We’re a bit squiffy about media outlets paying for stories in this country. Unlike in the UK, where any single mum with a third nipple can get a pay cheque from a newspaper, here we like our paid media appearances to be reserved for heroes or, at least, worthy folk.

Will you be watching? Picture of Gordon Wood: Craig Greenhill

No one begrudged the huge sums paid to Brant Webb and Todd Russell, who spent two weeks trapped down the Beaconsfield mine. They’d earned one of the biggest media cheques ever.

But going to air this Sunday night is a paid-for 60 Minutes interview with Gordon Wood, whose conviction for the murder of his girlfriend Caroline Byrne was recently quashed on appeal.

It’s such murky territory.

The beautiful and beloved Caroline Byrne was just 24 in 1995 when her body was found at the bottom of the cliff at the infamous Sydney suicide spot The Gap.

Wood’s trial was a festival of Sydney colour, with evidence given by deportment maven June Dally-Watkins (Caroline’s employer), and vivid tales of the exploits of the late-Rene Rivkin’s posse of young hangers-on (of which Wood was a member).

Everyone in the city had a strong opinion one way or another on Wood’s guilt or innocence.

Wood was convicted of throwing Caroline off The Gap and spent more than three years in jail for her murder, until this past February when the Court of Criminal Appeal overturned his conviction.

Her father is devastated.

Tony Byrne, 76, is convinced his daughter did not commit suicide. His main complaint against Nine, and its sister magazine the Women’s Weekly, which also paid Wood, appears to be that they weren’t clear with him about their plans.

He sent Nine a list of 12 questions he thinks Wood needed to answer, and this week told The Daily Telegraph:

“I said the reason I’m sending you this is because I wouldn’t want (Mr) Wood to be given money for what he has done and I hope you would not be doing anything with him and he said ‘no, we haven’t got anything planned with Gordon Wood’.”

Former NSW Attorney-General John Hatzistergos took to Twitter, saying: “The reckless indifference of channel 9 to the suffering of the Byrne family is demonstrated by the reported paid interview with Gordon Wood.”

Mr Byrne’s upset is totally understandable. It’s difficult to imagine what his life has been like for the past decade and a half.

But that’s not necessarily a good reason for others to attack Nine’s decision to pay for and run the interview.

The bottom line is Gordon Wood maintains he did not kill Caroline Byrne, and the Court of Criminal Appeal found there wasn’t sufficient evidence to prove otherwise.

According to the law he’s done nothing wrong and spent three years in jail for no good reason. On the face of it, that’s a terrible thing to happen to someone.

But there’ll be plenty of people who haven’t had their minds changed by the appeal result. For them it will look like Nine is paying hundreds of thousands of dollars to someone who seriously doesn’t deserve it.

Wood is no Stuart Diver, who was paid $250,000 for his story about surviving the Thredbo landslide.

He’s more of a Lindy Chamberlain, who all the way back in 1985 Nine paid $250,000 for exclusive rights to her story.

Chequebook journalism at the best of times can look a bit like dirty pool. This example looks particularly grubby, especially in the face of Mr Byrne’s upset. But it’s no worse than any other examples.

Let’s hope the interview is a good one.

Most commented

55 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Nathan says:

      05:51am | 26/04/12

      I get why Tony Byrne is upset over the pay day but at the end of the day the guy has been cleared so how are you going to stop it? If people think this is wrong then complain to 60minutes they are the one writing the cheques and the only reason they write them is because the public watches their show.

    • alank says:

      01:11pm | 26/04/12

      Wrong Nathan - “the public watches their show”?  Certain demographics watch 60 Minutes.  This and the other piles of journalistic fecal matter on the tabloid channels are not watched by discerning indiviuals.  These shows are fronted by egotists who think they ARE the news, pandering to lowest-common-denominator intellects - ie. NOT Punch readers generally.
      I admire, say Tracey Grimshaw for her superb hatchet job on the Rugby thug last year whose name escapes me, but she would be careful to call herself a “journalist” while fronting ACA - or is it the other one?  She is better than this, but lets face it, to be paid more than the PM to front lost dog stories, feuding neighbour scraps and dodgy insurance scams is just too attractive to resist.
      Same applies to say Kochie - smart man, loves the money too much to be a real journalist.  I always remember him and his interfering crew just about licking the arses of the Beaconsfield miners in order to get a scoop after their miraculous escape.  Gutter stuff.  Yes the ABC and SBS were there, but its the “way” the tabloids do things…
      As for Mr Wood, the law of our land sees him as not guilty - leave him alone.  Personal opinions matter not one whit.

