Ref No.: Not Specified
Salary: Salary not specified
Work Type: Temporary
Location: Wodonga, VIC 3690
Date Posted: Fri 23/05/08
Closing Date: Not Specified
Ad Placed By: Fairfax

This whole thread has been a hoot, I look forward to Ray’s exposay on the shady side of Worrall’s professional life, and Bridgit’s tell-all about life as a country journo.
It sounds like a pretty little petunia in the onion patch story just waiting to unfold.

My guess is that Worrall is making it all up, it’s fiction, but Ray, Krypto, Greg and I become involved because as far as we are aware we’re the only regular bloggers from this area. It doesn’t concern me too much, but I do think it’s fair to point out that both of Worrall’s pieces are shithouse journalism, which is what each of us did.

There’s certainly an important place for blogs concerned with local interests, especially in the country where rags like the Border Mail have long had a monopoly on ‘news’. And although I don’t read yours regularly, from what I can tell it does a good a job as any. It was simply my perspective that when you enter the fray of public debate and tweak the tiger’s* tail, eventually it’s going to take a swipe at you – and it’s then a bit rich to complain. It’s just all part of the game.

(* Not to suggest that Worrall or the BM are “tigers” – more like neutered alley cats with mange.)

Anyway, we clearly have a misunderstanding here. Perhaps you’re just natutrally over-aggressive and I’ve mistaken that for a continuation of “some other ; issue” you took with me once, if you get my clue there – OK?

BUT, consider this: You DID come into this thread sort-of guns blazing, made a few factual errors, ommissions and (by your admission) you hadn’t read the source responses to Mr Worrall at ALL three blogs. Gee, call me paranoid, but that sort-of gave me the impression that you just wanted to throw a spanner in the works, by throwing this thread off track and effectively killing it, which you’ve probably done.

My mistake was responding to your ‘bait’ (if that’s what it was). Anyway, I’ll just explain briefly that in my opinion you’re 100% wrong about Worrall’s two pieces, the implications and the responses. Read my two fairly low-key & almost tongue-in-cheek posts about the matter, if you care, (and the other blogs) and you’ll see how far off track you’ve been – there’s no “war” going on, just perplexion with this man’s broadside, and we just want to know who he’s talking about.

And no, I’m not looking for your support – I just don’t like being ambushed. Who does?

I sincerely hope we do not cross swords like this again and that we can both comment here with respect for each other.

As for what I’ve “got” on Worrall, don’t worry, it’s a clear cut case of failure to attribute, and he knows it.

Good night.

You’ve amazed me in this thread, Ray. You’ve expected if not demanded that I agree with you, then when I haven’t you’ve insulted me (I’ve ‘got it in for you’, I know nothing, I need sleep, etc.) You’ve slammed me for backing Worrall when it’s obvious that’s not my position. You’ve accused Worrall of “slander” – an utter nonsense – and then went on to effectively slander him by claiming you’ve got hard evidence of unethical, unprofessional behaviour on his part (evidence, I might add, that you’re yet to produce).

Why, I haven’t seen rhetorical twisting and blindsiding like this since the heady days of… no, I shan’t go there.

And now you want to “drop it”? Well that’s fine by me. But I will follow the issue on your blog in the faint hope that you’ll publish this stuff you claim to have on Worrall – that’s something I’d be interested in seeing. So would Bradley too, I imagine.

However saying, “don’t forget your bat and ball” when someone simply says “bye” IS sarcastic.

Let’s drop it, eh?

I’m not interested in continuing this game of yours Bridgit. You say you don’t have an issue with me and that you’re just innoncently here commenting on the topic, yet it’s obvious you don’t know (or care to know) the full story. Bye.

I don’t have “a problem” with you; I simply suggested that maybe this Worrall joker, beneath his arms-flailing rant, has a point – or at least a motive. The tone and content of your response to me in this thread just reiterates that. I haven’t taken his side at all, despite your suggestions to the contrary. I’m not falling in line behind anyone, neither him nor you.

Nor do I intend spending a half-hour or more excavating the history of Dixon vs Worrall on those sites – I read this blog, the issue has been raised here, you are here talking it up and I am responding to it here. Unless this stems from an issue or incident of note, unless there’s a cover-up or an matter of greater substance than just blogger vs. petty journalist, I’m not interested in spending time researching it.

When I get some time (tomorrow, fingers crossed) I plan on blogging about being a country journo, where my views will hopefully be clearer.

