Look in the Herald on any given day and you get a range of paid opinions. Leaving out salaried analysts, most opinions seem garnered from whichever out of work celeb or high profile professional needs the bucks or the kudos most.
Charles Waterstreet has to be one of the worst. Though he is a barrister, his articles sound like he ingested too much LSD in the 60s and is only now working out which way is up.
Lisa Prior, a GenY journo yet to reach twenty five, has the audacity to propound on issues that only affect people much older than herself. This is comforting to older people who are glad she’s a journo and not in the Labor Party.
Miranda Devine, on the other hand, presents a severely right wing solution to every situation. Whether or not you agree with Miranda, at least she doesn’t write drug addled commentary or speak in three letter syllables, lol.
And you thought this lot were boring…..
On the supposedly entertaining side of commentary, the dross takes over from the droll and presents us with ‘celebrity’ opinions. These are opinions formulated by any celeb who can spin two words together and needs a buck. It’s a marriage made in heaven for both tabloids and unemployed celebs; a guaranteed eye-catcher is an article expounded by anyone who has ever been on the front page.
This isn’t journalism, this isn’t even reporting, it’s called feeding the chickens*, it’s chaff for the masses, it sells newspapers, captures eyeballs on TV, gets clicks on the web, outrage in the letters columns, and very little else.
A vacuous conduit behind which the real world of politics, business and creativity function unhindered and unheard of. Is this a bad thing?
I don’t think so…