On defending disagreement

Roger Clifton writes: Re. “In defence of disagreement: how outrage bait is undermining public discourse” (Monday)

It may be that it is editorial policy that insists on misreading the message.

On Lateline (2015/11/30) Professor David Karoly was seen to promise that any reduction in the rate of emissions would result in a proportionate reduction in global average temperature. What he certainly meant was that a hypothetical (and unachievable) reduction in greenhouse concentrations would theoretically result in a reduction in temperature. A contrivance of interviewing and editing, this message is a direct contradiction of what the gentle professor teaches. Only a net-zero emission rate can stabilise the worsening average temperature, and nothing humans can do can reduce it.

On Michael McCormack

Christopher Hector writes: Re. “A quick primer on Michael McCormack, the man you’ve never heard of who just became Deputy PM” (Monday)

Why in all this has no-one mentioned Bridget McKenzie’s stellar performance in her interview with Fran Kelly on Insiders? Lucid, warm, articulate, all the things her male colleagues are not. And why not have a leader in the Senate? Right now that’s where the action is, and a good chance for her to up the profile.

Peter Fray

Get your first 12 weeks of Crikey for $12.

Without subscribers, Crikey can’t do what it does. Fortunately, our support base is growing.

Every day, Crikey aims to bring new and challenging insights into politics, business, national affairs, media and society. We lift up the rocks that other news media largely ignore. Without your support, more of those rocks – and the secrets beneath them — will remain lodged in the dirt.

Join today and get your first 12 weeks of Crikey for just $12.


Peter Fray
Editor-in-chief of Crikey