Crikey has been subjected to the most detailed and forensic profile piece so far with Garry Linnell’s Good Weekend cover story and whilst I think it was “tough but fair”, others beg to differ.
Ouch. If you’ve happened across the Good Weekend magazine from either The Age or the SMH yet this morning you can’t but notice that sinister (Mrs Crikey’s word) looking photo of Crikey on the cover and the 3500 words inside by Garry Linnell.
It is undoubtedly the most comprehensive piece on Crikey ever written.
Most of the usual suspects have lined up to take a swing and, Crikey, they’ve really had a good go. Eddie Everywhere says he “wouldn’t even cross the road to give him (me) a backhander or a writ”.
2UE shock jock Steve Price used the delightful phrase “t*rd” and even my old mate and Rupert Murdoch spindoctor Andrew Butcher unloaded with the line that Crikey is “the most consistently inaccurate journalist and publisher in the nation”.
That’s gotta hurt.
I’m 90 per cent certain that the unnamed “former close friend and workmate” is Natasha’s fiance Ian Smith. Any chance of a wedding invitation appears remote given this line: “Look, I loathe Stephen Maynehe’s a disgracehe has no discipline. You know that Tourette syndrome where people can’t stop swearing? Mayne suffers from a version of it. He can’t stop leaking.”
Mrs Crikey was rather taken aback by much of this but if you dish it out you really have to learn to take it. This sort of response from the powerful players that we attack is surely no surprise.
Be interested in your feedback which has already poured in as follows:
Let’s start positive
The Good Weekend article appeared tough but fair. At least my wife can now relate the the Newsletters l leave around the house.
As for your detractors in the article, it was Mandy Rice-Davies who said ‘ They would say that wouldn’t they’.
It is becoming increasingly evident that we need an independent voice in the media, and to me Crikey fills that role. When you take risks you are bound to come undone occasionally, but it is better than the cosy arrangements we have at present with more and more stories dictated to us by the Spin Doctors.
How many other secrets is Laurie Oakes sitting on?
And are Smithy’s and Princess Tashy’s proposed nuptials planned to take place before or after the full sale of Telstra?
More disclosure, disclosure, disclosure please, and while ever you keep putting the stories up, I’ll keep subscribing.
They can’t even get the domain name right
This isn’t about the article (which wasn’t too bad – but remind never to tell you about my love-life) but about the front cover. “Crikey.com” written in large print. For a paper that carries on about how switched on it is, and how tied into the zeitgeist, why the f*** can’t they understand the difference between .com and .com.au!
Let me set the record straight for any SMH (or elsewhere) journos reading. .com internet addresses have NOTHING to do with .com.au addresses. .com addresses should really be .com.us addresses, but the USA is the only nation in the world that doesn’t have to include it (surprised?).
The first part of the address www.crikey.com.au that is actually used to locate the site is the “au” bit. That means the browser is redirected to the Australian computer that then redirects to the computer with the lists of all the “.com.au” addresses. Only then does the browser get the actual URL (actually a number in dotted quad form eg192.168.0.1) which enables the browser to directly contact the Crikey server which then provides the HTML file and pics which the browser then displays as the page we know and love.
Putting up Crikey.com is like writing Texas Qld when you mean Texas USA.
Given the level of laziness in fact-checking this betrays, it sort of blunts any criticism about your work.
How much did you pay for that?
Crikey, how much did ya pay him! Full disclosure on the puff piece, please…
Thought the inclusion of snarky comments from your avowed foes only served to render you almost angelic by comparison. Gotta be happy about that! But thought all the guff about your alleged dislike of confrontation was superfluous – what critic would particularly enjoy meeting someone they’ve given a negative rap?
Keep it up, Gianna
Crikey’s huge readership
At the end of the day you will always find people who don’t like what you are doing and on the other side, you will always find people who agree or support what you do. That is life and in your line of work that is even more prevalent. Those who have issues with you will generally have those issues because they have their own axe to grind for what they consider some disservice you have done to them over time.
