Is Stephen Conroy a patsy? Or is he merely an innocent but accomplished networker who believes in spending time with all the key stakeholders, to borrow a flaccid phrase from modern management, across the communications portfolio?

Boxed in: Conroy's chumminess with media chiefs is half the problem.

I’ll leave those elements of the debate to others. I have no valuable insight into communications policy and am mindful that any opinion ventured would be viewed by cynics as the product of the Murdoch microchip we News Limited drones apparently have implanted in our brains. But I will try to examine the perception that has been created as a result of the $250 million rebate for free to air television, and the role of Conroy and the networks in creating it.

By way of ludicrous understatement, it’s worth noting that it is certainly a spirited debate, and one which underscores Kim Beazley’s conviction that his own tenure in the communications portfolio was time spent in hell.

Conroy faces several circles of hell at the moment. He’s got carriage of the fiscally deranged national broadband scheme, which has so far delivered benefits to Mike Kaiser, and will be fully funded sometime in the 2078-79 budget cycle when the prime minister of the day announces that he’s sold one of his kidneys.

He’s copping it from the twitterazzi – a badge of honour, really – over the censorious implications of the proposed web filter.

And now he’s blundered into a row over his $250m rebate for free-to-air television, which Tony Abbott has explosively likened to a pre-election bribe. Abbott’s remarks have earned him a rebuke from Nine boss David Gyngell, an on-air chip from political editor Laurie Oakes, and that most common of commodities, a gobful from Seven’s mad chief David Leckie, who became so characteristically animated in a separate interview with The Sunday Telegraph last week that he even started denouncing Channel Seven programs.

But if anyone should take responsibility for the perception that the minister is too close to the commercial players in his portfolio, and that the networks are in his pocket, it’s the minister and the CEOs themselves.

The nature and extent of the contact between Conroy and his “key stakeholders” is a powerful demonstration of the utter debasement of relationships in public life, where you are invited somewhere, or invite someone somewhere, not because you particularly like them but because you want them to do something for you.

Steve Conroy appears to live in a corporate box. It’s not that he has to. He chooses to. As other ministers commendably do, Conroy could eliminate any perception of duchessing by only ever scheduling meetings in a traditional office environment. Instead, he’s flitting about at the Grand Prix, sashaying down the slopes with fellow ski bunny Kerry Stokes, going to the AFL and the races with Channels Seven, Nine, and Ten, not to mention Ericsson, Optus, Vodafone, Service Stream, Australia Post and the Football Federation of Australia.

He even accepted a signed Chelsea jersey from Foxtel, which you would hope was a joke to embarrass the guy, shocking team of toffs that they are.

Like a tele-evangelist busted in a whorehouse, Conroy appears to have never paid for it in his life. And it’s a world which he has chosen to plunge into, headfirst, so much so that he almost topped the list of gift disclosures by federal MPs, finishing second behind Greens Senator Bob Brown who was forced to embark on a one-off fundraising drive to avoid bankruptcy through the costs of defamation.

Conroy’s own conduct has left him vulnerable to the type of claims made by Abbott.

As a journalist my sympathies lie with the likes of a great figure such as Laurie Oakes, who is rightly appalled at any suggestion that his reporting would be compromised by an arms-length ministerial decision.

But the issue is that the decision doesn’t look particularly arms-length, in large part because of Conroy’s schmoozing.

The TV chiefs appear kind of relieved that Abbott has entered the fray as it’s given them a chance to wax indignant about the fearlessness of their journalism – which is vastly preferable to their laughable “cultural heritage” argument for the $250 million rebate.

Seriously – can you imagine the devastation which would be visited upon our national identity if programs such as Packed to the Rafters moved offshore?

It’s a particularly silly red herring. And it also sits oddly with the commitment of media companies, through their journalism, to expose government waste and financial mismanagement. If a quarter of a billion bucks fell out of the sky and landed in the lap of any other industry sector, you would expect the media to be all over the story. Instead, the TV bosses are trousering the cash. 

