The Orstrahyun: Andrew Bolt's Reality Meltdown

The Orstrahyun: Andrew Bolt's Reality Meltdown

By Darryl Mason



Screengrab from The Australian online front page in the days following the March 11 Japanese earthquake and tsunami

How many times can pro-nuclear wacko and alleged journalist Andrew Bolt show himself to be grotesquely ignorant, wrong and ill-informed in the space of just one week? Five times? Ten times? More?

Following the March 11 earthquake in Japan, a 15 metre high tsunami wave slammed into a nuclear plant in Fukushima. The earthquake and tsunami killed more than 28,000 people.

For obvious reasons there was widespread concern in Japan, and around the world, about how good a job the Japanese government and the nuclear plant's operators were doing in containing radiation leaking from the smashed plant.

As a sign of just how confident the US government was that the Japanese government could contain radiation from the Fukushima plant, they began preparations for the evacuation of thousands of US military families within hours of the US government learning just how huge and potentially deadly the unfolding disaster actually was.

And, not unexpectedly, news media leaped on the 'Nuclear Crisis' story and ran with it hard, voicing arguments both for and against nuclear power.

This gave Andrew Bolt the opportunity to blame The Greens for nuclear "scaremongering" and to attack "the media" (of which he is one of Australia's most prominent and highly paid) for their coverage.

Well, attack some media.

Attack, primarily, the main newspaper competition to the newspapers owned by ex-Australian Rupert Murdoch that publish Andrew Bolt's often incoherent and poorly researched swill.

Bolt began his ill-fated campaign to bludgeon his ideological and political enemies for "fear-mongering" over Fukushima on March 14 :

"...the offensive media fear-mongering..."

"...the media coverage of some papers obsesses instead about trouble at some nuclear reactors..."

This was the only time Bolt linked to Australian newspapers he claimed were over-hyping the radioactive threat posed by the rapidly failing Fukushima nuclear plant. He didn't link to anything published in the newspapers he writes for, of course, because that would have proven what a deceitful idiot he is.

The stories from The Age and the Sydney Morning Herald Bolt did link to were, in fact, mild and quite low on undue hype and "fear-mongering", in stark contrast, that is, to the newspapers Andrew Bolt works for.






Here's the online front pages from the Bolt-publishing Daily Telegraph & Herald Sun the day before those Age & SMH stories were published.





Even more bizarrely, Andrew Bolt ran this headline on his blog...



....the day after his Herald Sun newspaper ran this front page :



Which proves Bolt doesn't even read the front pages of the main newspaper he writes for, because nowhere, in a week of blog postings, did he acknowledge it was the actually the Herald Sun shouting 'Meltdown'.

Here's more excerpts from Andrew Bolt's blogs & columns in the 10 days following the start of the Fukushima nuclear disaster, interspersed with online & print front pages from the Daily Telegraph, the Herald Sun and other Murdoch news media, including The Australian, published during the same period.

Bolt neither linked to nor mentioned any of these in any of his columns or blog posts.

March 15 :

The great green scaremongering gets worse.

March 16 :

No, there won’t be a nuclear explosion, “China syndrome” or “another Chernobyl”. The situation today is better than yesterday, and as each day goes by the chances of a big accident lesson. The nuclear fuel remains contained.

This scaremongering over the crippled Fukushima nuclear complex is extraordinary.

Isn't it though?



March 18 :

We will need to make some people accountable for this monstrous scaremongering once the truth becomes undeniable

March 19 :

The fear of Fukushima is deadlier than the fallout

Utter madness. The journalists who have whipped this up should be ashamed of themselves.

These journalists?



March 20 :

The wild reporting of Japan’s Fukushima nuclear emergency continues, with lurid claims of radioactive plumes, poisoned milk and more. The fact remains, though, that no one has been killed and probably never will.

March 21 :

no one in the towns around the plant is in any danger whatsoever from the radiation.

...the screaming, braying, lying, hyperventilating, fabricating, panicking media coverage is probably likely to kill you first instead.

March 21 :

It’s time to hold the scaremongers to account.

These "scaremongers?"



Andrew Bolt, March 22 :

Why worry only about the reactor that has killed no one?

Yes, why worry about a mostly destroyed, exploding, radioactive water spewing nuclear plant when you can, if you read Murdoch news media, worry instead about whether or not Mother Nature is now purposely trying to kill humans?



Her cruelty, eh?

March 11 wasn't, you see, another one of the hundreds of mega-earthquakes and tsunamis that have rocked, smashed and swept across the fault-line islands we now call Japan in the past few dozen million years.....it was instead a Terror Attack on humans by 'cruel' Mother Nature, at least according to the Gold Coast Bulletin :



None of the above headlines or front pages were criticised, or even mentioned, by Andrew Bolt is his 10 day campaign to blame "fear-mongering" over the deadly serious, ongoing nuclear disaster in Japan on "the greens" and non-Murdoch news media.

