-spending Nationals-lite Dutton, where to now for genuine Liberals?, Are genuine Liberals just in public life so they can expand the size of government? That's their role under Peter Dutton. (paywall)
Perversely, the matter of Dame Groan's change of heart came up ...
It shouldn’t therefore be a surprise that the first LNP leader of the federal Coalition — Dutton is the first non-NSW Liberal leader of the Coalition since the Downer disaster back in the 90s — has lurched the party sharply in a Nationals direction. As Crikey noted last week and other outlets are slowly realising, Dutton has proposed a truly unprecedented direction for the federal Coalition — not merely has he proposed a colossal infrastructure project that, on a sensible costing, would cost the best part of $100 billion, he has proposed an entirely new sphere of Commonwealth activity: power generation. Power generation has traditionally been left to the states, and nearly all of them have long since privatised it, leaving state governments as regulators.
Dutton doesn’t just want to move the Commonwealth into what used to be a state sphere, he wants it to be government-owned.
A coalition government under Dutton would almost certainly try to pretend that its $100 billion would earn a return on capital, while, hilariously, insisting that nuclear power would be cheaper than renewables — nuclear is prohibitively expensive even before you insist it generates a rate of return of the long term bond rate plus 5%. But this would enable it to keep the spending required on the capital side of the budget. It pulled the same stunt with the National Party’s last massive boondoggle, the $31 billion inland rail, which will never generate a cent of return for taxpayers. But whatever the accounting trickery in the budget papers, it will still mark a dramatic expansion of Commonwealth spending, in an area where the Commonwealth has zero experience or expertise.
It’s funny how partisanship warps people’s intellectual consistency. You’d think the man most associated with the privatisation of electricity generation in Australia, the very antithesis of public ownership of power generation, would be aghast at not only a state government but the federal government entering public power generation. But Jeff Kennett, it turns out, is a big fan of Dutton’s proposal for publicly owned nuclear power. And Judith Sloan, who is usually intellectually consistent even if it places her at odds with the editorial line of the Murdoch press, turns out to be a fan of public ownership too — inconveniently, just a couple of weeks after railing against public subsidies for renewable energy...
The pond will overlook the keen Keane labelling Dame Groan as "intellectually consistent" and willing to swim against the public tide, but did follow the link provided, and sure enough, below the requisite shot of whale-killing, beefy boofhead upsetting windmills ...
... there was a standard Dame Groan rant deploring renewables ...
Again there seems to have been a problem with the transition, or so We’re told ...
The pond had already covered this way back when, but offered that gobbet as a way of showing the format changes, the new, ugly font, and the rest of it ...
The pond should perhaps finish off the keen Keane's rant, yearning for the good old days of the free market ...
Nuclear power is a lot like Labor’s Future Made In Australia, another policy that defies Australia’s comparative advantage. Both are old ideas — from the days when we relied on always-on thermal power and made stuff, no matter how much more cheaply it could be made elsewhere. Australia’s advantage lies in plentiful renewables, as it lies in extractive industries, education, lifestyle and its high-quality public and civil institutions. Both Dutton and Labor instead want to pursue big dreams of government intervention in pursuit of 1970s ideas.
The Liberal Party under Dutton is thus, for all its climate denialism and attempts at product differentiation, ideologically the same as Labor — big government and government-industry intervention, ignoring our advantages. At least with Labor such an activist conception of government is in the party’s DNA and not only does it not apologise for it, it celebrates it.
But where to for real Liberals who don’t want an endlessly expanding government extending itself into new fields of activity, who want a market economy allowed to operate without massive intervention? Are genuine Liberals getting into public life just to be pale versions of the Nationals, to preside over massive economic intervention and a permanently enlarged government? That’s the future while an LNP figure like Dutton leads the party.
All things must change, it seems, and too say the pond is unhappy with the reptile makeover is something of an understatement, with the lizard Oz editorialist seemingly consigned to the digital wilderness.
Never again that bright red nationalistic flag announcing the thoughts of allegedly patriotic scoundrels?
The pond had to ferret out this astonishing set of insights ... relax, it's only a "2 min read" ... you can stick it out ...
The pond wonders what will happen to the rest of the reptile commentariat? Can the new layout allow for the rampant propaganda to take a proper place in the rag? Will important issues be front and centre?
Or will they disappear in an attempt to pander to the vulgar youff market?
And should the pond take the easy way out and make the gobbets almost impenetrable, with every reader offered reading glasses, as a "2 min read" becomes, gasp, a "3 min read", and yet is really only worth a single gobbet?
Where can you find a true conservative these days? Last night, on ‘Sky’, Credlin targeted Julian Assange. Her summation - he is more traitor than hero. But to bolster her opinion (it is all ‘opinion’ on Rupert’s vanity channel) she told us that ‘unlike others in the media, i’ve had plenty of briefing about Assange. I’m obviously constrained about what I can say publicly.’ Well, yes - that has always been the requirement when one is in any area of government, and is briefed on issues in security. But, of my experience, it is more than ‘constraint’. ‘Clearance’ makes it very clear that you do not say anything that might identify a person, or anything they might have done - good or bad. You say - nothing; and you certainly do not regress to 8-year-old in the schoolyard at recess ‘I know something about you, and I’m gonna tell.’
ReplyDeleteFor the Woman from Wycheproof to go on, as she did, to tell us that those briefings detailed how Assange was ‘selling out our country and our allies’ absolutely breaches her terms of clearance.