    • Tracker says:

      04:31pm | 26/04/12

      I read The Punch so why would I waste time watching 40 minutes of garbage and 20 minutes of ads ?

      If I want my tabloid stuff we get enough of it on news.com.au (now I will never get anything posted on news.com.au..lol)  grin

    • rayjaymor says:

      09:15pm | 26/04/12

      “Certain demographics watch 60 Minutes. ” and those certain demographics are members of “the public”.

      Nathan is dead right on that statement.

    • James Ricketson says:

      07:04am | 26/04/12

      We in the media (including documentary filmmakers such as myself) make a living out of telling other people’s stories - be they heart-warming stories of heroism or sordid tales of corruption. It is hard to mount a logical argument as to why we can make a living out of other people’s stories and they can’t. By the same token, paying for stories leaves open the very real possibility that stories will be made up or manipulated to cater for the public’s voracious appetite for both the heroic and the sensationally sordid. Tricky ethical territory!

    • Peter says:

      09:01am | 26/04/12

      Self-aggrandisement at its best - documentary filmmaker!!! Probably shooting weddings on VHS. Poseur.
      back on point - 60 Minutes is shite that people have wised up to. The typical show is tabloid shock horror, a soft interview with a celeb flogging a movie or a book and then a story from US 60 Minutes.
      Lazy self-indulgent crap masqueradng as serious journalism. Ha.
      7.30 last night ... gee we were sitting around the table with friends, eating a nice piece of beef I did on the bbq and listening to music. that’s entertainment. At least more people are showing indifference to tv nowadays. Even everyone getting excited about the voice should remember that 90% of Australians ARE NOT watching it.

    • centurion48 says:

      09:27am | 26/04/12

      Made up stories on 60 Minutes? Say it ain’t so!!! Both 60 Minutes and ACA - and probably other ‘current affairs programs’ on commercial networks - stretch the small kernels of truth into fantastic stories that appeal to people whose lives are so boring they need to escape to somewhere else. They are pap and crap.
      I long for the return of real journalism, especially investigative journalism, that Australia used to be capable of but now only seems to come from a few sources such as BBC, PBS, Al Jazeera. In Australia, a press release from a politician is reported as news. So sad.
      As far as paying for stories, I would be happy for even guilty people to be paid if it made the difference in getting to the truth of why they did what they did so it could be prevented from happening again. Just don’t sensationalise it. As they used to say on Dragnet, “Just the facts”.

    • James Ricketson says:

      09:44am | 26/04/12

      @ Peter
      “Probably shooting weddings on VHS. Poseur.” I’m a bit slow on the uptake this morning so am not sure what the VHS comment is in reference to. Hypothetical for you, Peter: You are filming in a third world country in which the subjects of your story are so poor that they cannot afford to eat. Do you give them some money for food? ie do you engage in what could be referred to as ‘cheque-book journalism’?

      I agree about 60 Minutes and other current affairs shows, incidentally. However, I do not think that the ‘cheque-book journalism’ question is quite as cut and dried as public discourse often makes out.

    • Pointen Shoot says:

      10:40am | 26/04/12

      ” Hypothetical for you, Peter: You are filming in a third world country in which the subjects of your story are so poor that they cannot afford to eat. Do you give them some money for food? ie do you engage in what could be referred to as ‘cheque-book journalism’?”
      After you get the shot.

      Rhetorical question, if people who are so poor that they cannot afford to eat found out you were handing out a bit of money if they could recite a story you might like to film, do you verify their story before using it?

    • James Ricketson says:

      10:57am | 26/04/12

      Pointen Shoot, if a family makes its living in (and lives in) a rubbish dump and if the kids are showing obvious signs of malnutrition, no verification of the fact that they are incredibly poor is necessary.The same applies to famine areas and others suffering from a crisis caused by a natural disaster. Documentary filmmakers, journalists, current affairs programs, any and everybody in the media can and do make their living, in part, at times, from other people’s tragedies and hardship. As I said at the outset, tricky ethical territory.

