GrodsCorp

Bolt’s shame

Saturday 14 June 2008, 4:10 pm

The Editor

Categories: Media, Sport, The Age

Tags: AndrewBolt, counselling, SamNewman, TheFootyShow

Andrew Bolt has spent the last couple of weeks valiantly defending Channel Nine’s bigot-in-residence, Sam Newman, against an overwhelming tide of public opinion. Bolta doesn’t like they way them evil lefties at the network have told Newman he can’t return to The Footy Show unless he attends counselling for his wimin-hatin’ ways. According to Bolt, Newman is being brainwashed and “re-educated” by teh left.

It is absurd to now have people hauled off to reeducation for sayings things to which some powerful others take exception. Not just absurd, either, but deeply concerning.

Andy conveniently leaves out the simple fact that Newman doesn’t have to attend counselling — he can tell his bosses at Channel Nine to go fuck themselves if he so desires — but he must attend counselling if he wants to continue appearing on The Footy Show. Most other TV personalities would have been escorted from the studio for lesser offences than Newman’s, and certainly wouldn’t be given the dozens of chances over a decade that Newman has had. If anything, he should be incredibly thankful for the chance of continued employment.

But Bolta doesn’t get any of that because he’s too busy being infuriated by how terribly shameful it is for Newman to have to attend counselling.

This “counselling” of wrong-thinkers as if they were diseased is not just a grave insult but a kind of authoritarianism best left buried with the KGB’s psychiatric hospitals for political dissidents.

Evil, evil PC-brigade leftists. But just when you thought it couldn’t get any more farcical, Andy tries to ramp up the guilts by referring to an unrelated injury of Newman’s that requires the use of crutches, and makes this bold statement.

Pictures like this, of Newman hobbling to his deprogramming, should shame us all:

No it shouldn’t.

17 Comments

Bron (Saturday 14 June 2008, 4:41 pm) #

No, it shouldn’t, indeed. Bolt’s a right turd.
Bruce (Saturday 14 June 2008, 5:07 pm) #

This “counselling” of wrong-thinkers…

Andrew’s sarcasm is misplaced. Are we to accept that behaviour like sexually assaulting Molly Meldrum is the epitome of acceptable broadcasting? It’s not just women that Sam’s malice is a threat to.

On that incident alone, Sam’s career should have ended (and Meldrum should have pressed charges). That his job is still on offer is an immense act of grace by people too blinded by sentimentality.

Are we to draw inferences about Andrew’s own standards of conduct from his choice of causes to champion? Look out David Marr if that’s the case.
Damian (Saturday 14 June 2008, 6:13 pm) #

I love the BlairBolt tactic of throwing in a ridiculously hyperbolic reference to support an argument. Likening this situation to “reeducation” processes and the KGB is an example. As ridiculous as it is, the echo chamber will pick it up, and perhaps it will become a common theme.
EC (Saturday 14 June 2008, 7:49 pm) #

If only Newman was really being sent to a “reeducation camp”. On Jupiter.
Ray Dixon (Saturday 14 June 2008, 11:45 pm) #

I think Newman’s so-called counselling is more of a PR stunt and that he’s on leave due to medical conditions as much as he’s suspended for his behaviour. He’ll most likely return all “reformed” to send the ratings through the roof again.

Bolt has chosen to use the official line as a reason to attack political correctness but since when has the Footy Show really cared about that?

I have to say that I think Newman’s blatant sexism is more of an act and perhaps shouldn’t be taken so seriously. I know a lot of women who say “he’s a pig” but in the next breath admit they’re attracted to him.

Putting all that aside, I find Newman’s comic ability and timing to be almost on a par with Graham Kennedy - and that’s saying something. I hope he comes back. He goes too far for sure, but geezus, it’s just the Footy Show.
Krypto (Saturday 14 June 2008, 11:51 pm) #

does ANYONE take Sam Newman seriously? or Andrew Bolt for that matter?
Bridgit Gread (Monday 16 June 2008, 12:09 am) #

Neil Mitchell was echoing Bolt on 3AW some time ago regarding Sam Newman’s ‘resting’, describing him as “a cutting-edge comedian” (get real) and the victim of “re-education”. The reality is that Newman’s misogynism generated such a backlash against the programme that it started to affect advertising revenue - and Nine can’t afford to be losing money at present.

I’m sure Newman will be back when it’s blown over. As for Bolt, he’s insulting the intelligence of his readers (which, let’s face it, generally isn’t difficult).
Krypto (Monday 16 June 2008, 12:32 am) #

you’re assuming they have intelligence to insult in the first instance.
Montague "Pitty-Pat" Smythe-JeJones (Monday 16 June 2008, 12:37 am) #

By the way he acts I get the feeling that Newman is over compensating for undersized genitals. Maybe that is what he is being councilled on.

Maybe the misogynist fuckwit should used Sally Morell’s or Janette Howard’s face instead. I’m sure this would have given Bolt a boner. Janette does have all the poise, grace and dress sense of a sack of spuds - she could have done with a bit of tarting up.
Krypto (Monday 16 June 2008, 12:41 am) #

there was an episode of the footy show where Sam Newman was “dacked” exposing his tockley to all and sundry, apparently the dimensions were less than impressive (although it was blanked out on the TV feed of course).
Bridgit Gread (Monday 16 June 2008, 2:59 am) #

Maybe the misogynist fuckwit should used Sally Morell’s or Janette Howard’s face instead.

One wonders if Bolt’s reaction would have been the same had Caroline Wilson been in the employ of Murdoch rather than Fairfax.
Krypto (Monday 16 June 2008, 5:01 pm) #

I think she’s gross, I wouldn’t do her with Wayne Carey’s dick.
Krypto (Monday 16 June 2008, 5:07 pm) #

actually, at the core of this debate is the issue of women in footy, I notice at the local level two fifteen year old girls were dropped from their local team “for insurance reasons”, basically a metaphor for “we don’t let girls play footy”.

Until this grass-roots sexism is dispensed with, we won’t see women in footy rising up through the ranks ON the field, so of course their contribution to the game of football OFF the field is going to be diminished.

It’ll take at least a generation after enabling women to play at the local level for them to achieve anything LIKE equality in the boardrooms of clubs I think.

AFL level competition is pretty full-on, but I don’t see any reason a woman couldn’t play, but like every other player she needs the opportunity to hone her skills at the local level.
Ray Dixon (Monday 16 June 2008, 9:29 pm) #

Krypto, why would you want women to play over 15s to seniors footy against men? It doesn’t happen in any other sport. Women have separate competitions for tennis, basketball, hockey, swimming … and the list goes on. I’m not sure that women would want that to change either.
Krypto (Monday 16 June 2008, 10:40 pm) #

I don’t have a problem with a seperate comp, but with current participation rates it’s hard to field a team much less a comp.

I also think women should be able to play test cricket.
Ray Dixon (Monday 16 June 2008, 10:55 pm) #

They do.
Bridgit Gread (Tuesday 17 June 2008, 12:02 am) #

Women are umpiring in the AFL (two goal umpires at present) and sitting on the boards of several clubs. I think there’s progress on many levels. But Ray is right: I don’t think we should expect women to end up on the park or be hoping for a female Gary Ablett or Wayne Carey (actually, spare us from that).