Comments on: Why I won’t be going to the 2020 summit

By: Lynda Hopgood

Lynda Hopgood — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I agree with Derek - given your stated view, I would have thought you were exactly the RIGHT sort of journalist to report on proceedings. Is it too late to change your mind?

By: David Ingram

David Ingram — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Totally agree, Margaret. And too many in the media today have abandoned the honorable trade of ‘Reporter’ to become instant ‘Commentators’, with unqualified opinions on everything. Let’s first get our own houses in order before hectoring others at 2020.

By: Margaret Simons

Margaret Simons — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Thanks for the recent remarks. I would be very happy to REPORT the summit., if someone commissioned me to do so. (Editors hint, hint) What I have declined is the opportunity to go as a participant.

By: James Malone

James Malone — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

A tad precious, Margaret! How would the conference compromise you more than the ‘quiet’ briefings you receive in the hope that you will run sympathetic stories? What about using your insights to help achieve effective outcomes? Think positlvely.

By: Andrew Clarke

Andrew Clarke — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

One would hope then that Margaret is not a member of an ACTU affiliated Union. I gave up my AJA membership many years ago the day it affiliated with the ACTU - bit hard to be objective when you are a member. Nothing against the ACTU either.

By: Vera

Vera — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

I am pleased to have the opportunity to say that I have admired both your writing and integrity for many many years. Thank you for both.

By: Joe Boswell

Joe Boswell — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Very well said, every bit of it. Editors and journalists should resemble not pampered lap dogs but Cassius in Julius Ceasar “Yond Cassius has a lean and hungry look; He thinks too much: such men are dangerous.”

By: Kevin Rennie

Kevin Rennie — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

It’s a chance for have a voice after 12 years of being ignored. Also to use the new Web social networking to get some real engagement going. I want to go as a participant, not just a citizen-journalist with views about that role and the media in general.

By: Patricia Weston

Patricia Weston — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

This reads like a load of hot air. What are you trying to say? Does being a participant somehow contaminate your precious journalistic ethics? Are there confidentiality agreements you must sign?

By: Jack Robertson

Jack Robertson — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Shit, Madge, dunno which is funnier, the idea of Neil ‘Howard’s flak’ Mitchell suddenly bigging up his vocational integrity or Michael ‘Mr Schmooze’ Gawenda belatedly extemporising on the importance of not being duchessed by the powerful. Usually when hacks start waffling about Autonomy As A Virtue it’s code for All My Contacts Have Withered Anyway…but not in your case. Unlike most journalists, who like most politicians only (re?)discover their ethical cojones in retirement - when jibbering about The Decline of Principle is professionally painless and so about as incongruously useless as wiping your arse with a bicycle - you’re proving consistently willing to piss inside your own vocational tent.

Exactly what it needs right now. Any journo who doesn’t ‘get’ the danger to which you refer should reflect on the profoundly back-handed eulogies delivered to Matt Price by the likes of Downer, Rudd, et al. Manifestly a lovely bloke. Manifestly a lousy - biddable - political journali

By: Misha Ketchell

Misha Ketchell — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Interestingly Neil Mitchell on 3AW took the same stance for similar reasons. Instead he’s offered a listener a spot at the summit, which is the same approach as the Herald Sun. And guess what? Both are now spruiking what they should be reporting.

By: michael gawenda

michael gawenda — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Being outside the tent is exactly where journalists and editors ought to be. But increasingly, editors in particular, no longer consider themselves outsiders. As a result, neither do many oftheir journalists. Good decisioon Margaret! It matters.

By: Scott Howard

Scott Howard — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Sanctimonius claptrap. You could focus minds, raise tough difficult questions, and generally sharpen the efforts of all those trying to drive us all forward. If you can, you should go. Independance? Work harder, don’t opt out.

By: Tom McLoughlin#2

Tom McLoughlin#2 — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Ignore these sledges, your article here was a little angsty long IMHO but it’s the very fact of your stature and credentials puts you at risk of flattery and co-option, because by definition there is PLENTY to flatter. The ring of power etc. Well done!

By: Tom McLoughlin

Tom McLoughlin — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

As 5th estate blogger/some legal smarts, found it surprisingly easy to nominate / be ignored. First I declared it on slog, 2nd - it’s a test of their poise not mine 3rd liberated by vocational poverty to be open minded. That’s Gandhi actually.

By: Margaret Simons

Margaret Simons — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

There is always a risk of being seen as precious when talking about points of principle. I thought writing about this was worth doing because of the importance of advocating for journalistic independence. And I’ve written about “quiet” briefings elsewher

By: Derek Barry

Derek Barry — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

“Journalism ain’t joinalism” eh? I thought that was all left behind with the concept of public journalism.

Shame, it would have been intriguing to read your insider’s view of the summit.

By: Nicholas Vida

Nicholas Vida — Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000

Bravo