Those who accuse News Limited of sour grapes, and say that Foxtel simply wanted to get its grubby hands on this kind of money, should spend a little more time acquainting themselves with the culture and behaviour of the company.

When the French Government unveiled a General Motors-style bailout for the newspaper industry, as circulations were belted by the rise of online and the tightening of advertising revenue, some newspaper companies in other countries said it wasn’t such a bad idea.

The immediate, instinctive response from News Corporation was that it was a dog of an idea, that any media company which accepted government money would be indebted to that government. And that rightly or wrongly, the readers would regard its journalism as potentially tainted, even if it remained fearless in practice.

Both Conroy and the free to air bosses will continue to argue that this is an absurd and hysterical conspiracy theory. They can make the argument publicly. They can also make it to each other, face to face, over Crownies and sashimi in the glass-fronted booths at ANZ Stadium and Etihad and Albert Park and Flemington and Suncorp, as befits their arms-length relationship.

Most commented

52 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • DaisyMae says:

      06:53am | 20/02/10

      All I ever see is on this website is bias, you have the same mentality Abbott has attack attack attack. The more you come out attack , the more I set my mind to vote for Labor. Keep it in mind Australia has traditionally gone for the underdog. I know others I have spoken to feel the same as me. I have no idea why Mr Rudd commited this money and to be truthful the subject is so boring I don’t care. I pay for Foxtel and never watch Free to Air so it won’t affect me at all.

    • Steve of Cornubia says:

      10:07am | 21/02/10

      Unless you are unemployed then I’m afraid that this latest raid on the national piggy bank WILL affect you, because the $250M was taxpayers’ money and has to be paid back.

      As for setting your mind on a vote for Labour, it’s plain to see that you are biased too, and would never vote for any other party.

    • Paul says:

      10:10am | 21/02/10

      It must be nice to be able to consider a quarter of a billion dollars of public money boring and inconsequential. Perhaps you could lend me a couple of hundred mil before you go back to your Foxtel?

    • Tom says:

      10:38am | 21/02/10

      It’s an opinion piece - not a news story. The point of an opinion piece is, surprise surprise, to express an opinion.

    • Lewy says:

      11:00am | 21/02/10

      You accuse Penberthy and the punch of being Bias? Read your comment, you clearly have no open mind and were never going to vote anywhere but Labor anyway. You literally said the more you see and read about Labors terrible job of running this country, the more you close your eyes and cover your ears.

      If the Liberal party did this when they were in power you would not find the subject boring.

    • Ben says:

      11:20am | 21/02/10

      Brilliant DaisyMae, bury your head in the sand and state you don’t care because it doesn’t affect you. It pains me that people like you are allowed to vote. Of course it affects you, it affects everyone when public money is appropriated without any due diligence. Enjoy being in opposition later this year. Cretin.

    • Evan Findlay says:

      06:16pm | 21/02/10

      Steve of Cornubia, if you want to mount an ill informed attack could you please use the Queens english. It would appear that you were educated during the Howard years. The left wing of Australian politics is referred to as the Austrailan Labor Party, not Labour. One would think with your lack of discipline to detail and your spelling errors it is you that is more likely to be unemployed, or should I say unemployable!

    • Craig says:

      06:39pm | 21/02/10

      Oh, Evan is a little bit sore, being the young labor man that he is….  Too bad that all the rhetoric, spin and crap is no longer being accepted in main-stream Australia, and Kevin will very likely lose the next election….

    • Lewy says:

      08:37pm | 21/02/10

      Evan Findlay, do you mind highlighting which parts of Steve’s post was ill informed? Seems like your just playing the man.

