How unbelievabley banal.
Oh, God. How often do you get shut down for stating an obvious truth?
Mine was, to ask, as an invited member of a panel on The Future of Journalism, a provocative question; actually a very ordinary question.
The Question, perhaps more a statement: Was that The Mercury and The Examiner were disaffected from their communities. That they actually weren’t loved by all of their communities, as Moderator Barbara Cox asserted.
The reaction of Moderator Cox:
“That’s enough Lindsay. Leave those cheap shots for your website.”
Sorry, I’m obviously in the wrong place. I thought we were talking about the future of media; a not inconsiderable topic; one theoretically requiring engaged, passionate debate.
Foolish, foolish man, that you should question the smooth rolling out of cliche and presentation over substance.
The slick PR of another Walkley debate knocked off in the colonies.
Beautifully presented with a lovely talking head from the Guardian; who was intelligent and engaged, and funny.
But utterly, finally, useless. You could not help but feel that here was the engagement of media management and union, to provide the same truth: We’re going to be alright aren’t we?
You are in more trouble than you will ever realise.
And no nice sculpted, censored presentations will make the slightest bit of difference.
Media is in the middle of revolution. As far-reaching and profound as the invention of the printing press.
And there, fundamentally, viscerally, was the problem with last night’s seminar.
It was all too touchy feely, all-too familiar media-speak, superficial, bland rolling out of cliche: how often did we hear of brand recognition, of business model?
I’m sorry; I’m an MEAA former state VP; but i was embarrassed by this. This is not inquiry; this is media-management-union-barracked propaganda.
I should have known: I did get an email warning me that I should not be off-topic?
I agreed, of course, puzzled; then shutdown by the Great Moderator, I realised what it meant.