If you look at the facts, there are 3500 subscribers, I would guess 2500 – 3000 would be paying. The subscribers would no doubt be of incredible influence within society from all walks of life but particurly the media and politics. That alone means what you are doing is having an effect. Not including the subscribers there are the tens of thousands of people who read your website weekly. Throw in the cut and paste crowd and the numbers reading some of what you put out must be massive.
Speaking for myself, I personally do not subscribe to anything else on the net other than your site, so with the exception of my monthly payment to my service provider and the very rare purchase on Amazon, you are the only internet site I give money to. I would guess that would be the same with many of your subscribers. That alone means you are providing a service that no one else is offering. If the newspapers were providing the same sort of output that you provide, then it would be fair to say that myself and all the other subscribers would not be handing over our hard earned to you. Finally, if most of what you put out was untrue as your detractors claim then again why would 3500 people subscribe to read fairy tales. (my Adam Smith summary of Crikey.com.AU)
Are you really that devious?
As a very young impressionable Journo, I am rather intrigued, firstly by the article in Good Weekend, and even more intrigued by your website.
The article certainly painted you as a massive cynic, slightly devious and sinister, intelligent, fearless with a touch of unethical behavior – the photos of course didn’t help much, nor did the journo sourcing quotes from people who clearly have no time for you . I would have liked a slightly more balanced view, ie get more quotes from people who do have time for you. Do they exist?
I felt the journalist failed to look at what you had achieved that had actually “made a difference”, as opposed to creating yourself as a political nuisance, the proverbial boil on powerful people’s buttocks.
But I found myself asking what and who are you?
Are you an investigative journalist?
Are you are a politician wannabe?
Are you an activist?
Or are you simply a “shit stirer”?
Whatever you are, the fact that you have the freedom and the luxury to write about what ever takes your fancy, and not be imprisoned by politics or media moguls who clearly have different agendas then reveal the “truth” objectively – must be an enjoyable position to be in. I just hope that what you actually write or disclose is the entire truth – or am I too idealistic??
Crikey hinders defamation law reform
My only reaction to the Good Weekend articles was the thought that Crikey is perversely helping the Government justify the continued existence of our ludicrous defamation laws. His policy of “publish irregardless” is probably counterproductive in the long term.
Not as good as HQ
I’ve read a few of the articles recently on Crikey, and I felt that last weekends SMH Good Weekender was pretty interesting. Positive or negative, all publicity is good, and I’m sure you’ll pick up quite a few new subscribers from it. The GC article a few months back was much better I thought, and it was that particle interview that encouraged me to become a subscriber myself. I used to spend my early mornings reviewing the IT sections of the Fin, SMH, Australian et al (it’s been my chosen industry for 17 years), but now, it’s my morning dose of Crikey that gets me through.
I’ve had a few friends read the SMH article as well. They now have a better (although slightly distorted) idea about what this news service I’ve been raving about for a while is all about.
Keep it coming!!!
GW was far too cynical
We think the GW piece overall painted a far too cynical picture of your motives. We were particularly peeved at the suggestion that the whole Pricey affair was some kind of marketing exercise and that you simply get your kicks out of “offending” people in high places.
The “anti-establishment” tag is way too simplistic and ignores Crikey’s greater contributions, ie the insight it gives us into how power really works in our society. For that, we thank you. I’ve written some feedback for next week’s Your Turn page in the GW but no guarantees it will get a look-in. Now on the upside, a friend of mine who read the piece can’t wait to subscribe to Crikey next week, so expect to be inundated with new subscriptions. Any publicity’s good publicity….
Cheers, Janine and Brendon, Sydney
From the people who brought you Miracle Water
Remember that Good Weekend published the story about ‘Miracle Water’ – I wouldn’t take anything that is printed in it very seriously. It’s nice to know that they think you’re threatening close enough to the truth that they need to do such an article!
