Asia-Pacific

Apr 27, 2018

Rudd: methodology lets down misguided analysis

Former prime minister Kevin Rudd responds to Fergus Ryan's recent Crikey article.

Kevin Rudd

Former Prime Minister of Australia

I refer to the Crikey article yesterday by Fergus Ryan ("Kevin Rudd thinks he’s still relevant to China-Australia relations"). I presume this is the same Fergus Ryan who used to be a journalist for the Murdoch media. Remarkably, that fact seems not to have been disclosed under his byline in the article posted.

If Ryan, or for that matter Crikey, are interested in a substantive presentation of my views on Turnbull’s mismanagement of the Australia-China relationship, then I suggest they read the full text of my op-ed in The Weekend Australian on February 24 this year.

Free Trial

You've hit members-only content.

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

29 comments

Leave a comment

29 thoughts on “Rudd: methodology lets down misguided analysis

  1. Moving to Paraguay

    It’s good to hear the other side, but I would have liked to read some actual contrary evidence. This seemed most invective.

    1. RL

      Moving To Paraguay is right about the invective, it’s what what KR does.
      What part of “just shut up and go away Kevin” does this man not get.

    2. N.A.F.

      It may have been accompanied by some invective but K-Rudd’s point is right. The article was worthless and ought not have appeared in Crikey.

  2. brian crooks

    well said Mr Rudd, Ryans article is what you expect from the murdoch bottom feeders, they spend their pathetic lives grovelling to the black prince in the vain hope of a pat on the head but like many before them when he`s finished with them they`ll be thrown on the scrap heap, the good thing is old Rupert`s apparently getting close to meeting his maker, when that happens the share holders at news ltd will get rid of the remaining Murdoch clan and clean up the shop to try and regain the middle ground readership they`ve lost from Murdoch extreme right wing bias and only catering for the 40% redneck readership base. in a dwindling market news needs to go for the 50% / 60%intelligent readership that have deserted him .

  3. Adrian

    This does not qualify as an “article” it’s just a letter from Mr Rudd.
    I’d love to hear his opinion more extensively. This just feels like a prickly response rather than a well written article the likes of which I’ve seen from him in the past.

  4. Itsarort

    Yes, when you read Ryan’s article it does feel like one of those pointless, tidbit morsels, simply left to bait and perhaps even encourage mindless, accusatory responses. But no matter how hard self-proclaimed ‘analysts’ like Ryan spin the wheel, Australia’s current public relations with China is like every other single thing that the Liberals have touched in their latest two terms – complete shit. And trying to dredge up old emotions about Kevin Rudd’s supposed personality is, like Brian Crooks wrote, real ‘bottom feeder’ stuff.

  5. Arky

    I mean, I’m no fan of Kevin Rudd and think he needs to stay out of Australian political life for a good long while but he’s objectively completely right about that hatchet job article from Ryan. Wow, Weibo censored stuff which was even mildly related to a controversial topic? You don’t say! How it was meant to prove anything about Rudd I don’t know.

  6. mobi801

    I’m with you, Kevin. I’m disappointed that such a poorly researched article was published by Crikey.

  7. AR

    Nice truncation of Krudd’s usual prolix verbosity – pity about the content.
    “No, you are!” isn’t especially informative.

    1. CML

      Go way, AR.
      The original article was crap…and just plain wrong. Kevin Rudd’s reply was totally justified and based on much better analysis and FACT.
      I repeat to you what I said yesterday to another commentator…when you know as much about Australian/Chinese relations as Rudd, come back and justify your nonsense comments.
      Just because you don’t like Kevin Rudd, is NO reason to doubt his ability to comment correctly on the above relationship.
      All that does is show a very closed mind…and plays the man, not the ball!!

  8. Sweeney Julanne

    Mr Rudd, please check the grammatical error in final sentence. HE is Nominative. The Objective HIM is required after preposition FOR.
    I trust the substantive material is more reliable.

  9. Ben.

    Sorry Kev, but ‘you can’t trust a Murdoch man’ followed by ‘instead read this piece I wrote in a Murdoch rag’, is a bit of a self defeating argument.

  10. 2bobsworth

    Have to agree with Kevin Rudd.
    So many of the Masters aprentices reared on News Corpse political character assassination on demand have migrated to every media organisation,the ABC and Crikey included. Its just a part of the cloned DNA that Rupert has cultivated on three continents over 50 years.
    Why is the press so outrageously toxic, so narrow minded, so shock jock, neo liberal cold war warrior driven , climate poluting, fossil fuel driven and devoted to “alternative facts”.
    Will the departure of Rupert Murdoch mean an end of Australian Murdocracy? Will we see the rapture, where all of the Murdoch clones will just disappear and depart the earth and join Rupert in the front row where he can influence whoever is running the show downstairs?
    We can only hope.

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...