    • Susan says:

      11:52am | 26/04/12

      True James….and the same happens in say the ethnographic research field. In the U.S. it’s been popular to pay people for research or to at least give them vouchers for fast food/coffee etc. In poorer areas researchers therefore have to be really wary of people lining up a second time and so on.  My concern is that these participants have no particular interest in the research and in truth telling (necessarily) and they may tend to say what they want the researcher to hear.  As a senior researcher myself (don’t attack me Peter, please! smile) I also know what most surveys are aiming to find out and I tend to pre-empt and try and cut to the chase.

      But, there is another argument about paying people for their time. I guess I try and consider ‘who benefits’. If, in telling their story and having you capture it, that person may improve their lives or that of their family or community, then they have a vested longer term interest and benefits may flow in.  There’s a fine line between simply shooting a documentary and ‘advocacy’ which I’m sure you would recognise.

      The current issue re Woods is such a grey area for me but based on fact, he deserves to be paid IF he has been declared innocent and IF the program generally pays people to be on the show.  To suggest he not be paid seems more of an issue of deeming him guilty - and I don’t think you can go there Tory in all good conscience.

      I noticed a comment James about paying a destitute family. I see your point but I wonder…if you enter a slum….and you look around for a family to select (and you intend to pay them)...by the heavens..what a god-like hand is being waved.  If you choose ONE family to give extra to…what happens to those around them in such a scenario?  What happens to the family with the kids who are not quite as photogenic as the one next door?  For some reason I’m reminded of Madonna adopting and her rationale focusing on ‘saving a family’. Her money could have left the child with the family and saved a whole community.

      So, will you pay the one family James or use more of your limited budget and pay for one hot meal for the whole neighbourhood?

      I have no right or wrong answers…I just wonder.

    • James Ricketson says:

      12:12pm | 26/04/12

      Susan, you are right. It is very very complex and there is no space here to do justice to the complexity. For the most part, in what I do, I do not ‘choose’ my ‘subjects’. They tend to choose me. My experiences are with people I have known for many years, in one case 17 years, and my experiences recording are now inextricably bound up with my personal involvement with those whose lives I have been following. If you are interested to know more, here’s my email address: jamesricketson@gmail.com

      I will probably write a piece about it one day. Indeed, a book

    • Tracker says:

      04:43pm | 26/04/12

      From time to time I see this thing on Discovery Science about a manufacturer in India who installed gearing in their rickshaws to make it easier for the rickshaw driver to do his work carting people around. They use an old man who daily takes school kids in his non-geared rickshaw to school and they make a comment about how he will never be able to afford one. One of the journo’s even gets to take his rickshaw for a spin.

      My thought whenever I see this is what a pathetic bunch of journo’s.. why don’t they friggen buy the old man one as thanks for using him on this topic. The price of a geared rickshaw is quite small to us in the First World and would be small change considering the cost of getting their crew over to India.

      Journo’s are so tight you have to commit a crime (or be accused of one) to get a dollar out of these tight a$$holes is what I think.

    • S.L says:

      07:27am | 26/04/12

      I don’t watch TDT or ACA because of the pathetic stories they both show. But I also find very ordinary Z grade celebrities shopping around their wedding, divorce or baby stories to the highest bidder (if there are any bidders at all?).
      On the other side of the fence there are people out there who will watch or read these stories so I can’t see an end to it…............

    • Jim says:

      07:42am | 26/04/12

      60 Minutes used to be the show that everyone set aside an hour each Sunday night for. It used to be serious current affairs.

      But then sensationalised promos and stories started creeping into the show in the early 00’s (Dam of Death, anyone?), and it has deteriorated now to the point where it’s starting to make Today Tonight look legitimate.

      Is Wood innocent because he didn’t do it? Or is he innocent simply because someone didn’t seal a plastic bag, or filled out a report with a typo or some other bullshit?

      Either way, a young girl died and her family is being pulled through the wringers again while the accused gets a big payday.

    • Sloan says:

      08:07am | 26/04/12

      “Either way, a young girl died and her family is being pulled through the wringers again while the accused gets a big payday.”

      I think what you meant to say was the aquitted.

    • Bev says:

      08:14am | 26/04/12

      He has been exonerated and has just as much right to give his side of the story as anyone else despite what we think of him.  Going to jail for three years is not exactly a bed of roses either.

    • TEZZA says:

      11:12am | 26/04/12

      It was a travesty that Gordon Wood was convicted in the first place. All I knew about the case is what I read in newspaper reports of the trial, but there was definitely something overblown about the forensic evidence.