Not one.

And since it has been confirmed that explosions at Fukushima did indeed claim lives, that vast farming areas of Japan are so polluted with radiation they can't grow essential crops like rice, perhaps for years, or decades, and that radioactive water gushing into the Pacific Ocean from the nuclear plant has destroyed lifeblood fishing industries and clouds of radiation have even reached milk and food supplies in the United States, what has Andrew Bolt said?

Nothing.

As soon as Andrew Bolt realised facts and reality had proven him wrong, deceitfully wrong, about Fukushima, over and over again, he simply dropped the story.

Completely.

Like a petulant child who, once told he is wrong, runs to his room and slams the door on the reality of his mistakes.

Bolt has said nothing, not even an update or a correction, about the true scale of the Fukushima nuclear disaster in weeks.

Meanwhile, in the real world, the Fukushima disaster has been upgraded to a Level 7 nuclear emergency, the same rating as Chernobyl, the highest rating possible.

Quality journalism indeed.

There Is No Good Outcome For Fukushima Disaster

Your New Reality - Mother Nature : The Ultimate Terrorist

Subscribe in a reader

Phil Gould: Fiddling leaders burn chance to rejig season for big TV rights deal

If and when the new independent commission is established, I would hope one of the first matters to appear on their extra-long list of agenda items is a total rethink on the NRL season schedule and the all-important representative fixtures.

When I say "if and when" the commission is established, I mean that as a big IF and WHEN.

Self-interest, hidden agendas and survival tactics are still severely restricting this process. I will discuss the real reasons behind the prolonged procrastination in these negotiations and those responsible some time in the coming weeks - they can't keep me silent for much longer. It's time this stuff is set free for public consumption. Fans will be up in arms when the truth is revealed.

I believe it is vital we consider an overhaul of our season schedule because the current system is simply not good enough. Everyone knows it's not good enough. However, to force the necessary changes, we need strong leadership and independent thinkers who act only in the best interests of the game.

We need to consider what we want our game to look like in two, five, 10, 20 and even 50 years' time: How many NRL franchises will we have? Where will they be? How many players and teams will each franchise field in NRL, second-tier and elite junior competitions? How big do we want second-tier state leagues and competitions such as the Toyota Cup to become? What's the optimum number of home-and-away games for each season?

How many levels of representative football should we have? Should we have three-match Test series against Great Britain and New Zealand on a regular basis? Should State of Origin be expanded to a best-of-five series? Should Origin be expanded to include a new Polynesian-based team?

If we reduced the NRL competition to 20 or 22 home-and-away games - and then set aside a four- or five-week period mid-season for all stand-alone representative fixtures to be played - could we run a big-prizemoney, mid-season knockout competition for all other players in the NRL competition during this club football hiatus? Could our game cope with a five-week period mid-season of only representative football? Could TV broadcasters cope with such a period? Would fans tolerate such an interruption? Would fans trade such an interruption in exchange for knowing their club would never have to play without their rep stars, or see their tired rep stars back up shortly after a taxing representative match?

I'm just brainstorming - I'm sure there are plenty of smarter people than me who could come up with even better ideas.

Another problem associated with our rep football and the strain it places on our elite players is the significant reduction in player depth over the past decade. Restrictive and inflexible salary-cap laws have diluted talent levels. The NRL has totally underfunded clubs during this period. As it currently stands, clubs don't have enough first grade-standard players available to cope with significant injury tolls; but this can change in time with the right funding and development.

All these things should be discussed, decided and acted upon long before we go anywhere near the broadcasters looking for a new television rights contract. How can you sell your product to broadcasters and sponsors when your product is nowhere near the best it can be? We have just bumbled along since the last rights deal was negotiated and not developed one extra product to sell. We haven't introduced new teams to provide extra product.

Don't get me wrong: our product is the best TV football code in the country - not a doubt about that - but that doesn't mean we shouldn't be looking for an improved model to take to TV, pay TV and internet providers and say: "Hey, have we got a deal for you!"

Melbourne Storm coach Craig Bellamy last week again raised the issue of player welfare - it is ridiculous in this day and age that our elite players are asked to play twice in a 48-hour period, or that any players should have to endure below-zero temperatures in Albury on a Friday night, and then play 24 hours later in Brisbane.

A number of players involved in the rep games on Friday night won't back up for their teams this weekend. There is no doubt this will adversely affect their team's chances. It also disappoints the fans and detracts from the quality of games. Officials will reply that players get hurt in club games, too, but that's not an acceptable justification for our current schedules.

Every year the question is asked because we know it's not right. And every year our officials shrug their shoulders, duck for cover and simply wait it out until some other story fills the newspapers.

I love representative football. Judging by the television audiences for Friday night's Anzac Test and City-Country fixtures, fans love representative football, too.

However, of the 26 weeks of home-and-away rounds in the NRL competition each year, seven are affected by representative football. That's nearly 27 per cent of our club football played with weakened line-ups or with players backing up within 48 hours of a rep fixture.