    • Jack Thomas says:

      09:01am | 22/02/10

      If you think there is nothing wrong with the Minister snowboarding at a guest of the owner of Channel 7 then handing him a $250 million taxpayer freebie, then you’re silly enough to think there is nothing in him playing regular rounds of golf with Jamie Packer on a private course,

      Conflict of interest, no personal gain at the expense of the taxpayer or national interests, bribery - were these words part of Kevin 07’s holier than thou MP’s code of ethics he so hypocritically trumpeted.

      The old school Labor figures must be shaking their heads tutting at Conroy, a real Union background would mean he would know how to pocket the bribes without gettting busted. Unions are old hands at getting their hands very dirty financially, I have seen corporate boxes at the Grand Prix that look like an ACTU meeting.

      Richo, Hawkey, Brian Burke, David White (Victoria), in fact name any senior ex Victorian Labor Minister and you could be listing the blokes immediately below the BRW Top 200 rich list.

      TC, Abbott having a meeting with Murdoch is a long long way from staying in his multi million dollar ski lodge, having a $20,000+ snowboarding holiday then handing him a $250 m handout. Abbott’s sense of irony (in his comment) is lost on you, then again your sense of balance is so far off I can see why. Funny that Abbott was happy to talk about it, yet Conroy is running for cover. 

      Same with Rudd staying with Kerry Stokes in Broome, why doesn’t the media talk that one up too? Lots of bias and mates in the media I guess.

      Pretty obvious scam in an election year to get the biggest Aussie media baron on your side with a $250 m handout. 

      Why no mention of the fact that the boss of Free TV who negiotiated this bung is Kevin 07’s old boss, ex Labor Premier and mate Wayne Goss? Again, bias and mates in the media will help smooth that one, the punters don’t need to know.

      It would all be funny, if not for the fact that this muppet is handling the $42 million NBN and the potential growth (through IT, media etc) in his sweaty greasy money grubbing hands…and the fact that it’s our money they are p!ssing away.

      TC, Daisy Mae, you guys seem happy to allow this, oblivious to the facts.

    • George says:

      10:36am | 22/02/10

      “I pay for Foxtel and never watch Free to Air so it won’t affect me at all. “

      Well I doubt much affects you, except maybe the tax on alcopops and the baby bonus.

    • Charles Kelly says:

      11:38am | 22/02/10

      Ummmm, actually Evan Findlay, it’s NOT the “Queens english” as you ignorantly bleated, it’s the “Queen’s English”. Evidently you’re the product of a Labor indoctrinated public school system. How sad.

    • T.Chong says:

      06:57am | 20/02/10

      Dont worry Dave P. Abbott is also palling around with media CEOs, in fact he had a very little publicised meeting with Rupert (about the same time the LNP was criticising Conroy for doing the same with 7 & 9 execs).
      Embarrsing is the only way to describe Abbotts ” I hope he liked me” meeting with the Big R.
      A pox upon both parties as they try to seek favor with the msm.
      Gives a very troubling nuance to “All hail to the chief” (media CEO)

    • Monty says:

      07:52am | 20/02/10

      David

      Good piece, objective and unbiased. The fact that you have looked at the Minister and analysed / researched your theory of Steve’s decision making is commendable and sheds a light squarely on the minister. I hope other Journos can follow your lead, it’s about holding any incumbent governments to account rather than trivial biased mudslinging. Facts make the best reporting and let’s hope you continue down this path.

    • Adam Diver says:

      08:01am | 20/02/10

      I seen that Laurie Oakes attack on Tony Abbott. That was very weak on the part of nine and completely unnecessary. To ask him on the 6pm news if he can be bought it was like a damn infomercial.

    • Ben G says:

      12:21pm | 22/02/10

      Besides that: Laurie Oakes attacking the leader of the Opposition at the behest of Channel 9, just after they got the money.
      Perhaps he can’t be bought, but he can do a pretty good impression of someone being bought.

    • Jack Thomas says:

      09:49pm | 22/02/10

      I haven’t seen Laurie Oakes attack like that since someone pinched food from him…

      Is it true his Labor bias is due to one of their Canberra based spin doctors being a “chubby chaser”?

