Wikileaks – exposing the worst in some media commentators

For years now us bloggers have been criticised by some “professional” media folk as amateurs and single issue folk who can’t hold a candle to the Pros. Now initially I fell for this line and indeed some bloggers tend to write before researching and some even before thinking, but the release of the Wikileaks material has shown the “Pros” aren’t exactly as pure and insightful as these folk would have us believe.

At first I started wondering about their skill sets during Election coverage and an excellent Editorial by David Salter in “The Week” on December 10 reminded me of one of my pet hates. After an election it’s quite common for some of them to say the Voters got their desired outcome of a hung Parliament or “sent a message” to the pollies over <insert their pet theory here>.

Of course this is nonsense on a number of points.

  • More than half the Voters are struggling to know exactly what either Party stands for,
  • none of us know what the outcome is going to be so we can hardly engineer the result especially in a one person one vote system.
  • A big slab of Voters are just voting to avoid a fine. Incumbency is good for a couple of percent.
  • The distrust of pollies would also suggest Voters don’t expect to see much difference in any case

The Aussie Voter just isn’t that switched on.

As for the “message” that would have to be easily as obscure as the regular messages from “God” which a good entrepreneur (or Bible thumper") can bend to his own personal preferences.

To me the result of the last Federal election was pretty straight forward. Not enough folk trusted Tony Abbott and who can blame them? When it came to the Independents none of them trusted him either. Wether Tony can actually build any level of trust in the community remains to be seen but I’m or the opinion he has already hit his high water mark and will have to rely on the Voters being less trusting of his opponent.

Now to Wikileaks. Firstly it’s time some pundits accepted that Wikileaks is a media outlet. A giant Whistle blower outlet that may not produce a physical newspaper but is a media outlet all the same. Any media player worth their salt is delighted to pick up whistle blower data and indeed that is what often fuels award winning journalists’ material.

But it appears that some of the “Pros” either don’t research their opportunities or feel slighted that they didn’t the material first. Perhaps they should ponder the fact that no media outlets have been charged with publishing this “highly dangerous” material. As far as I can tell the Wikileaks material was offered widely but some media companies were so lazy they did not appreciate the value they were being offered.

Now they watch their competitors enjoying headline after headline.

The campaign to vilify Assange isn’t tracking too well either. More and more folk are appreciating it’s a David and Goliath battle and siding with pollies has no value for a media company.

One thing that has encouraged me over the whole affair is the re-emergence of “proper” journalism. I had all but given up on sensible political commentary but suddenly we have some newspapers working hard in their traditional role. These folk are far more professional than us bloggers but they are the cream of the crop.

The remaining media plodders? Well they are just bloggers who get a pay check.

2 thoughts on “Wikileaks – exposing the worst in some media commentators

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s