Media watch
Gareth was pre-emptively upset by news that a protest outside Philip Ruddock’s house would go ahead. He threw a couple of the usual tired insults at the protestors, and predicted that the protest would be violent. So what happened?
The police reneged on the accepted interpretation of the terms of the Notice of Intention to protest, and blocked off Ruddock’s street. There is some question as to whether they are in contempt of court for doing this, but they’ve just guaranteed the protestors will be very specific about where they’re going next time.
Even though the protest was stopped at the entrance to Ruddock’s street, the TV news still used the phrase “HOME INVASION” in their titles. Likewise, the Sydney Morning Herald headline was Marchers storm Ruddock’s home. It didn’t happen, nor was it the protestors’ intention. The first line of the article continued this spin:
Police formed a human barricade at the Sydney home of Immigration Minister Philip Ruddock yesterday to stop a protest march from reaching his front door. (My emphasis.)
It’s not until the fifth paragraph that we learn what really happened:
Three people were arrested when they tried to break through the police line formed 100 metres from Mr Ruddock’s front yard. (My emphasis.)
The same misleading attitude is found when we consider the various claims of “violence” breaking out — they don’t appear to be backed up by anything. The most detailed description of what occurred is in this article: “some pushing and shoving as protesters tried to force their way through.”
A scan of the photos on the internet reveals very little. In one picture, the cameramen appear to have stepped in between the police and the protestors, while in other photos the police don’t look like they’re under a great deal of pressure. The closest I could get to a violent incident was this photo:
Note that it is the policeman who is pushing the woman. All in all a pretty pissweak attempt at violence. That’s pretty much confirmed by the officer in charge:
Supt Mennilli … conceded the alleged assault by the woman could have been verbal.
Oh, it’s verbal violence now. But what of the other two chappies who were arrested?
The two men were arrested for failing to move on when police instructed them to do so.
Not violence, and possibly not even true:
The above article is sadly inaccurate. I was one of the men arrested for ‘breach of the peace.’ It isnt true to say that I was arrested for failing to move on as I was given no such direction. In any event, the police dont have move on powers under the legislation in respect of apparently genuine demonstrations.
The police insist that tthey complied with the court order because it gave the protestors a right to be on Philip Ruddock’s street. It seems strange, then, that they can order a protestor to move on from the site of the protest.
One of the most reported spin-offs from the confrontation was Alexander Downer’s comment that “I don’t think we should have a situation in Australia where the feral left are going to come and protest outside ministers’ private houses.” He just extended an open invitation to the feral left to pay him a little house visit. [Line deleted. See this post.]
The prize for the most bizarre spin must go to the Herald Sun, for this conclusion:
A lone Liberal Party supporter arrived in the street to show his solidarity with the minister.
The story was sourced from AAP. Here’s what they really said:
An unusual figure observing the demonstration was former president of the Normanhurst branch of the Liberal Party, Clive Troy… But despite being vehemently opposed to the government’s immigration policies, Mr Troy said he would continue to vote Liberal. (My emphasis.)
It takes some strategic interpretation to go from ‘vehement opposition to the government’s immigration policies’ to ’showing solidarity with the immigration minister’.
Still, this whole incident is obviously further proof of insidious, lefty, pro-ratbag bias at Australia’s media outlets…
To me it just seems like a dangerous precedent.
The next time a judge convicts a member of a bikie gang, why shouldn’t they be able to pass his/her address around so they can ‘protest’ out the front of their house?
And what about you? Why aren’t you fair game? You speak out on a range of issues. Would you like 50 strangers out the front of your house, shouting abuse, and preventing you from leaving to go to work? How would you deal with a ‘protester’ sitting outside your driveway preventing the use of your car? Wouldn’t you be afraid if people made death threats against you and your partner and suddenly found a group circulating your home address?
Aren’t there ways of protesting that don’t endanger the innocent members of a public officials family? The minister has recieved death threats in the past and no matter how much you hate him its just irresponsible to do.
Seriously, Rob. You’re a funny fellow ;)
In response to Tysen, some might argue ‘irresponsible’ is locking kids away in detention centres, but I’m not really interested in that cheap shot. Or even whether its morally okay to protest outside the houses of the people who represent us.
Well done Rob on a decently investigated post. As someone with some connection to the media, for the most part it’s true: any headline for a protest story has to contain the word ‘violent’. Whether the story talks about a “violent protest” or a peaceful one that might “threaten to turn violent”, these events are hardly newsworthy unless there’s a bit of rough housing involved.
Jostling with the police? Violent. Refusing arrest? Violent. Five dickheads punching on with the cops while thousands march peacefully? Violent.
I note the indymedia story contains the word “violent” in the headline (http://sydney.indymedia.org/front.php3?article_id=33439&group=webcast). Everyone plays the same game.
What a pathetic little display by the coalition of the unemployable. The cops should kick the shit out of the little fairies when they go asking for it, especially the dickheads with camcorders.
I find it most reassuring, Cecil [Rhodes?] Kruger [Rand?] to see that the nutters aren’t restricted to the left. Thank you.
PING:
TITLE: Making an idiot of himself
BLOG NAME: Troppo Armadillo
Robert Corr blogs an interesting piece about yesterday’s demo near federal Immigration Minister Phillip Ruddock’s house. Rob effectively unpicks (I won’t say “unpacks” because of its pomo denotations) the somewhat hysterical media coverage of the event…