Sinister photos and crappy old laptops
Just finished the Good Weekend article and I found it pretty ordinary. I don’t think they looked at the fact you’re the only person doing this in Australia and they barely touched on the point you’re the only person covering issues that the better resourced outlets aren’t touching.
Paula’s right, you look sinister on the cover. On the bright side you might score a gig on the next Austin Powers movie. Also you should have organised an Apple product placement for the inside shot, you could have scored a new i-book and a few grand.
Crikey as Lleyton Hewitt
Re Saturday’s story
As one of your “sole subscribers” I was actually quite proud to see you on the front cover of the Good Weekend. At first I actually thought it was a photo of an rather anorexic looking Lleyton Hewitt, then I realised it was you. I thought it was a decent piece, though it did seem to end abruptly.
I am oddly proprietorial and protective about crikey. Whenever you’re quoted I always think, “There it is again! Excellent!” though I don’t really know why – reinforcement perhaps of the value of being a subscriber?? I also feel you’re a bit of kindred spirit: early 30’s, tall, lanky, young families and your work has typos. As for the criticisms, I think the obvious conclusion is that it shows you’re doing your job!
I prefer Crikey’s faults to the mainstream
The few good journalistic points were countered by the article’s bias and lazy journalism. The text was almost as bad as the images – an inadequate representation. Garry Linnell is guilty of the same faults the article attempts to tar Crikey with: inaccuracy and hyperbole. Unlike Garry’s piece, however, at least Crikey usually admits to faults and takes action to correct them.
As so many others have said, no publicity is bad publicity – the article fairly unwittingly exposes the shortcomings of mainstream media which have inspired alternative news sources like Crikey in the first place. Fortunately, the worth of alternative media shines through the establishment smokescreen and will hopefully bring you a flock of subscribers.
The following are some of the bad memories surfacing from my weekend read:
1. The photos: Crikey is not, by and large, glamorous and standoffish as it would appear from these images. Crikey is, in my very limited experience, an approachable bloke with a baby under one arm and a clipboard under the other doing his own footwork. Yet the media continues to affirm its interest in style over substance.
2. Why interview at length a large number of people who ‘hate’ Crikey, some highly dubious characters among them, and brush over Crikey’s high-profile supporters with hardly a mention?
3. Garry seems to positively acknowledge some of Crikey’s achievements in running the stories that vested interests (aka. safeguards and protocols) prevent seeing the light of day in the print media. On the other hand, Garry says piously that Crikey is not subject to the ‘safeguards and protocols’ of the print media, and that this is bad. Is Garry oblivious to the irony?
4. There are a whole bunch of relevant issues that Garry skates over. Some things are ignored entirely, like ‘People Power’!
The Crikey phenomenon certainly has faults. Just as the mainstream media does. I know whose faults I prefer. One suggestion (of many) might be to include a cast list so newcomers know who this Britney person is…
Keep it up, Bruce
Protect the innocent and get your facts right
I like the story even it might look a bit harsh on you .. just think about the heavy net traffic you are getting as a result of this … I for one got to your site for the first time this evening after reading the article.
Keep up the good work with your team and try harder to get the facts right so that less number of ‘innocent’ people will get hurt.
Kind regards, Akram
Writing a letter of complaint
I thought the Good Weekend stuff was pretty rugged. Am writing a letter.
Linnell could have done more with this
Congrats on the GW cover. I wish I’d had the idea, I’d have done a better job. I thought Mr Linnell focused a little too much on your perceived sins (god forbid anyone in the mainstream media ever got something wrong or chose to take a personal, idiosyncratic or sensationalist approach to anything).
It would have been good to hear from, as well as your enemies, some intelligent observers talking about what you do that no-one else is doing ie debunking, balloon pricking, raking over the mullock heap and inviting readers to give opinion, fact or assesment to add to what you’ve turned over.