    • Rohan says:

      08:04am | 20/02/10

      Tony Abbott has “met with Rupert Murdoch”. Rudd not happy.

    • Steve of Cornubia says:

      08:21am | 20/02/10

      Abbott’s statement, that the $250M ‘looks like a bribe’ is exactly right. He didn’t go so far as to say it IS a bribe, but that it smells like one. Once again, Abbott is in tune with public opinion.

      Predictably however, Rudd and his media mates are choosing to misrepresent Abbott and instead say that he ACCUSED them of bribery. Semantics maybe, but legally correct nevertheless.

    • Evan Findlay says:

      06:19pm | 21/02/10

      Abbott was having lunch with his right wing mate Murdoch, but that would seem alright by your standards. Whats good for the goose.

    • Louise says:

      08:14am | 22/02/10

      Evan, the issue is not that politicians have a relationship with the owners of media organisations, these people are amongst the richest in Australia.  With that money comes power and influence, it is right that policiations have some form of relationship with these organisations given the millions of dollars of revenue etc they generate and their capacity to influcence public debate and policy.  The issue is how these relationships are managed by the politician’s that is the issue. Conroy’s relationship with these media organisations is clearly in the realm of the increasingly social and as such it gives the appearance (whether or not it exists) of bias.  Secondly the fact that $250m of public money was granted without a clear and defendable and transparent public policy decision is an indictment.  Making up the the public policy reasoning after the fact is not good governance.

    • steve says:

      08:42am | 20/02/10

      As I say many times “Don’t Blame me, I didn’t vote for the silly bastards” but to all those who did, you got what you voted for,

      By the way Pembo I can only suspect who you voted for? not

    • joe says:

      10:03am | 20/02/10

      What does one have to do to be kicked out of a job in the Labor party (and not handed continually better jobs?)

      Firstly there is Peter Garret who I think Rudd wants to wear as much of the public flack over the bungled insulation scheme that he can so that Rudd is not further tarnished.

      Then there is Mike Kaiser. Kaiser was forced to resign as a state MP when he was sprung in in a 1986 Labor Party branch stacking exercise by the Shepherdson Inquiry. It was his signature on falsified electoral enrollment forms in 1986! This is very serious stuff. And what does Labor do? Give him even better jobs. Iemma’s office, Bligh’s office now this NBN job. Can he be trusted to not further forge documents? Labor has a real stink to it.

    • robynne morton says:

      10:08am | 21/02/10

      nothing,they keep all their crooks ....

    • Iva Tarbell says:

      12:48pm | 20/02/10

      If it looks like a bribe and smells like a bribe, it’s probably just the Labor party handing out free (taxpayer’s) money to get re-elected.

    • Andrew says:

      01:20pm | 20/02/10

      Is the Rudd Government so stupid that giving these guys a $250 million handout in an election year is not going to look suspicious? Also Conroy skiing or snow boarding with Stokes just before the announcement? The Rudd Government seem to be so over confident that they just can’t put a step wrong and they seem to believe that they can get away with anything. Conroy giving his Labor mate a plum job without asking for any other applicants? In the past they’ve had no opposition and a media who only keep the spot light on the opposition and away from the Rudd Government, well haven’t things changed. Rudd wasn’t expecting an opposition that could hold them to account and to expose them, nor a media who have finally woken up to the fact they have let Rudd get away on them. Thanks to Abbott and the voter back lash at the media for being so biased in their support for a phoney PM. (as Turnbull always called him).

    • Matthew says:

      01:25pm | 20/02/10

      $45,000,000,000 of our money to build a network that should have been built by Telstra’s competition, but didn’t, because for all there cries, never wanted to invest in Australia because it was too easy to ride the coat tails of Telstra.

      $250,000,000 of our money to Free-to-air TV networks in an election year to protect Australian content without any such clauses.