      I’m not a physicist but I found it inherently unbelievable that the expert could rule out the possibility that a fit young woman would be able to launch herself from a rock ledge and reach a similar point to which a limp body could be thrown. Plus, the way in which the “expert” was so emotionally wedded to his theory of how it happened that he would write a polemic about it and run around trying to convince people of the correctness of his view.

      I predicted that the conviction would be overturned. I was right.

    • Jim says:

      11:33am | 26/04/12

      No Sloan, I meant accused as I was talking in terms of what the family is thinking. No court ruling on the planet will change what they think.

      Anyway, the main gist of what I was saying is about how far 60 Minutes (well, ALL Australian media, really) has fallen into the sensationalised tabloid basket.

    • Sniper says:

      11:48am | 26/04/12

      Good for you tezza, pat yourself on the back and tell the world about it.

    • Judy says:

      07:50am | 26/04/12

      The argument that Gordon Wood shouldn’t be paid implies that he’s guilty. If that’s the case, are we suggesting that the media are more capable of judging someone’s guilt or innocence than a court of law?

      Just because we don’t like a court’s decision doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t accept it, difficult as it may sometimes be when we have vested emotional interests in the outcome.

    • Rodney says:

      11:15am | 26/04/12

      Well said.

      To address the title of this article, there’s more than one person working in the media who I don’t think should be employed in their position at all. But since they are, they should be paid. Likewise, if a journalist decides to pay someone for their story, that’s really between the journalist and the person with the story.

      The exception is when the person is a convicted criminal who is being paid to tell the story of his or her crimes. In that case, I think the criminal shouldn’t benefit financially, and any journalist who offers the criminal money for it should be punished (journalists who offer money to a charity or the criminal’s victims for the story are in a different situation).

      That said, whatever you might think of him, the law says that Mr Wood is not currently a convicted criminal. Unless that situation changes, I see nothing wrong with channel 9 paying him for his story. If it should turn out that Mr Wood is proven guilty of that crime, then the payment should be confiscated as a proceed of crime.

    • master says:

      08:12am | 26/04/12

      it is certain that 90% of punch columnists should not be paid for the trash they write.

    • wantok says:

      08:13am | 26/04/12

      There is now a lucrative business in selling celebrity and the smart operators ( read Kardashian family, Warne & Hurley ) never allow a photo or a doorstep comment without money being paid, even now anybody with a Twitter following can get paid for spruiking Kangaroo Island: go figure.
      Ultimately we pay, that’s how capitalism works

    • gen-y says:

      09:16am | 26/04/12

      criminals shouldn’t be paid for stories ...

    • Really?!? says:

      09:37am | 26/04/12

      his not a criminal, he was exonerated which makes him not guilty…

    • gen-y says:

      01:15pm | 26/04/12

      not saying specifically just in general

    • Jim says:

      02:37pm | 26/04/12

      Yes, yes, Really?!? - exonerated which makes him not guilty…

      Not guilty does not necessarily mean innocent, it just means the defense team were more convincing on the day.

      Our court system is a disgrace; murderers can get out after anywhere between 3 and 10 years…you get 25 for attemted armed robbery in the US! Pedophiles can be released with new identities, they can work with kids and live next door to primary schools and the courts protect them.

      Wood may be ‘not guilty’ like you say, but as for innocence…only one person alive knows that, and he’s about to twist the knife into a grieving family with the help of channel 9.

    • Really?!? says:

      02:52pm | 26/04/12

      @Jim, this country has a thing called innocent until proven guilty, and as he was found not guilty that would make him innocent.

      I do agree that in this country when you are found guilty the punishment doesn’t match the crime

    • Really?!? says:

      03:06pm | 26/04/12

      Also from a legal point he is innocent, but personally he looks like a sleazy douche, but that’s not relevant as it is simply a personal point of view

    • James says:

      05:24pm | 26/04/12

      whilst they are in jail they should not be paid for their stories but once they are realised then there should be no constraints upon them getting paid for their stories. our criminal justice system is both for punishment and for rehabilitation. once someone is released i feel they should be treated the exact same way as you or i. when someone is released from jail they are square.

    • ShamWow says:

      09:21am | 26/04/12

      I really hope not too many people watch 60 minutes, today tonight or ACA. All three are tripe and rot your brain.

    • AdamC says:

      09:23am | 26/04/12

      I am in two minds on this. After all, this fellow was (ultimately) acquitted of murdering Caroline Byrne. On the other, he still smells pretty bad and it is ultra-tacky to pay him for a story. This is one of those cases where you just cannot teach tact or decency, I guess.