Some discussion on the role of web publishers, the economics and politics of the industry and some reference to zines OS might have also been useful. Also totally ignored was an assesment of your attempt to develop a new culture of shareholder activism and what that means.
A shallow read
I thought the article was a shallow read and could have been better. I would have liked more of your justification and your anecdotes about pissing off those in power. The people who had a go at you all illustrated exactly why you are needed. I thought the cover photo was great and the inside ones not too bad. You looked serious and intelligent in a kind of bohemian way. Well done and keep up the good work. Australia needs Crikey for all sorts of important reasons.
No such thing as bad publicity
Interestingly, the piece following the Crikey! article is apt. As George Deen recounted his speedy, pre-injunction demolition of a Brisbane icon, he states “All publicity is good”.
Wise words indeed. Please find my subscription request below!
Michael in North Narrabeen
The good and the bad of Crikey
I thought the article was useful for you in the main (no pun intended). They did quote more of your detractors than fans but that’s appropriate when you’re interviewing a ‘muckraker’ – frankly it’s a compliment to be reviled by these types.
These are the things that I enjoy and find useful about Crikey!
* Shareholder activism and business critiques
* Gossip – why not? Provided that it doesn’t become nasty and childish (something that a number of your subscribers haven’t worked out yet)
* Political commentary.
Things I don’t enjoy about Crikey!
* A number of your subscribers seem to have never moved beyond the Lower 5th remove in their attitudes and humor. I really found a lot of the commentary re Cheryl Kernot (flake as she is) disgustingly sexist. And cowardly, as so many hide behind the ‘name deleted’ when they are not functioning as a whistle blower, but are demonstrating that they would be embarrassed to ‘own’ their opionions.
* There’s a 15 year old locker room boy attitude that prevails in the newsletter that I find pretty tiresome and which seems typical of aging journalists and public school boys.
* Gossip that is just plain nasty – I mean really, why let some of the stuff in ie Cheryl’s brother is a rapist! Even if it’s true, what does this serve? You reserve the right to delete your father from the site, yet think that the family of targets are fair play? Come on Stephen, you’re a bit braver than that surely.
I continue to subscribe to Crikey! for the first number of reasons, but really think you need to lift your game in terms of the latter.
Carmel Boyle – I’m always happy to put my name to my opinions (as opposed to genuine Whistle blowing activities – who do need to be protected)
Loving that disclose, disclose, disclose
Great piece in the SMH GW today, Steve. I’ve always admired your guts, mate, and wish you the best in fighting the idealistic fight!
I particularly liked this quoted Crikey! post justifying your (correct, I feel) decision to run with the Evans/Kernot affair disclosure:
“…but if Crikey is serious about ‘disclose, disclose, disclose’ and claims to fearlessly report political gossip, then we would not be doing our job if we ignored this issue…’
Top stuff! Keep it up.
Good profile as Crikey does lose the plot sometimes
This one went direct to Garry:
As a Crikey subscriber and journo, may I congratulate you on your piece on Crikey! I think you gave him a pretty fair hearing, even if you quoted more of his victims than fans. Maybe he has more of them? I certainly feel he’s providing a much-needed balance to the big boys at the other end of the spectrum who would have it all their own way.
He would do the job even better with more time/help/money and I think that’s his main problem now, as pointed out by a few people in your story – he’s losing the plot a bit and getting sloppy because there is no way a lone operator can properly check the huge amount of info he serves up every day and properly cover all the business/media and political points he seeks to cover. Especially with a young family and other commitments.
The danger – for him – is that too many more writs will ruin him financially, which would be a real shame as none of the big newspaper groups seem willing or independant enough to tackle the controversial issues or pay journos to spend the time on investigative stuff any more.
Thanks for the good read.
You’d better explain that photo
What is it with that photo? Are they attempting to portray you as some sort of nocturnal subterranean uber-spook? And, interestingly, are you/were you complicit in that portrayal?