After setting actual journalists in their place with her ‘I had access to security officials and you didn’t’ she continues, wiith no sense of irony. Remember - the government in which she served set off several specious attempts at prosecution of persons who, for example, gave legal services to some who had alluded to blatant espionage of Timor Leste, by Australia, over squalid money-grubbing of oil rights.
Perhaps there was a time when true conservatives might have respected the terms of their clearance for security briefing. If officers giving those briefings cannot be so assured, the entire system fails. It has inherent problems anyway - of my time, I was aware that there were officers in the public service who would withhold important information from Labor ministers, and I have no doubt there are still many like that - I give you Michael Pezzullo, AO, whose successor should be weeding-out the Pezzullo sycophants - but there is a lot of useful communication every day at commonwealth and state levels, which should remain verbal at least until a legal case might be made out - and should forever remain in total confidence.
A "true conservative"? I'm not sure such a creature exists - it may once have, but is now long extinct. Thing is though, one doesn't ever hear anything much about 'progressives' who would withhold important stuff - are there many ? was there many ?
DeleteAnyhow, the 'politicisation' of the public service is unfortunate, given that it is mostly politicised in favour of those who have held power the longest and the most often in the most places. Now who might that be ?
Of course we have no way of knowing just how much “inside knowledge” on Assange or other sensitive matters that Petulant Peta was privy to; nor do we know whether or to what extent she may be exaggerating such knowledge.
DeleteI would imagine though that were, say, a retired ASIO or ASIS officer to start publicly hinting that they knew a lot of secret background stuff about specific matters, Peta would be amongst the first to start screeching about traitors threatening national security and calling for prosecution.
Jacinta Allan and Ben Carroll should raise a small amount of money? Perhaps Robert could just run a cake stall to raise the small amount of money required, like community groups have done for schools or hospitals. The Exxon executives might buy a few cakes. Then again, Robert may be suggesting the Victorian Government should raise taxes to fund the drilling, provided the well-to-do can find a way not to pay the tax.
ReplyDeleteNot sure that Keane is right to say the Nationals engage in socialism; it's more like tribalism.
Yair, spot on about it being tribalism, Anony.
DeleteDP: "Mein Gott. Mein Gott, what a dilemma ..." - nuclear as a stalking horse for coal n gas.
ReplyDeleteMien Gotte pays MORE TAX than Exxon. And Santos et al.
Ah, who is the joke on?
Gathering dust for a decade, Exxon's TAX plan needs to be considered!
Mien Gotte! ExxOff!
Exxon invests $21bn. Takes $50bn. Pays no tax. Has to raise money to dust off gas plan, gets to pay no tax again for years.
The Australian suckers.
Exxon sucked us, Exxon floated bloated 'funding costs' aka double Dutch Irish sandwich - off shore.
"Tax Justice Network spokesman Jason Ward said Exxon's testimony proved the company was "arrogant, entitled and not transparent" when it came to paying no tax in Australia.
"Mr Ward, who also gave testimony to the inquiry, said by 2021 Exxon would have made over $50 billion out of Australia and put back nothing in company tax."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-15/exxon-mobil-will-not-pay-tax-until-2021/9549034
Exxonmobil Australia Pty Ltd
"Exxon has enjoyed the rampant increase in gas prices in Australia but managed to wipe out $25 billion in total income to deliver taxable income of donut. Accountant PwC.
"Hundreds of related tax haven entities, huge loans from associates overseas, and exploiting tax losses on new mega-gas projects allows the largest of the US oil majors to pay no income tax. This, despite running the fabulously profitable Bass Strait gas joint venture with BHP. In constant disputes with its workers, Exxon misled the Senate but has not been charged with contempt."
https://michaelwest.com.au/exxonmobil-australia-pty-ltd/
Ooh. That last cartoon is xichilling!
#whywecanthavenicethings
ReplyDelete"If You Invested $1,000 In Exxon Mobil When Joe Biden Was Elected President, Here's How Much You'd Have Now"
Published 23/10/2022
...
"A $1,000 investment in Exxon Mobil could have purchased 30.06 shares at the open on Nov. 4, 2020. The 30.06 shares would be worth $3,186.66 today based on a current price of $106.01 for Exxon Mobil at the time of writing.
"The $3,186.66 value, which doesn’t count dividends, represents a return of 218.7% in nearly two years time."
https://uk.investing.com/news/stock-market-news/if-you-invested-1000-in-exxon-mobil-when-joe-biden-was-elected-president-heres-how-much-youd-have-now-2792130
So is the adoption of a digital layout that looks like something from circa 1995 part of the Reptiles’ 60th anniversary commemoration of the Oz?
ReplyDeleteIts general shittiness is unsurprising in a way; after all this time, the Murdoch Media still appears doubtful about this online thingee. To be fair, that probably reflects the worldview of both Rupert himself and his rags’ ageing readership. In one of his recent Graudian columns, John Crace noted that the London headquarters of “The Sun”, still Murdoch’s biggest-selling British fish wrapper, doesn’t have a broadband connection. That’s cutting edge 21st Century media practice for you.
Never mind the readership, what about the ownership. Does Rupert have a broadband connection to his home ? Does Lachie ?
DeleteSince Dennis Shanahan is top of the right of the digital edition of the rag, with his talk of a rat in the ranks, this caught my attention:
ReplyDelete"Mr ALBANESE: Yes, Mr Speaker. They've come up with the most expensive form of new energy possible. They're basing their energy policy for the next decade on the basis of a mistake in the Weekend Australian. The shadow cabinet got rolled by Dennis Shanahan. It's just extraordinary. Well done, Dennis—keep going!"
Hansard, Questions without notice, 26 June 2024.