News Corp’s blurring of news and views damaging society
Maybe he should run for parliament, and if he becomes PM he could do something about it.
Oh, wait…
He did do something about it. But it’s very easy to paper over that argument in an echo chamber.
Whats more is that he continues to do something about it in the private sector. This is after losing his prime ministership for trying to do something about it at the political level.
What have you done?
What have you done?
I’ll ignore that whataboutism. We’re talking about Turnbull aren’t we, not me?
He did do something about it. But it’s very easy to paper over that argument in an echo chamber.
Well, let’s not ‘paper it over’. What did he do?
Whats more is that he continues to do something about it in the private sector. This is after losing his prime ministership for trying to do something about it at the political level.
What has he done? What has he actually achieved from an environment perspective? Because as far as I can tell, he talks. Talks and talks. But achieves nothing. At least with the NBN he can claim to have successfully given millions of dollars to Telstra and Foxtel and created a mixed-technology NBN that cost more and took longer lol.
- Is new Australian prime minister Malcolm Turnbull already a climate change turncoat?
- Turnbull wants to change Australia’s environment act - here’s what we stand to lose
So, I’d be happy if you could point out what he achieved as PM for the environment or has achieved since. Besides talking.
Snowy Hydro 2.0 was something he backed heavily whilst in power. He has also invested and advocate considerably in renewables since leaving politics. Compare that to your regular run of the mill politician like Gladys or Baird swanning into telcos and banking, or the others jumping into gambling industries.
Also, why are you downplaying him talking about climate change? It’s one of his best assets, he holds huge influence. Would you prefer he install solar panels? Get real. You just want someone to hate but are completely misguided.
Snowy Hydro 2.0 was something he backed heavily whilst in power. He has also invested and advocate considerably in renewables since leaving politics.
Oops. It would be criminal if that Snowy 2.0 turns out to be worse than what happened with the NBN
- Five years on, Snowy 2.0 emerges as a $10 billion white elephant
- Snowy Hydro 2.0 pumped-hydro battery project faces a further two years of delays
Compare that to your regular run of the mill politician like Gladys or Baird swanning into telcos and banking, or the others jumping into gambling industries.
I’ll ignore that whataboutism. Again, let’s get back to what Turnbull has or has not achieved.
Also, why are you downplaying him talking about climate change? It’s one of his best assets, he holds huge influence. Would you prefer he install solar panels? Get real.
To quote the lyrical poet DMX from the seminal Ruff Ryders Anthem; Talk is cheap, motherfucker.
And when what you talk about goes as well as NBN and now Snowy Hydro 2.0 is going, well, we should wonder if he maybe, err, should talk less?
What influence does he have? He certainly didn’t influence anyone in office. In fact he so ‘influenced’ them that they got rid of him.
You just want someone to hate but are completely misguided.
And that, my friend, is an ad hominem, which I shall also ignore.
Old NBN-ruiner Turnbull still out there pretending to be a Good Guy despite being categorically a Bad Guy when he actually had the power to do anything about… anything. Just sit down m8, you had your 5 minutes in the PM’s chair you so desperately wanted. You want to make a difference, go donate your millions to environmental charities.
Yep, I’ll always remember him for fucking up the NBN
I do find it a bit rich for a journalist to complain about blurring the line between news and commentary while referring to herself as Dr.
It’s technically correct as she has a PhD, but it’s in media and communications, so it does make her an expert in the area she’s commenting on, however representing herself that way without clarity in the short bio or article is misleading nonetheless.
I have no idea what you are trying to say here.
I’m saying that when someone refers to themselves as a doctor, we expect medical knowledge. Referring to oneself as a doctor with a PhD in communications is technically correct but misleading. The exact thing she’s accusing.
Here it is in joke form, topically from a current shitpost
