Journalism

Oct 18, 2011

Andrew Bolt’s secret ex-fiancée revealed

Anne Summers' profile of Andrew Bolt in the October edition of The Monthly looks set to become one of the most successful commissions in editor Ben Naparstek's 30-month reign as editor.

Andrew Crook — Former <em>Crikey</em> Senior Journalist

Andrew Crook

Former Crikey Senior Journalist

Anne Summers’ profile of Andrew Bolt in the October edition of The Monthly looks set to become one of the most successful commissions in Ben Naparstek’s 30-month reign as editor.

Interim sales figures are said to be huge and when the story was temporarily released online last Monday it notched up a massive 10,000 page views in 24 hours.

Free Trial

Proudly annoying those in power since 2000.

Sign up for a FREE 21-day trial to keep reading and get the best of Crikey straight to your inbox

By starting a free trial, you agree to accept Crikey’s terms and conditions

37 comments

Leave a comment

37 thoughts on “Andrew Bolt’s secret ex-fiancée revealed

  1. Ross Sharp

    “How can Andrew possibly argue against reality?” Youl told Crikey.

    It’s Andrew Bolt. That’s all he does.

  2. david

    But all good stuff to up the sales figures, whats Bolts cut?

  3. William Fettes

    I really don’t find much journalistic relevance in this kind of work – delving into someone’s private life. But that little detail about him referring to the time he spent with his former fiancée in Darwin as a minder was revealing of his lack of class or character.

  4. John64

    Attempting to give a damn…
    processing…
    critical error.

    Failed to give a damn.

    The world would be a much better place the less we heard about Andrew Bolt.

  5. MAREE WHITTON

    What’s all this about. Bolt makes a few statements some of us don’t like, has the courts deal with him. No, that’s not enough his past has to be brought up and now we all know he had a live-in-lover in the 80’s. We don’t even do this kind of coverage to our lying politicians.

  6. SBH

    I read the monthly article. It was really disappointing. Firstly it was published before the judgement and was greatly diminished as a result. I understand that this was an editorial decision. I know bugger all about publishing but I would love someone to explain to me why you would commission an article about Bolt and not wait until the judgement was out.

    I suppose you might do so because you had a substantial piece but we didn’t get that. In fact what we got was a bit of detail about his parents which could have been kept to half a para and been as useful (eg they were required to marry in Holland as a visa condition – and??) some really interesting but all too scant analysis of Bolt’s motivations, and some just unreasonable intrusion into his and his family’s personal life. Lots of people find there past romances uncomfortable territory, why should this most human weakness be held against Bolt. I was really surprised that someone like Summers would choose to go there and the irony of the piece immediately predating the Ernies was not lost on me.

    I also found the references to his early career, things like (and I paraphrase) 20 years ago as a a copy boy – pointless and even petty attempts to belittle Bolt. 20 years ago we were all something else but so what?

    Why wasn’t more done to discuss the proposition that Bolt saw a niche and with a cynical commercialism pursued a place as Australia’s Bill O’Reilly? This seemed like a really meaty angle. Why not more discussion about why he would write the offending pieces and how they might fit his business model, or a development of the view that he sees himself as an elite intellectual opinion maker who can cynically manipulate his readers into outbursts of rage and hatred – and that he does it, not because he believes it, but because it makes money. This would have been a much more useful contribution. Maybe it was lawyered out or maybe Summers pulled her punches. Either way, it diminished rather than enhance the Monthly’s reputation in my eyes.

  7. Andrew McIntosh

    There’s minimum standards for journalism out the window at Crikey. If you can’t beat ’em, join ’em, it seems.

    By the way – “confirmed that the his wife had in fact been Bolt’s fiancée”; editing standards seem to be going in the same direction as well.

  8. DF

    Interesting how Bolt expects others to endure being lied about by him but he does not like the truth being told about himself. As my late grandmother used to say, the higher up the ladder you go, the easier it is for people to see up your dress.

  9. fredex

    Pathetic.

    By all concerned.

    Irrelevant trivial elevated to news status.

Leave a comment

Share this article with a friend

Just fill out the fields below and we'll send your friend a link to this article along with a message from you.

Your details

Your friend's details

Sending...