This use of unnamed sources continues throughout both articles. There are four direct quotes from anonymous sources in the Herald Sun article, three in The Daily Telegraph and none of them complimentary.
There are also four paragraphs with references to the opinions of "detractors", "colleagues" and "critics". There is only one "reference" to the opinions of "supporters" but in the Herald Sun version even this is tempered by the use of the pejorative term, "political star".
The articles in both papers are virtually identical, apart from some notable substitutions and additions in Lewis’s descriptions of Gillard's actions and character. The language used in both versions is heavily loaded against Gillard. Interestingly, the descriptions of Gillard are even more pejorative in the Herald Sun than in The Daily Telegraph.
Advertisement
These changes are interesting because they clearly demonstrate the agendas of both Lewis and his proprietor. If Lewis’s impressions of Gillard were genuinely held, why would they not appear in both versions of the article? It is curious that the more disparaging Herald Sun version is available online while The Daily Telegraph version is not.
Below is an example of differences between the versions. Bolding has been added:
"And with that, Julia Gillard shoots off to yet another meeting, planning and scheming for the coming election". - Herald Sun.
"And with that, Julia Gillard shoots off to yet another meeting, planning for the coming election". - The Daily Telegraph.
In addition to his use of anonymous sources and loaded language to discredit Gillard, Lewis makes numerous unsubstantiated allegations and fails to place his own and others’ assertions in context with known facts. Throughout, he makes no attempt to discuss policy.
An example of Lewis's failure to provide appropriate context is in relation to the allegation that Gillard is a "hard-core Leftie", "very Left" and "hard Left". Even a cursory internet search reveals that Gillard belongs to the Ferguson Left faction, which is often seen as more moderate than the Socialist Left faction. This does not necessarily disprove the allegation against Gillard, but it is a significant known fact that places both the allegation and Gillard's quoted defence in context.
Advertisement
Michelle Grattan of The Age, attempts a cheap and phony "objectivity".
Her headline is "Howard in dilemma as polls fail to deliver", with the lead, "Kevin Rudd is in an enviable position going into the soon-to-be called election".
Grattan continues the initial to and fro between the subjects of Howard and Rudd throughout the article. This attempt at 'objectivity' results in several contradictory statements. Most telling within the first three paragraphs, Grattan contradicts her own lead, with “anyway, the six-month average is historical, not a prediction.”
Discuss in our Forums
See what other readers are saying about this article!
Click here to read & post comments.
18 posts so far.