      $45,000,000,000 of our money to build a network without any cost/benefit analysis, nor any idea how much it will cost the consumer to access.

      And to top it off, mocks and belittles constituents by making faces on a radio interview while being asked questions by said people.  But only seen on a short on the 7pm project ... $250,000,000 already well spent hey Conman.

    • Julia says:

      01:41pm | 20/02/10

      Maybe Conroy never heard the expression that perception is everything in politics.

    • anon says:

      12:09am | 21/02/10

      Just when we thought before the election, Conroy was meant to be a saviour to our Technology woes. Instead he’s become the worst villian…

      NBN has not started, he’s introduced a filter no one wants and now we know he’s been getting gifts. We feel betrayed by Conroy.

      And he’s meant to be concerned about consumer complaints against the telcos. And look he’s being sponsored by Optus and Vodafone. Their complaints may not be as large as Telstras, but it’s still damning.

      Which makes me wonder why he setup ACCAN in the first place?

      ACCAN’s recent announcement was SMS rip-offs. Thats not much of an argument. Any telco’s can argue that part of the SMS cost is the cost of labour in Australia, and the wider dispersion of populations means that there needs to be more cell towers…etc

      How is Conroy representing Australians? He’s not.

      Conroy’s effectiveness is just woeful. It would have been much better had he done nothing.

    • Luke says:

      07:30am | 21/02/10

      It’s so good of Rudds ministers to all take the flack for their problems when Rudd himself stays in the clear. I would think Rudd being the PM, would be behind all these issues and so far he seems “insulated”. Nothing in the Government goes ahead without first going by the PMs office, this has been well documented in the past. Kevin stop trying to pretend these issues have nothing to do with you and take some responsibility, you obviously knew about and agreed to Conroys decision to employ your Labor mate Kaiser, I’m sure you knew Conroy went off on a skiing holiday with Stokes in the US just before the announcement of a $250 million handout, you agrred to roll out the huge insulation program as fast as possible without adhereing to the advice given to you and your minister. Or are you trying to say that these decisions were all made without your input and knowledge? I doubt that very much. C’mon Rudd be a man and face the music.

    • John A Neve says:

      08:44am | 21/02/10

      We all have a level of guilt regarding comunications. The people voted for this and the previous government.

      The worst two decisions the Howard government made in it’s 12 years, was to take Australia to war and sell off Telstra. We, the people want along with both decisions!!!

      This country will never have a top rate communications network until we have a government owned and run system. Private enterprise is about money, not people.

    • ant says:

      09:48am | 21/02/10

      Conroy is a wind-up doll. Rudd winds the key, points him in whatever direction and off he goes. The filter is a tool for the government to control information on the internet, with a cloak draped over it to make it look like it’s about protecting children (it won’t).

      Communications policy has for some time been made by the main players in the industry, they pretty-much inform the department’s policy formulation and what the government decides to do.  Evidently this has become so normalised that Conroy forgot to hide it.

    • Peter says:

      01:56pm | 21/02/10

      Conroy is only following his predecessor Grahame Richardson.

      Prepare yourself for a swan job in the Media when you get the flick.

    • Socrates says:

      05:15pm | 21/02/10

      It’s very doubtful if the superheroes Kruddman and his sidekick Conboy are as smart as “whatever it takes” Richo, though they both have a certain level of rat cunning.

      It would be interesting to know if there is any connection between the hospitality given to K and C, and the loopy decision to impose secret government censorship on the Internet.

      Contrary to what Kruddman and Conboy claim, their filter will do nothing to end child porn, but it could be very handy for blocking bit torrent downloading to please the content multinationals.  And of course the filter would be perfect for any pollies who might want to secretly block opposing political views.

    • Chase Stevens says:

      09:49pm | 21/02/10

      Socrates one of the major flaws of the filter is it is incapable of blocking BitTorret downloads.  It’s a flaw because this is one of the biggest ways to share and distribute child porn.

