Oz endorses the Right
Yesterday The Australian used its front page to spruik for the Right’s candidate for Labor’s WA presidency. It was a ridiculously unbalanced article that mentioned the six candidates running against her, but only quoted her supporters. Today they’ve got another article that effectively endorses her — based on the incredible revelation that a Right-wing MP thinks the Right-wing candidate is worthy of support. Yawn. Far more interesting is that the incumbent State Secretary is being challenged for the position, but they’ve got nothing about that.
I think it’s because the candidate is the daughter of a former premier who was WA’s answer to Hawke :-)
I hereby predict tat once she is elected, the knives will come out and she will be compared to her father’s misdeeds and WA Inc will rear it’s ugly head as Gallop is keen to consign that sorry episode to the history books.
From http://www.alp.org.au/media/1105/dsiloo180.php
JOURNALIST: Sarah Bourke – new State ALP President?
BEAZLEY: Well, you understand that party leaders or political leaders, parliamentary leaders, don’t go around telling the machine who should and who should not be elected. There are lot of good candidates in the field, and Sarah is one of them. She is a good soul, and Brian and his family stand well with me.
JOURNALIST: Geoff Gallop has always distanced himself from (inaudible).
BEAZLEY: Brian is a life-long friend of mine. We did things together as kids and starting off in political life. Geoff doesn’t have the same relationship with him, and that’s a matter for Geoff. For me, I see things differently, and I wish Sarah well. But I also say, there are other good candidates in the field, and I am not selecting from among them.
What a great way for the Oz to base an article on :-)
well guess what? the Oz is a right wing paper!
well guess what? the Oz is a right wing paper!
Surely the reason it ran on the front page of the national broadsheet is the Brian Burke angle, rather than it being an overarching right-wing conspiracy take on a story that is – apart from those interested in the byzantine world of WA Labor factions – of fairly marginal interest?
Pretty disappointing post, mate.
In what sense, Luke?
Gareth, I don’t think you can justify writing two articles about Sarah Burke’s ambitions without (1) talking to the Sharryn Jackson camp, or (2) mentioning that if she had succeeded it would represent a significant change in the party’s factional arrangements. Something The West did right, incidentally.
I just feel that as a Left person, you should have disclosed that, if you were going to pointing out the factional issues at play.
Secondly, I think that to drag in the Johnstone challenge is irrelevant, as he was always going to get up, whereas the presidency was genuinely in doubt. That, and the ‘Burke angle’ made it a valid news story. I don’t think it was at all unbiased – they talked a lot about WA Inc, which could hardly be seen as helpful to Sarah Burke.
First, I don’t hide my factional allegiance.
Second, I don’t think the WA Inc stuff is unhelpful to Sarah Burke. She is her own woman, and thinking people treat her as such.
Third, as I pointed out above, The Oz failed to mention that the Presidency was previously held by the Left/New Right alliance, and that if Sarah Burke won it would be an upset with potentially serious ramifications for the factional alignment within the party. To its credit, The West reported on all of these issues. Even the WA Business News had better coverage — at least they mentioned the other candidates.
I just thought it was a pissweak article.
Incidentally, congratulations. You got elected to something or other didn’t you?
Me? Only if I didn’t know about it, mate! Now I need to find out…..
….I did win a raffle though….
Aahh.. that’s what it was. They announced the winners just before the returning officer’s report.
Truth be told, I’d much rather win a washing basket full of wine and choclates than a position in the ALP. It’s easier, and there’s no chance you’ll be dudded out of your prize…I think the raffles are the only things at Conference where the rsult is not known ahead of time, aren’t they?
And there was you saying the presidency “was genuinely in doubt”… ;-)
I’ll admit, losing 35 of your own votes would have made the Left panic a bit….and I didn;t predict it. My cynicism is unfounded.