
Although she has almost no credibility in the wake of Paul Sheehan’s retraction of his article concerning her alleged rape this week, “Louise” may well have been the victim of a crime or crimes at the hands of someone, somewhere. She is clearly a disturbed and unhappy woman, and such women are particularly vulnerable to abuse of all kinds — including exploitation by careless newspaper columnists.
The story of Louise, who said she had been brutally raped by a group of “MERCs” (Middle Eastern Raping Cunts) is not Sheehan’s first serious blunder. His 2002 “Unique Water” report on the miracle water of Taren Point featured the same weaknesses that have landed him in so much trouble this week — the reliance on an unreliable source, the lack of fact-checking, the self-importance, and perhaps most of all, the willingness to believe a story that suited his own needs. In the case of the miracle water, this was the human and perhaps forgivable need to believe in a miracle cure for the various physical ailments that Sheehan said he was suffering from at the time. In the case of Louise and the MERCs, however, it was weirder.
Sheehan’s preoccupation with race dates back at least as far as his 1995 visiting fellowship at Harvard University, during which he published an article about “Four Stories That The US Media Refuses To Tell”. Up there at No. 1 (ahead of “Bill Clinton’s Sex Addiction, The Rise of Right-Wing Women, and The Decline of the US Media”) was “The Race War of Black Against White”. This war, he said, had claimed the lives of 25 million whites in the form of interracial crime (a figure that failed to take into account the impact of socio-economic factors). White Americans, he said, were retaliating in unfortunate but understandable ways — like, say, the Oklahoma City bombing.
Right. Let’s leave aside for the moment Sheehan’s response to any suggestion that Muslim bombings are justified by injustices experienced by their co-religionists.
On his return to Australia, he began writing about the then-trendy target of “Asian” crime gangs in the ghetto of Cabramatta — back in the days before Australians developed a taste for laksa and a distaste for Pauline Hanson. But he really came into his own with the Sydney gang rape trials and the Cronulla riots that followed in their wake. If black crime helped to bring about the Oklahoma bombing, then Muslim gang rapes certainly triggered the Cronulla riots — a line he repeated in his report this week. Sheehan of course covered the trials for The Sydney Morning Herald and in his 2006 book Girls Like You.
This book described the long, drawn-out trials of the infamous “K brothers” — brothers described by their defence team as “cultural time bombs”. This was a description that Sheehan was more than happy to endorse. How many more such time bombs lay hidden in our suburbs?
As it turns out, several fewer than Sheehan would have had us believe on Monday.
Fairfax owes a duty of care to its troublesome source. Louise’s lurid allegations would have remained confined to her those in her immediate vicinity had their senior journalist not provided her with a megaphone. She has caused immense damage to the Arab and Muslim communities, to survivors of sexual violence, but most of all to herself. She is now far more vulnerable than she was before Paul Sheehan crossed her path. I hope that any health or welfare professionals who approach Fairfax on her behalf receive an appropriately receptive hearing.
And I hope that Fairfax sees fit to apologise to (and pay compensation to) representatives of the Arab and Muslim communities, to whom Sheehan has failed to apologise.
A hefty donation to support services for survivors of sexual violence would also be in order.

15 thoughts on “Paul Sheehan’s long, uncomfortable history with race reporting”
Dog's Breakfast
February 26, 2016 at 2:35 pmYeah, this was a Sheehan gem.
I was pleased to see his apology, which I did read, as opposed to the original article, which I consciously ignored.
I’m now looking for Sheehan to apologise for the 1000 other incorrect assertions, beat-ups and non-sequiturs that make up the bulk of his journalistic output.
Not. Holding. My. Breath.
Irfan Yusuf
February 26, 2016 at 2:42 pmI much prefer this to some of the victimhood of those who think defending us all from generalised racialised nonsense necessarily involves using buzzwords lifted from the index of Das Kapital. Stick to the facts and leave the victimhood to the ridiculous pseudo-Right.
Bob the builder
February 26, 2016 at 2:46 pmHow does this PVC (pompous, vacuous, c…) have a job? It’s a blot on the mainstream media that he’s still employed.
What a moron.
Jim O'Pines
February 26, 2016 at 2:47 pmHow unfortunate that at a time its quality standards are coming under scrutiny Fairfax’s most excitable hack should decide to perpetrate a journalistic atrocity.
You don’t really need a token right-winger, SMH. ‘The Australian’ doesn’t bother with the appearance of ideological balance anymore, and neither should you, especially now that you’ve decided to become a Gawker-esque clickfarm.
John Newton
February 26, 2016 at 3:14 pmSurely he must be ‘let go’?
Norman Hanscombe
February 26, 2016 at 3:42 pmDog’s Breakfast remains an apt name for his material, but it’s a shame he’s only prepared to ‘courageously’ attack those who don’t accept his muddled fantasies from anonymous Crikey Bunkers, isn’t it.
Irfan Yusuf also is as befuddled as ever, while enjoying the sort of taxpayer funded lifestyles not available in countries spawning those who’d rejoice whenever harm is done in Western Democracies and other States not assisting fundamentalist murderers.
Bob the builder accuses OTHERS of being morons, including people who could be much further along the line from morons to imbeciles than he is. But still don’t deserve that tag. Out of kindness (and regard to his possible ignorance of the actual definitions of these two categories) I recommend he check relevant dictionaries before jumping to the incorrect conclusion that my previous sentence was an insult to him.
Jim O’Pines opines, but I shan’t comment on his opines than one is worth the effort.
John Newton’ hopes make sense for anyone sharing his apparent views — but scant else.
Let’s hope the Crikey Land Censnsorship Team doesn’t delay the much needed help provided above.
Jaybuoy
February 26, 2016 at 9:50 pmI only read his mea culpas..but he is what passes for right wing balance..lazy..
Lingo
February 26, 2016 at 10:07 pmSheehan’s history as a lazy and careless investigator goes back many years. In the days when I read his columns in SMH, whenever he needed an academic source to quote on immigration matters, he wheeled out Bob Birrell from Monash university, who appeared to be his mate. Birrell once had a reputation as a sound researcher and writer, but had seemingly turned into a bit of a one-eyed crank as he got older. Constantly, on immigration, we got from Paul a quick dash through a few lightweight (can I say dodgy?) sources, and a lot of opinion, triumphantly backed by a reference to some stats/conclusions from his pal Bob. I often felt the column was like a conversation between these two angry, jaundiced men, with a sneering disdain for the reader. No other academic in the immigration field ever got a mention in any columns that I read, and there were plenty of fine researchers around through that period, who he could have approached.
klewso
February 27, 2016 at 2:29 amThe trouble with so much of our msm these daze is it’s just so much personal opinion – from very ordinary thinkers, with a weakness for their own facts.
Needlemeyer
February 27, 2016 at 12:47 pmI’d like to know HTF a PVC* of the likes of Paul Sheehan gets a visiting fellowship to such a hallowed institution as Havard? While we’re on the topic, can anyone explain how another PVC of the likes of Professor Ian Plimer, Climate Change denier & all round bullshiterer, continues to hold tenure at the University of SA?
*Thank you, Bob the Builder, for that little gem of a TLA. It is now firmly wedged in my mind’s lexicon and slated for frequent future use.