    • martinX says:

      10:42am | 26/04/12

      OTOH, innocent man would like something to reclaim lost earnings.

    • AdamC says:

      02:42pm | 26/04/12

      Sure, and he may want a solid gold, autoflush toilet with a robot to wipe his bottom, but there is no reason 60 Minutes should have given it to him.

    • Lucy says:

      09:40am | 26/04/12

      I dont think anyone should be paid for their story. If you have a story you wont to tell, you should tell it for free.

    • Pointen Shoot says:

      10:45am | 26/04/12

      How about the people who help tell the story - the interviewers, the camera crew, the network. Should they all work for free?

      What if he doesn’t want to tell his story, but everyone really really wants to hear it? Could someone buy him a beer to recount his tale - or is that the slippery slope to cheque book journalism?

    • Rose says:

      10:48am | 26/04/12

      Why? Why should media outlet be allowed to make money off people’s stories while the people who own the stories not allowed to make a penny?

    • martinX says:

      11:25am | 26/04/12

      Another hypothetical: blood donations. In Australia, blood (and other organs) is donated free of charge. No money can be offered, though I did get an offer of a beer in the NT.

      All well and good, but the rest of the infrastructure around blood is definitely for-profit, if not for the organisation, then for the people working there. I seem to recall that a single unit of blood can be valued at up to $1000, yet without the donor, there’d be nothing.

    • Sloan says:

      12:46pm | 26/04/12

      Too right MartinX.

      The dirty little secret of the Australian blood products industry.

      The fact that the rare blood types that are collected here are often sent to other countries to be sold so that we have shortages should be a national scandal.

      The breakdown of whole blood which was donated in good faith, into saleable and storable products that make hundreds of millions of dollars for the relevent companies involved, shows the contempt our masters have for us.

      The other dirty secret in Australia is the cash that changes hands under the table here for donor organs and priority in the queue. Australian trained doctors flying abroad to transplant organs in China and India where organs are traded is also morally wrong.

      Where did Australia start to go so wrong? If the people of a civilised nation such as the Swiss behaved like politicians and business figures do here they would be thrown from office or jailed immediately and be replaced with people who truly had the national interests at heart.

    • martinX says:

      10:50am | 26/04/12

      Should only people we like be paid for their stories?
      Yep. I vote Jason Tin doesn’t get paid this week. He keeps looking at me funny.

    • Kassandra says:

      12:59pm | 26/04/12

      Nobody should be paid for their stories. I detest chequebook journalism, doesn’t matter who the person is selling their story. I also detest the mentality that says people are entitled to be paid for anything they do, or for just being a person of interest to the media because of the flying fickle finger of fate and the petty voyeuristic proclivities of a section of the public. It seems to be that the crappier the newspaper, TV show or whatever is the more likely they are to do this kind of thing. The type of audience that is attracted to these “stories” is as predictable as the type of journalist who does them and the TV show or magazine they work for.

    • Chris W says:

      02:50pm | 26/04/12

      Nicely put Kassandra.  Journalists should be able to get stories without paying for them.  If someone wants to write a book and make money out of their experience go for it.  But media outlets should not pay talent for stories.  Oh and in reference to Alank’s earlier comment about Grimshaw’s “superb hatchet job” on Johns, I hope he was being sacrastic.  Anyone off the street could have hammered Johns in that interview. But she won a Walkley for the interview - completely devaluing Australian journalists’ goal to win one.  As Alank correctly put it she should never be able to call herself a journalist.

    • Rabbits says:

      01:04pm | 26/04/12

      Why should he be paid at all, innocent or guilty. If he’s that keen to get the story out there he shouldn’t have to be paid. He has been incarcerated for something the courts now say he didn’t do, so I’m sure he’s been compensated already for that. At least theses days there is one way of knowing 100% whether someone is guilty or not . . . is their lawyer Chris Murphy ?, if answer is yes then you can safely assume they’re guilty as charged (even if he gets them off on some technicality). I agree with all the comments slamming journalism globally, and especially TV shows that were at one time journalistic, like ACA. Now there’s about as much accuracy on ACA as there is reality on the Kardashians. “Reality TV” these days is more carefully planned than a sitcom or drama.

    • jackie says:

      02:58pm | 26/04/12

      Gordon Wood is an innocent man. It has been proven in the high court of appeal, by three impartial judges.

      He lost the love of his life through suicide. it was her third attempt. She was clinically depressed. there are records to show this.

