I acknowledge from the outset that I am no fan of The West Australian newspaper. This rag has peddled blatant pro-conservative propaganda in the guise of an “Editorial” for as long as I can remember. Not to mention their “feature writers” like the big-headed, self-righteous arch-conservative foghorn, Paul Murray (although, one upside of having Murray around is this crack-up of a thread from local blog The Worst Of Perth).
Indeed, the anti-ALP bias of The West Australian was so extreme in the lead-up to the recent WA state election that in a post-victory interview, outgoing Lib Matt Birney was moved to chastise the West journos for carrying on a personal vendetta against ALP ministers who had raised their ire during the Carpenter reign. Birney is not known for handing the ALP any bouquets. Hats off to him for speaking up. It is some measure of the extremity of The West’s bias that he – a political beneficiary of their propaganda – should feel moved to speak out publicly as he did.
If I am ill-disposed towards The West in hard copy, I am far more so the online version – especially their “blogs”. Why the inverted commas? Because, as with all the major newspapers, thewest.com.au “blogs” are not worthy of the name.
True blogging is an interactive online form of communication. The blogger responds to Commenters, and vice versa. This rarely happens with the mainstream newspaper “blogs” – and NEVER with those you find at thewest.com.au. The journo writes their piece and chucks it to the masses, then sits back and watches the ensuing squabble, without deigning to respond.
Other than compiling their (mostly) scrappy, prosaic pieces and hitting “upload”, the role of the online journo is censorial. I have lost count of the number of posts of mine thewest.com.au has refused to publish. And when they do let one through, parts are frequently deleted. I hasten to add, although I am not averse to using some ripe fucking language in my Boomtown Rap posts, I know better than to do this with mainstream newspaper blogs. No, they seem to object most strongly to put-downs of other Commenters, especially the ad hominem wit-wrangling sorta thang I indulge in from time to time.
The lesson we are supposed to learn, I guess, out here in rabbleland, is that we should conduct ourselves with restraint, and treat others with respect – even if they prove themselves lamentable blockheads deserving of a linguisitic lashing. Bugger me backwards, even a little ironic touching up is duly excised by the ever-vigilant censors at thewest.com.au.
I should declare myself here: I am basically anti-censorship. You, the reader, are free to comment on my posts in any way you choose. Disagree with me, call me on my logical flaws (if you can find any, heh heh), call me a ranting fuckwit, whatever. I reserve the right to respond in kind, of course. And I’d prefer that you argue rationally, and not resort to needless abuse. But if you feel so strongly opposed to something I write that the muse of abuse guides your tapping fingers, be assured I will not censor you. The only censorship I impose is on dumb twats who send me hollow abuse that does not relate to my post content at all. Be relevant or be damned.
There is, I concede, a case (though not one I necessarily support unconditionally) for censorship of non-comedic racial and/or religious vilification driven entirely by hatred. Ironic and perturbing indeed, then, that thewest.com.au should allow this type of shit past their otherwise terribly strict censorial watchdog. You can’t pay out on a blathering buffoon of a commenter, but vile anti-Islam spew is evidently quite acceptable over at thewest.com.au
Check out this selection of comments in response to their recent “Should the Bali Bombers Be Executed?” blog:
There is no point validating any of this toxic crap with a considered response. This stuff amounts to venting – emotional steam released under pressure and uninformed by any rational thought.
Nevertheless, these posts are unarguably far more offensive than any of the many posts I have had censored by thewest.com.au. It is ok, it seems, to dig as deep as you like into your wellspring of base insults as long as the shit you come up with is flung at Islam. For clearly, while the hate that fuels these posters is directed at the Bali bombers, the blasphemic pig references leave no doubt that they are vilifying Islam with all the gross disrespect they can summon.
Putting aside my policy not to comment again on any blogs at thewest.com.au, I added the following to the thread:
You primitives who are baying for execution via exotic tortures and porcine indignities – are you so taken over by hatred that you have lost all sense of humanity? Do you not see that you debase yourselves with your stupid propositions, and that the mindset you are coming from is IDENTICAL to that of the Bali bombers (and all terrorists)? That’s right – believe the rubbish you’re touting here and you are NO BETTER than them. Dehumanise “the enemy” – as you are doing – and you reduce yourselves to psychopaths.
Yeah, yeah, I know in advance the arguments you’ll come back with – look what THEY did to innocent Australians. Yes, terrible…but if you regress to the level of primitives who stone miscreants in the village square (or worse), you’re buying into the black and white lie of any fundamentalism. Them (good) and us (evil). THAT’S DUMB, folks!
The bombers are just peasants, without the benefit of education. They are nobodies recruited by manipulative, evil puppetmasters and moulded in the cause of an extremist fundamentalist jihad. Nothing new – Hitler took the minds of a whole nation and infected it with his vision. You’re scapegoating the foot soldiers and missing the true target – the generals. One of the most influential is now out there after a brief period of incarceration, free to continue working on producing new Amrozis.
Shame on the West Australian – usually so quick to censor any poster who shows a bit of aggression – for printing the offensive, anti-Islamic rantings that have proliferated here. If you’re going to wield the censorship baton, show some real discrimination and responsibility and weed out the lowest-common-denominator set spewing their anti-Islam bile all over their bibs.
Censored, of course – guess which part?
Yes, the last paragraph was too much for the West’s censors. Blaspheme against Islam with all the bile you can muster, and you’ll get the nod from thewest.com.au – just don’t call them on ducking their professional responsibility to filter out hateful, offensive anti-Islam tirades such as those reprinted above.
It’s abundantly clear that thewest.com.au is very selective in their moral guardianship. The hypocritical cunts. And before anyone levels a charge of offensive language at me, consider the proposition that my use of the word “cunt” is far less offensive than any of the anti-Islam spew thewest.com.au blithely waved through.
2 thoughts on “Shame, thewest.com.au – Shame!”
And everyone knows that “cunt” is the new bastard, so nothing to complain of there. It’s even written in full view around town in adverts! http://is.gd/6hTT
But seriously, why bother with the West’s blogs? They’re too scared to alow comments freedom, and too bad to be able to take criticism.
Not sure the bulk of the population has caught on about “the new bastard”, WOP. Foul-mouthed fuckers like thee and me are probably not ideally equipped to make such assessments.
As I indicated in my post, I have long ago given up on The West’s blogs, but this one caught my eye and I couldn’t let their hypocrisy go this time. Also, they are failing in their self-appointed responsibility as media moral watchdogs. I don’t support them taking on that role, but if they choose to do so, their spectacular failing in this instance goes way beyond petty considerations such as the use of profane or personally attacking expression. That was my point, and it’s one that needs to be made, I think.