Bernard’s sandwich-board-of-doom style of fortune-telling

Crikey readers have their say.

The Labor leadership spill:

Brian Mitchell, ALP member, writes: Re. “And the winner is … Smith, Shorten or Crean” (yesterday, item 1). Bernard Keane is committing the age-old sin of having formed an opinion and then reporting only the facts that go to support it, while ignoring those that inconveniently get in the way of his world view.

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


Leave a comment

5 thoughts on “Bernard’s sandwich-board-of-doom style of fortune-telling

  1. Shine

    Bernard Keane is either amazing, very inexperienced, commencing his would-be writing career, has never read anything ever written by anyone else or just trying to be clever. Most people will be able to select one of these and possibly two which is unfortunate.

    Unfortunate, because every writer influences someone and often many form their opinions, still, based on those pieces written under a brand. As the capacity for more people to contribute to debates grows through forums, comments and even blogs, those writing under brands are considered by many to be of even greater value.

    Bernard misses several marks depending on his intention. If his intention is to deliberately attract those who lash out wildly without factual evidence and cannot see through his manipulation then he suffers too much for his art. But surely if capable of attempting this kind of manipulation then, he is capable also of both speaking to that audience, whilst at the same time challenging them. There are far more experienced and accomplished writers who make a substantial living catering for this audience already.

    If it is the case that he wishes simply to stir up higher comment counts by outraged readers, then I suggest writing balanced unbiased and fair articles, given the wide range of opinions on politics would bring as many comments if not more. Gillard hatred or writing with the intention of appearing to hate Gillard, women or both is a market with no vacancies at present. It is well serviced through the many rags, social networking and forums. Yet there has not to date been a single vacancy filled in the rich area of attacking Tony Abbott, analyzing in fact why this area is avoided by most journalists and how he gained and remains at the head if a party, a party which historically has had some of the most intelligent mps and members.

    If only Bernard would write one or more pieces that display his actual ability. Like the pop band playing punk rock music cannot be judged as musicians until they play a piece that has fewer hiding places for inability. It is then that people can truly accept that they are in fact truly great musicians, but have an unfortunate taste in music or they have an unfortunate taste in music because they are truly terrible musicians.

  2. Michael

    Noxious, hubris, mysogyny, visceral, bile, fevered, lazy, rant, attack, bias, laughable.
    I suspect there must have been a preexisting condition, indeed a gaping wound, for Bernard to be so vilified.
    Commenters would do better by resorting to reason rather than vitriol.

  3. The Old Bill

    The above writers made several reasoned arguments I think Michael.
    From my reading of the above articles, the main point seems to be:
    Julia Gillard is running a successful minority government with strong economic credentials, but can’t find a single reporter to talk about anything except her chances of being ousted before the next election. Shame that Bernard Keane and the others don’t think the strong vote for her 71 – 31 ( plus one more if another Gillard supporter wasn’t inconveniently having a baby ) is anything to write home about.
    Her opposition had ( at last count ) only two votes more than his counterpart.

    Nevertheless, the only thing the right wing so called independent press in Australia wants to talk about is Abbott’s GREAT BIG TAX catch cry. The opposite side of the argument, that obscene mining profits should help prop up schools and hospitals decimated by years of Liberal Tax cuts is ignored. Why would we want to pay for good public services? The Liberals have the same attitude as the current leader of QANTAS. Why have a strong diverse company that used to do major servicing / engineering / engine repairs for competitors in a country with a wide skills base, when you can have an imitation Tiger Airways in a country with a big hole in the ground and no future.

  4. j-boy57

    Bernard give us some substantial pieces on the policies of Robb and Hockey who you have previously
    stated are the shining lights of the Liberal parties economic planning,as oxymoronic as that sounds..
    You could start with the duo’s “audited” costings of last elections promises which if they had been a prospectus
    would have landed them in the slammer. This is serious as these declarations almost succeeded in them gaining the treasury benches. We now are treated to more of the the same in regard to costings by the opposition.
    This Maddof style behaviour by a party that aspires to government is surely worth at least a story or two …

  5. Kevin Tyerman

    “a visceral dislike of Gillard ”

    “a visceral dislike for Gillard ”

    Those phrases from two different letters above are too different to
    suggest a campaign, surely.

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