      He spent the good part of the past 15 years being hounded by the media and the public alike, accusing him of something he did not do.

      Imagine losing the love of your life, being accused of her murder, going through a witch hunt and very public trial, and being locked up for something you did not do for three years? Pretty sure you would not like it!

      I’m also pretty sure Gordon Wood would swap places with the Beaconsfield miners any day!

      As for Tony Bryne. I understand his grief, but there was never any conclusive evidence that Gordon was even at the gap that night. The evidence presented by the prosecution was fabricated and flawed and has been proven to be so. The DPP is under investigation because of it.

      Mr. Byrne needs to accept that it was suicide and move on, or if he truly believes that his daughter was murdered, spend his energy and time finding the real killer.

      Gordon should absolutely be paid every cent for this story, and he should receive millions in compensation.

      The DPP and the media of Australia have ruined his life.

    • SM says:

      03:37pm | 26/04/12

      Is this the “Jackie” who is Mr Wood’s sister?

    • Kika says:

      03:29pm | 26/04/12

      I’ve totally given up on 60 minutes. It’s utter bull plop. It’s so bad it gives me cancer.

      I watch Dateline now. I think it’s the only current affairs programme on TV that dares to actually push the boundaries and report on real things happening overseas and at home. Like the current state of the Gulf States and the BP Oil Saga. People are getting real sick over there right now and things are only going to get worse. You wouldn’t hear about that on 60 minutes. You’re more likely to see Peter Overton floating around in 0 gravity on a Russian space simulating plane./

    • Jim says:

      05:24pm | 26/04/12

      Ahhh, but if a 3-eyed fish turned up in the Gulf of Mexico then 60 Minutes would be there in a flash…interviewing some yokel with an opinion and elevating him to the status of ‘expert’.

    • Jackie says:

      06:55pm | 26/04/12

      No, it is not Jackie, his sister.

    • Jackie says:

      06:58pm | 26/04/12

      I think a three eyed fish has actually turned up in the Gulf of mexico! Or at least it was a one eyed lobster. I am sure I saw a link on it last week!

    • James Mathews says:

      09:22pm | 26/04/12

      Well know I think that people have to do the investigating work that may take long and hard hours but is all worth it as then people know that they have thoroughly researched facts and then it makes it better

    • stephen says:

      09:42pm | 26/04/12

      The girl who died was a qualified clinical psychologist, (at University) and it is difficult for me to accept that at some point in her life that she felt it necessary to ignore her whole professional training, go to a spot on a cliff at night, and take a running jump on to rocks below.

      I’d like to know who these other Rivkin lap-dogs are, because I do not believe that Ms Byrne would have done such a violent act.

      And maybe Nine should consider that 3 years in the lockup is punishment enough for everyone involved in the fire at Alpine Printing ... in which case, Wood should get nothing except anonomnity.

    • Tabitha says:

      12:55am | 01/05/12

      Caroline Byrne was not a qualified clinical psychologist, she was a failed model.

    • taxpayer says:

      10:57am | 01/05/12

      Tony ‘Byrne was photographed drinking and laughing with the arresting Police this was man alleged to be upset about his daughter.  I would like to know if the Police paid taxpayer money to Tony Byrne to lie about Gordon Wood as they already stated in Court he was known to lie.  He has never seemed the bit upset about his daughter and loves media attention. I think Byrne is the liar and should be gaoled for the rest of his life along with the Police who lied.

    • http://menuggs.elitetestingconsultants.com/ says:

      08:59am | 16/11/12

      What we read influences our thinking.Yes£¬I suppose So.His looks are always funny.Tom and Mary congratulated us on the birth of our daughter.So do I.I do not care whether it rains or not.I do not care whether it rains or not.May I use your pen? I am afraid that l have to go.He is crazy about Crazy English

 

Facebook Recommendations

Read all about it

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @ToryShepherd: Onya, @KRuddMP“@newscomauHQ: BREAKING: Kevin Rudd has come out in support of same sex marriage: http://t.co/CFaHrxyV5G

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @newscomauHQ: BREAKING: Kevin Rudd has come out in support of same sex marriage: http://t.co/2KEO6yEx5F

Daniel Piotrowski

True Rudd style. Bazillion word folksy statement

Daniel Piotrowski

RT @Rob_Stott: Like a lot of Republicans in the US, it's much easier to support gay marriage when you're no longer in a position to do anyt…

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