My perception of Crikey is of the free (too free if you believe Garry Linnell) interchange of information ranging from the dubiously (and actionable) scurrilous to the altogether-too-true and scurrilous and everything in between. If you are as ‘underground’ as the photo suggests you would not be as engaged and informed as you are.
Or are you genuinely, as an activist, an agitator and a publicity/oxygen-deprived turd, a pale troglodyte with slitty eyes, armed only with an old Tecra laptop under the stairs of your repeatedly remortgaged South Melbourne townhouse (read: tumble-down inner city grungy garret-style hovel conducive to the hatching of treason and plot – however far from the truth that may be).
Do you front the AGMs still blinking in the unaccustomed light of day? Can you be trusted with any piece of information (including from Mrs Crikey or the Lesser-Spotted-Crikey)? What fetid troll lurks within the foam Crikey suit? Are you and do you intend to remain, as the meedja would have it, a mystery wrapped in an enigma (wrapped in an ectomorph wrapped in a skivvy)?
Who is Stephen Mayne?
You’re sinister but serve a good purpose
Hope you’ve had a GOOD WEEKEND. HeHe. I live in Western Australia and after I received your email on Saturday I wandered down to the newsagent and forked out $4 for an eastern state’s newspaper. The SMH in fact. The Age was $4.70.
I agree that there is only one word I can think of for that photo on the front cover – sinister. In fact, it is the type of photo normally reserved for pedophiles and other serious sex offenders.
The article tried to belittle you but at least it credited with you with some success. I agree with you that you will have to expect to cop this kind of stuff because of the people that you sometimes take on. But you are doing the right thing and there is definitely a market for Crikey in Australia.
People often say that what happens in America and UK often takes so many years to reach here. The Kernot affair outing, the reduction in the power of trade unions and their move to the right, etc. is all part of a trend.
While we shouldn’t follow everything that is done overseas the power of the Internet will see some things become too hard to cover up. As far as your “friends” are concerned, if there is something that needs to be reported and is relevant that involves acquaintances etc. then you have to “disclose, disclose, disclose”. Otherwise you simply become a part of the so-called establishment and lose credibility amongst your followers.
It doesn’t necessarily mean that you have to be malicious (and I don’t think you are) it just means that you have to give equal treatment to all. Hypocrisy is what annoys me the most. For instance, politicians and journalists call for a republic citing the “affairs” of Prince Charles and Lady Diana Spencer.
Yet, when something comes their way they run for cover. Kevin Reynolds, a trade union leader here in WA, calls for revolution yet he is the first one to accept a discounted luxury apartment from developers. This is what I like about your site.
Kind regards, M
Don’t be distracted
Sir, I have not read the article and am unlikely to. I check out the crikey website because you publish information. Information that I am free to digest at my leisure and act on according to my own judgement. I cannot ask more, so please keep up the good work. Most of the media seems to feed us anything they think will sell, regardless of the truth or accuracy. I think you do your best to inform truthfully, accurately and including the whole story. You should ignore words which are intended only to distract or hurt. When actions are taken against you then fight back. Keep up the good work.
Thanks, Guy Anderson
Great story by Garry Linnell. But Paula might agree the pictures tell it all. I now know why you do not question the restaurant bill (smile)
Good Weekend made me subscribe
Q. How did I find my way here?
A. Read about you and this site in an article.
Q. Where did I find the article?
A. Sydney Morning Herald’s ‘ Good Weekend ‘.
Q. Did I like what I read?
A. You bet!
Q. Am I going to subscribe to Crikey as a result of reading about you in GW?
So it’s all good, isn’t it? As in ‘any publicity’s good — as long as they spell your name right….. (and they did). They described you as ‘ idealistic, extremely intelligent … perpetually outraged at the ‘real’ world, with its double standards, greasing of palms etc.’ …. you couldn’t ask for higher praise than that, could you? I mean at that point — just hearing there were still people like you around — my Sunday seemed sunnier.