The State of Origin series is now upon us. It's the mid-season highlight of the rugby league calendar. However, the downside of the Origin period is that for the next seven weeks crowds, television ratings and public interest in the NRL will drop significantly because many of the best players will be missing from their club sides.

Our current leaders wave this off by saying: "We know it's not ideal but find us a better model."

Sorry - wrong attitude. It's not up to us to come up with the better model. It's up to the people who get paid to run this game to solve major problems and create new and exciting ideas to increase the value of our product. It is also up to our governing body to protect the welfare of our players, which they clearly aren't doing under the current schedule.

They keep telling us that this next TV rights deal is the most important in our game's history. Well, the value of this rights deal has already been decided and I don't think our game did all it could over the past five years to maximise its value for these negotiations. We will get an increase simply based on inflation and competition for our product. But we haven't expanded the product. It's the same product as last time.

I say the rights deal after this next one is the most important rights deal in our history. That's the one we need to be working on right now.

We have to find the right people - the independent and creative people, the passionate and aggressive, the talented and entrepreneurial, the proactive and progressive - to capitalise fully on our potential. Which brings me back to the IF and WHEN.


 Subscribe in a reader

NFP: Champion cuts Mendenhall loose after Twitter controversy

Champion has distanced itself from Pittsburgh Steelers running back Rashard Mendenhall, terminating his four-year contract as a celebrity endorser following his controversial Twitter remarks regarding the death of Osama bin Laden.

Mendenhall is no longer associated with Champion.

"While we respect Mr. Mendenhall's right to express sincere thoughts regarding potentially controversial topics, we no longer belief that Mr. Mendenhall can appropriately represent Champion," Champion said in a statement.

After enraging many and baffling the Steelers organization, Mendenhall posted a blog clarifying his comments.

He also deleted one of his Tweets where he questioned how a plane could knock down a skyscraper.

Here's what he wrote in its entirety:

"I appreciate those of you who have decided to read this letter and attain a greater understanding of my recent twitter posts. I see how they have gotten misconstrued, and wanted to use this outlet as a way to clear up all things that do not truthfully represent myself, what I stand for personally, and any organization that I am a part of."

"First, I want people to understand that I am not in support of Bin Laden, or against the USA. I understand how devastating 9/11 was to this country and to the people whose families were affected. Not just in the US, but families all over the world who had relatives in the World Trade Centers. My heart goes out to the troops who fight for our freedoms everyday, not being certain if they will have the opportunity to return home, and the families who watch their loved ones bravely go off to war. Last year, I was grateful enough to have the opportunity to travel over seas and participate in a football camp put on for the children of US troops stationed in Germany. It was a special experience. These events have had a significant impact in my life."

"“What kind of person celebrates death? It's amazing how people can HATE a man they have never even heard speak. We've only heard one side...”

"This controversial statement was something I said in response to the amount of joy I saw in the event of a murder. I don’t believe that this is an issue of politics or American pride; but one of religion, morality, and human ethics. In the bible, Ezekiel 33:11 states, “Say to them, ‘As surely as I live, declares the Sovereign LORD, I take no pleasure in the death of the wicked, but rather that they turn from their ways and live. Turn! Turn from your evil ways!...”. I wasn’t questioning Bin Laden’s evil acts. I believe that he will have to face God for what he has done. I was reflecting on our own hypocrisy. During 9/11 we watched in horror as parts of the world celebrated death on our soil. Earlier this week, parts of the world watched us in horror celebrating a man’s death."

"Nothing I said was meant to stir up controversy. It was my way to generate conversation. In looking at my timeline in its entirety, everything that I’ve said is with the intent of expressing a wide array of ideas and generating open and honest discussions, something I believe we as American citizens should be able to do. Most opinions will not be fully agreed upon and are not meant to be. However, I believe every opinion should be respected or at least given some thought. I apologize for the timing as such a sensitive matter, but it was not meant to do harm. I apologize to anyone I unintentionally harmed with anything that I said, or any hurtful interpretation that was made and put in my name. It was only meant to encourage anyone reading it to think."

In the wake of the remarks, team president Art Rooney II issued the following statement Tuesday: "I have not spoken with Rashard so it is hard to explain or even comprehend what he meant with his recent Twitter comments. The entire Steelers’ organization is very proud of the job our military personnel have done and we can only hope this leads to our troops coming home soon.”

Here are some of Mendenhall's Tweets that caused the backlash:

"We'll never know what really happened. I just have a hard time believing a plane could take a skyscraper down demolition style"

"I believe in God. I believe we're ALL his children. And I believe HE is the ONE and ONLY judge."

"Those who judge others, will also be judged themselves."

"For those of you who said you want to see Bin Laden burn in hell ... I ask how would God feel about your heart?"

"There is not an ignorant bone in my body. I just encourage you to #think"

 Subscribe in a reader