I’m not sure what your problem with me is and I don’t care to find out, quite frankly. But hey, if you’re interested in this topic perhaps refrain from posting so aggressively here on The Ed’s site and creating a bun fight and come over to one of these sites where the issue began:

http://alburywodongaonline.wordpress.com/
http://davefromalbury.wordpress.com/
http://alpineopinion.wordpress.com/

If you want to fight then do it in the right arena.

By the way, your insults are as pathetic as they are baseless. I was raised in the country; I started in a country newspaper not unlike the Border Mail and I know just how full of tin gods and sideline snipers the country can be. I’ve come across many Brad Worralls and Ray Dixons, each thinking they know better than the other. So don’t play this you-know-nothing game with me; when it comes to bush egos, I know more than most.

By the way, I’m now waiting for this more substantial ’scoop’ on Worrall’s journalistic bona fides that you temptingly promised us. I hope you don’t let your fans down by not producing it.

She’s called him enough names to demonstrate that.

I’m not about to alter my writing style to please some press release re-writing hack like Brad Worral, but I’ll take his view into account.
Promptly disregard it, but I’ll take it into account.

It strikes me that you could just as easily have seen the wrong in what he has done, like (obviously) The Ed did. But for some reason that I don’t care to ponder, you choose not to. Fine, that’s your choice. But perhaps in future just stick to subjects you actually know something about, whatever that is.

I don’t really mind one way or the other I’m just confused as to whether I should take offence or not.

Maybe Worrall took exception to your clumsy sarcasm, Ray. And I’m not complaining about Ed’s post: I heartily concur that Worrall sounds like a clown. I only take issue with the suggestion that he has “slandered” someone (he hasn’t) which was hotly followed by an implication that Worrall himself is unethical (unsupported by evidence). It’s difficult to see this matter is anything other than a dick-waving contest – which, I might add, you will probably lose (research suggests that in rural areas print readership still outnumbers online readership about four to one).

Incidentally, I’ve been filling in for one of the night subs this week, just so you don’t leap to any more false conclusions.

And I realise this is not as substantive as the o-so-vital issues you comment on (such as fridge magnets) but if there is no substantive issue here then why are you bothering to comment at all? And why did The Ed bother posting this? Perhaps direct your complaint at the author of this post, not at me.

As for my “support”, I’m not sure why you think I owe it to you. I call it as I see it, and to me this just looks like a battle of egos with no substantive issues involved. That said, if you’ve got something more meaty on Worrall the media ethicist, then load your guns and use it.

I’m not so precious that I can’t deal with people telling me I’m being a jerk, sometimes I do take an antagonistic stance. It’s a matter of fact not an opinion.
I think a lot of the frustration at Bradley’s stance is that for so very long, the border mail and other media outlets have peddled their myopic, monocultural view of the world and now that any dissenting opinion is being expressed we come in for this kind of attack.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day but this is a bit rich I think.

And Ray, let’s not exaggerate, this isn’t the battleground of a so-called war between bloggers and journalists – it’s a bush pissing competition between a few territorial males. The Border Mail is a third-rate Fairfax daily, juggling reports on church fetes, livestock sales and the local footy. If Brad Worrall is a knob, as he seems to be, then he’s probably working in the right place.

Any suggestions?

Btw, Greg has recently been diagnosed with terminal cancer and, if you get a chance, just read the way he is facing his “journey”; it’s gob-smackingly honest & touching: http://kingvalley.wordpress.com/

………………………….

It would be nice to think Brad follows up and reads this post as I would like him to know that my blog King Valley Watchdog certainly does have an agenda. Go to my site and read the article, “A cynical approach” and you will find that my agenda is to search through the source’s hidden agenda spin for the truth as published by the commercial (Fairfax et al) Press.

I will even throw an open invitation to Brad to become a contributing blogger on King Valley Online. – Greg Naylor

It’s worth noticing that in both articles Brad is careful to avoid using any specifics, he couches every insult with ’some’, ’several’, ‘most’, or ‘Almost all’, I guess he learnt that in ‘Journalism 101′

He’s a hack trying to manufacture some cred with his readers, thus far I think that he’s failing miserably.

The more he puts down bloggers the more he puts himself down by simultaneously demonstrating himself to be worse, either than the alleged character or the actual character of his targets.

The sad thing is, is that being worse at journalism than bloggers are has never been an impediment to journalists. News Ltd being the classic example with Fairfax doing its best to catch up in the downward spiral speedway of journalism.

Hee.