SA Footy

Following on from the Misc Debris thread, this is started to list favourite and non-favourite journalists.

My preferred journalists:

1 Laura Tingle - Financial Review. IMO, comfortably the best political journo ATM.

2 George Megalogonis - The Australian. Always sensible, fair and a good writer, well researched.

3 Mark Kenny - Sunday Mail. A voice of fairness in a down-market Liberal rag.

I have several others, for later.

TV:

1 Paul Bongiorno - Channel 10. Only on for a few minutes, but fair.

2 Steve Cannane - ABC. Actually researches and knows what he's talking about.

3 Laurie Oakes - Not always, but good at times.

Bloggers:

1 Greg Jericho - Ex Grog's Gamut, now ABC.net


The balance to follow and I've left out several favourites.

Also to follow, my list of no-hopers (which will probably coincide with Jimmy's 'best' list

Will have to think about it some more, yet Lainie Anderson from the Sunday Mail - who I still disagree with on some issues is streets ahead of most of them - her column and the Calvin & Hobbes comic were the only reason I bought the Sunday Mail for a while! Lainie can also handle herself on 5AA pretty well when challenged by the Right members who like to call in!

I read whatever is in front of me R&B and dont look to see who's written it
The difference is, I'm quite happy to read both good and bad comments about all parties and politicians and I don't label them.
Everyone is entitled their point of view and I am quite happy to read it all, whether I agree or not

Is Andrew Bolt a credible journalist? Who knows. But I do know he is entitled to his opinion as much as any other person and to ask that question reflects on the person asking the question and not the subject.

We're much the same then, Jimmy

I read both good and bad like you, but I do know who's written it.

I'm not sure who's ever said Andrew Bolt isn't entitled to his opinion.

Soj, I agree about Lainie Anderson - brave at times.

Jimmy_041 wrote:Is Andrew Bolt a credible journalist? Who knows. But I do know he is entitled to his opinion as much as any other person and to ask that question reflects on the person asking the question and not the subject.

Hey, I started that thread ...

I despise nearly everything Bolt writes but he's free to write whatever he likes, as long as it's within the law.

I don't take much notice of individual journalists (other than Bolt and maybe Akerman) ... I read/see/hear media and then make up my own mind so it doesn't matter who writes or publishes media content as far as I'm concerned.

The only political journalists I bother to read are Bernard Keane, Mark Kenny, Laurie Oakes & for SA politics Tom Richardson in InDaily.

All pretty fair & balanced and not afraid to criticise either side of the political spectrum.

Hendrik Gout was pretty good for The Independent Weekly until he lost his mind and became too partisan during the 2010 state election campaign when he became obsessed with the Rann/Chantelois affair and is now unsurprisingly a Liberal Party staffer.

dedja wrote:

Jimmy_041 wrote:Is Andrew Bolt a credible journalist? Who knows. But I do know he is entitled to his opinion as much as any other person and to ask that question reflects on the person asking the question and not the subject.

Hey, I started that thread ...

I despise nearly everything Bolt writes but he's free to write whatever he likes, as long as it's within the law.

I don't take much notice of individual journalists (other than Bolt and maybe Akerman) ... I read/see/hear media and then make up my own mind so it doesn't matter who writes or publishes media content as far as I'm concerned.

I know who started it

I really dont read Bolt coz I cant be bothered, and Piers Akermans - well, I dont bother either

The only political journalist I like is Danny Buchanan

Guy Rundle. Inspirational.

I read anything that attracts my interest at the time, then form my own opinions, which tend to shift over time as I process more of what I've read.
I never pay much attention to who wrote anything because I am not influenced by authorities, but by content and context.
(And, as I've said before, I approach each new view from a point of scepticism initially.)

It's not that hard to note who wrote something.

Knowing who wrote something and forming your own opinions aren't mutually exclusive.

redandblack wrote:It's not that hard to note who wrote something.
Knowing who wrote something and forming your own opinions aren't mutually exclusive.

True, but knowing who the writer is first can influence your response to it due to emotional prejudices - no matter how hard you try to tell yourself you are uninfluenced.
I'm usually attracted by the header, then read the content, and only look at the by-line after I've read the article if it impresses me or provokes thought.

agree

Yep forgot about Guy Rundle, lock him in too.

I don't agree with everything he writes but he's hilarious and very well travelled, always good on Q&A too.

His book 'Down To The Crossroads-On The Trail of the 2008 US Election' is a great read.

Just looked it up - I will get that book

Phillip Coorey