Monthly Archives: May 2009

If we do say so ourselves

They do love a bit of shameless self-promotion, don’t they?

News website for bloggers to punch above its weight

Yes, we have it on good authority (ours) that it will be awesome. So awesome its awesomeness will shine through without us having to do anything to promote it.

…no one will be paid. With no marketing budget, the site will rely on word-of-mouth.

Well, that and this article in the business section of The Australian before it launches and:

…Penberthy will also host a half-hour political discussion show on Sky TV, also to be called The Punch, and some content from the website will be available for News titles.

And fair enough. If you were about to finally bring “general opinion” and “debate” to the Australian Internets, could you stop talking about it?

What “supporting our troops” actually means

Although the phrase itself has in recent years been horribly politicised and tarnished through shameless misuse, Nilk has a genuinely good suggestion for “supporting our troops” serving overseas:

Did you know that if you are in Australia, you can send a care package to a soldier in Afghanistan for free?

She and two others have set up a blog with ideas and suggestions for how best to do it.

Kitteh chaser

Max and Polly, saving their energy for pouncing on us at three in the morning:

09-05-29 max 022

09-05-27 neenish tarts and kittehs 029

09-05-21 maxb 004

TYPOS SPOTTED

They don’t pay tim Blair the big bucks for nothing.

UPDATE: God, he really can’t get us out of his head.

We only write about tim and Andy’s published work because they’re columnists whose vicious efforts to poison public discussion in this country are sufficiently prominent – in the tabloids, on news.com.au, on the television – that they really need some kind of public response. Not only prominent – but prolific. It’s not like if we ignore them they’ll go away.

But their regular posts about us? God knows why they think those’ll win them anything.

Hell, this post has been up for almost a day and has not a single comment. My commenters here don’t give a crap about those two. Why would theirs be any more interested to read about us? Sure, some readers might be interested in hearing a response to the actual content of our critiques – you know, an actual debate on the topics at hand – but that’s hardly what they’re being offered.

The whole thing’s very weird.

Glau to awesome-ify, then kill another sci-fi series

On the one hand, the addition of Summer Glau to Joss Whedon’s Dollhouse could, on her history, make the show worthwhile and encourage me to watch it again. On the other, also based on Summer’s form of being in brilliant shows that Fox screws around and then cancels, it seems likely that she’ll simultaneously make it something I care about and something that will inevitably be ended suddenly and prematurely. Maybe the sheer awesomeness of a Summer Glau sci-fi TV series is just too much for the television universe to bear, and they can only be allowed to shine painfully briefly before they have to be killed.

It’s not like Dollhouse could’ve been destroyed when I didn’t care about it – no, that would’ve been too kind. What’s the point of getting rid of something the audience is blase about? Instead, first they exterminate the Sarah Connor Chronicles in its place, and now, just to rub it in our faces, they’ll Glau-ify Dollhouse before they then kill it. Hit the sci-fi fans with two thoroughly depressing endings instead of one, or none. WE CAN DO WHAT WE LIKE TO YOU! AND EVEN THOUGH YOU KNOW IT’S COMING, YOU’LL BE BACK FOR MORE! SUCKERS!

2s784na
Like fireflies to a flame, they let us build up their expectations right before we terminate them.

Thank god we’re only talking about television shows.

But voters love rich merchant bankers!

Christian Kerr wonders why a wealthy businessman politician like Malcolm Turnbull should be ashamed of his featuring in the BRW Rich List:

Indeed, Turnbull seems to be the sort of leader we want in an economic downturn.

“For the first time in almost a decade, the rich got poorer this year,” BRW’s media release says. Rich Listers “lost more than $25 billion in combined wealth as the economic downturn hit hard.”

Yet Turnbull has prospered. Clearly a man for tough times!

In his revamped version he turns this exhortation to voters into political advice:

The Liberals might even try subliminally spinning Turnbull is the man for tough times.

I suspect that voters are less sold on the idea that someone’s ability to accumulate money for themselves – particularly that of a merchant banker – necessarily translates into improving outcomes for other people. Like, say, the broader public. I suspect that the politicians are downplaying their personal wealth for very good (and intensely focus-grouped) electoral reasons, knowing that Australians are much less inclined to worship the “acumen” of the rich in accumulating a fortune (those who didn’t just inherit one, and those who didn’t actually create or build anything) than to wonder who they screwed over to get it. I suspect that the Liberals’ actually following Christian Kerr’s advice would be suicidal.

But I’m more than happy for them to test the theory.

What, they’re back on again?

The Chaser: funny when it was a satirical, Onion-style newspaper and website. Funny when it was a satirical news programme.

Lame when it turned into Candid Camera. When a federal politician caught being involved in the smearing of muslims could call the stunt “a Chaser-style prank”. Ugh.

They haven’t gone back to the old stuff, have they? I didn’t bother watching last night.