    • E says:

      07:03pm | 21/02/10

      Whoever you vote for, a politician gets in.

      Psychopaths gain satisfaction through antisocial behavior, and do not experience shame, guilt, or remorse for their actions.

      Psychopaths lack a sense of guilt or remorse for any harm they may have caused others, instead rationalizing the behavior, blaming someone else, or denying it outright.
      Psychopaths also lack empathy towards others in general, resulting in tactlessness, insensitivity, and contemptuousness.

      All of this belies their tendency to make a good, likable first impression. Psychopaths have a superficial charm about them, enabled by a willingness to say anything without concern for accuracy or truth.

      Shallow affect also describes the psychopath’s tendency for genuine emotion to be short lived and egocentric with an overall cold demeanor.

      Their behavior is impulsive and irresponsible, often failing to keep a job or defaulting on debts.

      Psychopaths also have a markedly distorted sense of the potential consequences of their actions, not only for others, but also for themselves.

      They do not, for example, deeply recognize the risk of being caught, disbelieved or injured as a result of their behaviour.

      Sound like anyone we know?

    • Nicki says:

      07:28pm | 21/02/10

      You must be one of Murdoch journalists.

    • hellohello says:

      09:45pm | 21/02/10

      We all know News Limited and The Australian are bias and so are you..this is a yawn

    • Louise says:

      08:49am | 22/02/10

      Do you remember The Australian’s coverage of the last Federal election?  The total fawing that occured over Rudd in the pages of the Australian during that campaign demonstrated a pro-Rudd bias that went a good way to helping get him elected. This government is rightly deserving of criticism and it has taken journalists a long while to shake off the swallowing of the governments spin and start examining how this government is governing the country.  There has been gross mismanagement of billions of dollars.  You cannot surely be suggesting that because an article is critical that it is biased?  The criticism is the majority of instances is well deserved.

    • Jojo says:

      06:44am | 22/02/10

      Conroy is just the fall guy for the latest round of compromises made to the networks to keep them happy.  Anyone remember datacasting?  What a success that was.

    • Gary Cox says:

      08:28am | 22/02/10

      It was an interesting coincidence that channel 7 made that apology thing to Mike Rann pretty much the day after the announcement. Just in the nick of time for the SA election campaign too.

    • Andrew says:

      08:39am | 22/02/10

      Stephen Conroy is a power freak who thinks he is on a free ride in politics. Well, Stephen, I have news for you. Let your constituents decide what’s more important. Going skiing with the wealthy, and wrangling deals? Or making sure your constituents can survive money wise each week. Can all your constituents feed their kids? Have you ever bother to ask? Of course you haven’t.

    • Phil says:

      10:04am | 22/02/10

      Andrew

      With labor its always do as I say not as I do.

      As has been said many times prior -

      If it smells like sh1t, looks like sh1t, tastes like sh1t, then it probably is sh1t.

      For decades they have been the party of crooked deals, always have always will. They get corrupted by power and want more. They may be delusional to think that the owners/managers of corporations actually like them when in fact they are just being used for personal benefit.

      If they could actually tell us what the money is for, other than as a form of bribe to the bottom line, then maybe you could look at it.

      If we were well and truely in the black, ditto.

      But we have a deficit that the PM wants to break a major election promise on (private health insurance rebate) and yet they can hand out our money like its just being printed rather than earned.

    • Phil says:

      10:11am | 22/02/10

      David - Probably the best heading for an article on the punch yet.

      And so true. They have their noses in the pie once more.

      Good to see the punch finally holding labor to account.

    • Alex Megas says:

      11:21am | 22/02/10

      I hope that News Limited is exposed for its bias.  It has been anti-Rudd from the first day…  Has anyone ever watched FOX NEWS? If the 250 million stop Rupert from putting the AFL, NRL and the Cricket exclusively on pay TV…. I am all for it. Where was the outcry when the Howard government did the same, and actually gave more from memory?