The photos were fine and I hope you took the rants against you as the compliment they are. They said more about ‘them’ than you — and indicated you’re ahead in the game. You are winning!
So, hope you’re hoisting a glass of whatever with a smile on your face … because we like you! And, by the sound of the article, so does Good Weekend.
Too harsh on yourself
As usual, I reckon you were a bit harsh on yourself.
I reckon you scrubbed up pretty well in the profile, as do a couple of others who are not Crikey subscribers who I’ve spoken to this morning.
Criticism from Pricey and McGuire would be a good thing in many people’s books.
A little bit scathing
I thought it seemed a little scathing with some of the return fire being particularly nasty (eg Eddie’s missive), But on the whole the author seemed very keen to make it a reasonably open and objective piece, and (the author)seemed to be restraining some of his personal opinons. As is written, some of the Fairfax people really don’t like you so it was interesting to see this slant of the article (Badguy vs Underground hero.)
I think (the article) seemed to portray Crikey as more slanderous than it really is, with you portrayed as a dark mischeif maker. I believe the author should probably have read more of the content on the site to get a perspective that much of the stories are scathing but not destructive.
I would have liked to see more about the attacks on talkback journalism – no mention of Stan or the Parrot – as this is an area where Crikey should hang its head up high. Much of the populist diatribe spouted by these men is one sided rubbish and disgusts me greatly. For the record I am a proud Crikey subscriber. I love reading the inside stories that we aren’t meant to know about, including the workings of our major parties and media backroom shenannigans. I would like to see more Sydney content on the site and also see more of Hillary’s comments placed directly into the sealed section-rather than having to click to a link to read her comments.
Other than that just do ya Best,
Andrew in Sydney
Just more personality politics
From my perspective, as a uni student at pains to understand the gullibility and consequent voting patterns of mainstream Australia, this weekend’s Good Weekend article does little beyond paint you as an anti-establishment fighter of the truth. It shows you as part of a minority capable of realising that Australia’s cross media ownership laws do little beyond maintain the farce that is open media in a liberal democracy and give high schoolers matter for debates on the power of the media. The media in Australia has marginalised real debate about crucial policy issues and allowed personality politics to prosper. I hope you win many subscribers from their ‘expose’.
Hi Stephen, Congratulations on the fantastic good Weekend cover. It is all good, from the moody movie star cover (not sinister – cool!) to the mean quotes from idiots like Eddie and Price and bitter old Blunden. Loved the schooldays shorts anecdote. I thought it was a sympathetic piece, overall, without being sycophantic. Great feather in your cap.
Not too bad
The Good Weekend article looks OK to me. You could hardly expect to be painted as a saint, could you? Telling the truth or trying to has never been popular, and some blokes have actually got crucified for it, as I recall.
Still overall the article still paints you as a bit of a remarkable diamond. I’d stick with that, if I were you – you have come off pretty well over all. Anyway, which other journalist or even business activists gets their picture on the cover of the Good Weekend?
The only slightly sour note is where you recant of your criticism of Natasha – your judgement is mostly impeccable, in spite of some industry hacks and managers think. You worry me when you publish without checking with anyone about anything, but I accept that is the nature of the business you are in.
BTW, when I can afford it, I will apply for a life subscription. In the mean time, I am working on paying my bills by making rich men richer. I expect you will yell, if the bastards pursuing you get too close. I have a hat ready to pass around the office….
If are standing on their ticket, Stephen, I might seriously have to consider voting for the Democrats again, even if you are interstate. Otherwise I think I am going to vote Green, mostly out of frustration.
PS Nice photo.
The article was pretty one sided, Stephen, they certainly interviewed everyone who DOESN’T like you, but what the hell….. Overall, I thought you came across as an interesting chap.