    • Brad Coward says:

      11:34am | 22/02/10

      Lawrie Oakes was angry, and rightly so !  You simply cannot buy favourable comment from the man.  He is always going to swing for Labor, for free, regardless which party is governing.

    • CSallen says:

      11:47am | 22/02/10

      Stephen Conroy insists that the $250 million was supposed to ensure that TV stations would include more Australian content, but did not put any minimum amounts free to air stations have to air. The TV stations are under the opinion that the money is supposed to be spend easing the transition from Analogue to Digital broadcast.
      (http://www.abc.net.au/rn/breakfast/stories/2010/2824234.htm)
      Why has the payment been agreed upon when the involved parties aren’t even sure what it’s for? It all sounds a bit dodgy to me.

    • Phil says:

      12:04pm | 22/02/10

      CS Perhaps this was bought up at the table of knowledge

    • E says:

      04:20pm | 22/02/10

      Being mates with Conroy is a profitable exercise

    • Phil says:

      04:30pm | 22/02/10

      Could you imagine the Libs giving money of this calibre to one of their mates. The uproar would wake the dead. This is hypocracy.

    • club matt says:

      06:16pm | 22/02/10

      Isn’t it ironic. It’s 7pm in metro melbourne and there’s nothing on (free-to-air) TV. It’s all crap. 7 crap. 9 crap. 10 crap. Hence the reason I am on The Punch. Geeze $250,000,000 is a lot of money when you put all the zeros in front. I’m just staring at all those zeros now. Instead of watching TV. Which is, by the way, crap.

    • Shelley says:

      06:46pm | 22/02/10

      Cop an eyeful of Conroy on Insiders 21/2/10. He as good as said journalists should shut up about this being a bribe and not report him ‘meeting’ outside office hours or at resort locations because ...they too buy him coffee and dinner!

      I reckon Conroy needs to keep his snout out of the freebie trough and use his extensive expense account and salary to pay his own blasted way!

      At least if he picks up his own blasted tab and does government business in a business like manner journalists will not confuse the nature of the business with bribery . They’ll be able to report his latest golf day out or snow-bunny adventure without fear of you too bribe me! accusations!

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

@stilgherrian said Australia

Paul Colgan

RT @TheEconomist: Google is coming under intense scrutiny from regulators http://t.co/4bfvNp5oyEhttp://t.co/NLV9yRSIKr

Paul Colgan

@mpesce make sure you let us know when you take the covers off it

Paul Colgan

RT @PSyvret: As if anyone needs reminding of the bigoted pond-scum out there, this arrived in my in-box this morning: http://t.co/Lfu5ntmq

Recent posts

The latest and greatest

The Punch is moving house

The Punch is moving house

Good morning Punchers. After four years of excellent fun and great conversation, this is the final post…

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

Will Pope Francis have the vision to tackle this?

I have had some close calls, one that involved what looked to me like an AK47 pointed my way, followed…

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

Advocating risk management is not “victim blaming”

In a world in which there are still people who subscribe to the vile notion that certain victims of sexual…

Nosebleed Section

choice ringside rantings

From: Hasbro, go straight to gaol, do not pass go

Tim says:

They should update other things in the game too. Instead of a get out of jail free card, they should have a Dodgy Lawyer card that not only gets you out of jail straight away but also gives you a fat payout in compensation for daring to arrest you in the first place. Instead of getting a hotel when you… [read more]

From: A guide to summer festivals especially if you wouldn’t go

Kel says:

If you want a festival for older people or for families alike, get amongst the respectable punters at Bluesfest. A truly amazing festival experience to be had of ALL AGES. And all the young "festivalgoers" usually write themselves off on the first night, only to never hear from them again the rest of… [read more]

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Superman needs saving

Superman needs saving

Can somebody please save Superman? He seems to be going through a bit of a crisis. Eighteen months ago,… Read more

28 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free News.com.au newsletter