Crikey on, Rhyl
I’m not thrilled with the Good Weekend story – especially the comment about poorly paid contributors. Consdering that when I freelanced for the SMH they tried to undercut the MEAA per word-rate.
A great roll call of enemies
Anyone who can have Ego Smith, Peter Blunders, Eddie Everywhere, Bolta and Sprice all snarling and squirming and all at the same time must be doing something right. Keep up the good work.
Crikey as Mark Seymour
I thought, on first glance at the Good Weekend cover, that it was a photo of Mark Seymour of the Hunnas – you can’t complain about that !!!! Pretty fair article all in all, try not to become too paranoid about who said what!
Returning Pricey’s fire
I want to ram Pricey’s own words down his throat next week.
Expect a call to Pricey that will include:
“I’ve never had so much support from people as when it became clear that I was shit stirring Steve Price. So many people, from company leaders around the country to others, were all saying, ‘Good on you. He’s a turd.'”
Lay off the gossip
To be criticised by most of the people you mention is high praise indeed. You will always get a few things worng in the gadfly business, but you admit your mistakes, and as far as I can tell they are honest mistakes to start with. (And speaking in my physicianly role, Smith has his medical metaphors hopelessly mixed).There’s a bit too much gossipy stuff about non-entities for my liking, but on the whole a breath of good clean honest fresh air, and keep it going.
Pissing off the right people
I liked the story. Here you are, you’ve pissed off the likes of Fast Ed and Nat the Fascist, get angry to the point of irrationality over the abuse of power, swing wildly at everything in sight, stand way taller than most folks and hate confrontation and violence. On top of that, you drove an HK Monaro (shame it was written off two months back). Sounds like me, and I’d subscribe if I could hold a job for longer than a fortnight.
What sort of submissions do you take? I worked up a nice riff on how Nat is taking out her anger with her pushy mum on Meg as some kind of substitute mum. I’m surprised that no-one seems to have picked up on this. Then again, I’m also surpised that most folks publicly poo-poo the idea of Gareth’s sexual prowess being a factor in Cheryl’s defection to the ALP – bloody hell, if being a teacher and having an affair with a student isn’t a sign of an uncontrolled libido, what the hell is?
Keep fighting the good fight – I’m damn glad that people like you are around. Let me know if you need any non-financial help – I can write, at least – and I’ll see what I can do.
Cheers, Name Withheld
How to get yourself sued
I’ve never visisted your website before but read the article in the SMH. From my point of view you came across as lovably, weird and earnest. I don’t think too many people feel sorry for Eddie and Seve.
So when are you going to expose the John Howard/Pru Goward affair?
CRIKEY: Errrr, when it’s true which it certainly is not.
Garry Linnell went in pretty hard
I thought Garry Linnell was pretty tough on Crikey in the Good Weekend (although he’s a Carlton supporter so I’ll give him some leeway for the grief he’s going through).
The quote of the article had to be Eddie’s “I don’t want to give him the oxygen he craves.” Eddie Everywhere criticising someone for craving publicity? Surely not!
I thought the quote from Rupert’s mouthpiece Andrew Butcher was a bit tough too- “there is something fundamentally wrong with a journalist who sees lawsuits as a marketing tool.” The way I understand it, Crikey never went looking for the lawsuits, and they have given you a good deal of worry. But if you can use them to promote a struggling website, then why not?
Do ya best, Dom
Become a contributor to Crikey
* Like everyone else, Crikey is getting screwed by the banks (yep, we copped an $1132 merchant fee for July alone) but we’re prepared to pay $10 into your PAYbySNAP account for every item contributed to our daily 5000-word subscriber only sealed section. To find our more about this great new internet-based payments system, click here: https://secure.paybysnap.com/register/ to open an account. Then just send your contributions to [email protected] along with your PAYbySNAP account number and if we use the item you’ll get paid $10. Contributed items should be 100-200 words and full of gossip, news, insight and biting analysis.