Howard Victory Not a Big Story, A Howard Loss Would Have Been

(By Ray D.)

As expected the German media has pushed the story of John Howard's resounding victory in Australia off to the sidelines. Howard, a strong supporter of President Bush and the war in Iraq slam dunked the opposition for a 4th term in Australian national elections.

Standing Firm on Iraq: Conservative John Howard Claims Major Election Victory in Australia

Certainly, a Howard victory does not fit into the German media's world view, so it won't receive more than minimal coverage. Had Howard lost however, it would have been a leading story in the German media today, providing them with further evidence that Bush and Blair are "under massive pressure" and that the war is failing. Howard would have been portrayed as another domino to fall in the coalition of the willing and his loss would have been portrayed as a further sign that the momentum is shifting against Bush. But it isn't, and the last thing the German media wants to do is create any momentum for someone they have worked so tirelessly to smear, demonize and defame.

Note: Instapundit has a good story on the US media's coverage of this as well.

Comments

[Don]

I wonder whether SPAN and Der Spiegel will consider a CDU vistory in the German national elections in 2006 a big story?

Probably not....

[Gabi]

"Rupert Murdocks Krawall-Kanal „Fox News“", schreibt Matthias B. Krause im Tagesspiegel, während CNN einfach CNN heißt, ohne Zusatz und ohne Anführungszeichen. Alltägliche deutsche Propaganda.

http://www.tagesspiegel.de/medien/index.asp?gotos=http://archiv.tagesspiegel.de/toolbox-neu.php?ran=on&url=http://archiv.tagesspiegel.de/archiv/10.10.2004/1409405.asp#art

[no comment]

Rupert Murdocks Krawall-Kanal „Fox News“

na und? genau so sollte man diese kriegstreiber nennen! sie beschweren sich doch wohl nicht über einen mangel an ausgwogenheit!? doch nicht hier!

[Hartmut]

Congratulations and best Wishes to the Australia!

[cyllo]

"Certainly, a Howard victory does not fit into the German media's world view, so it won't receive more than minimal coverage."

Every major newpapers has it:

http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,1354692,00.html?maca=de-netzzeitung_politik-130-rdf
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,322383,00.html
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/ausland/artikel/893/40853/
http://www.ftd.de/pw/in/1097302797618.html?nv=hpm
http://www.welt.de/data/2004/10/09/344305.html?search=Australien+Wahl&searchHILI=1
etc

Google.de lists more than 100 German language articles on the Australian elections. What exactly do you mean by "minimal coverage" and how does this compare to coverage in the US media?

[tyranno]

One would have to dig in and observe the angle of the reporting.
One example for instance;
- The accusations about Bush's military service, coming from still unknown sources, spun by DNC operatives carville and begalla, have circulated for over four years, have received massive media coverage from all of the mainstream medias, and have elicited the medias reaction (angle) that these are credible charges that Bush must, needs, to answer!

- The accusations about Kerry's coming from known sources who served with him, who are willing to appear in public to discuss them, have been 100% ignored by the mainstream medias, and have elicited the media reaction (angle) that the accusers are questionable, that they have questionable political ties and that their motives are entirely suspect! And I have not seen a single mainstream media reporter state that Kerry must/ needs to respond to them.

Memory is always a terrible thing to these folks. Just like with John Howard's "stunning" victory, If you remember, much of the mainstream media coverage in the U.S.A. had Ronald Reagan "neck and neck" with Walter Mondale right up to the . . . . historic 49 state ~ 59% to 41% landslide!

So simply "covering" the story does not necessarily nor automatically infer from my part any level of objectivity on their part.

Tyranno

PS: I have to add that the American medias, with all of it's warts and foibles, are head and shoulders more objective than what I see here in Europe in general and Germany in particular, no matter how much they wish to stroke themselves about their more "nuanced" and "sophisticated" perspectives.

[Gabi]

cyllo, you are naive. I did not find one article about John Howard, when I went on the homepages of the media which you quotet. That is not the same when you have to reasearch to FIND information. They don't GIVE you the information. Don't you understand the difference?

No comment, you write: Na, und? So what. You don't care but I care. What does it tell us about you. But don't tell me you did not know, you did not see, you did not understand the propaganda. So, please stay here and try harder. Propaganda is already to give words adjectives. Perhaps one day you will care.

[Gabi]

And, no comment, go to Fow news, take the time and show me what fills the word "Krawall-Kanal". Perhaps you are able to have your own opinion and perhaps you can prove it. I doubt it.

[Gabi]

"Hersh hat vor 35 Jahren das Massaker von My Lai aufgedeckt, aber Abu Ghraib, glaubt er, sei schlimmer."

So steht es in der Frankfurter Rundschau, als ich nach einem Artikel über John Howard GESUCHT und heute nichts mehr dazu gefunden habe, aber dieser überzogene und falsche VERgleich wird noch einmal aufgewärmt.

Australien ist für die FR absolut unwichtig. Warum wohl?

Stattdessen läßt man seit dem 03.10.2004 Hersh den Abu Ghraib-Skandal wieder aufgreifen. Das ist online leicht zu finden, Informationen über Howard und Australien waren nicht mehr verfügbar. Stundenlanges Suchen habe ich mir erspart, falls mir wieder jemand eine url um die Ohren hauen will.

Das Wort FOLTER für diese Erniedrigungen und Demütigungen halte ich für leichtfertig, wie hier im weblog schon dargelegt, aber dies mit dem Massaker von My Lai auch nur in Beziehung zu setzen, zeigt, wie sehr Hersh besessen ist von dem Zwang, endlich endlich wieder einen Skandal aufzudecken, der ihn wieder bedeutend macht.

Guckt euch die Bilder und Fakten zu My Lai an und dann die Fotos von England & Co. Folter? Schlimmer als das Massaker? Tatsächlich?

Diese Journalistin greift seine Beschuldigungen völlig unkritisch auf. "Wer ist für die gefälschten Dokumente verantwortlich, mit denen unsere Regierung beweisen wollte, dass der Irak Massenvernichtungswaffen hatte?"", läßt sie Peter Jennings sagen, statt mal darüber nachzudenken, welche GEFÄLSCHTEN Dokumente hier gemeint sein könnten. Haben die Geheimdienste Dokumente gefälscht oder ging es nicht vielmehr um falsche Schlußfolgerungen? Meint er die Niger-Sache? Man macht es sich leicht in liberalen Medien: Lüge ist das, was der Gegner macht, da braucht man keine Beweise mehr. Fehler deutet man in Lüge um, das gefällt dem Mob, der auch kein Interesse an Wahrheit mehr hat. So funktioniert die Mediengesellschaft, wenn man sie gewähren läßt.

Aber ist das deutsche Volk nicht schon einmal Opfer immenser Propaganda geworden? Sollten wir nicht ganz besonders daran interessiert sein, Propaganda zu verhindern?

Warum weigern sich unsere Journalisten, fair und sachlich über die Gegner zu berichten? Warum gibt man Andersdenkenden nicht denselben Raum? Howard in Australien ist kein Thema, weil ihnen der Sieg nicht paßt. Trotz Irakkrieg-Unterstützung gewonnen? Das kann nicht sein. Das darf nicht sein.

Spiegel hat auch nur einen einziges Artikel zum Wahlergebnis. Kein Kommentar. Keine Analyse. Kein Interesse.

Tagesspiegel hat nur eine kleine News dazu. Die findet man heute nur noch im Archiv, wenn man John Howard eingibt, über die homepage ist sie nicht mehr zu finden.

Wenn ich das mit dem Spektakel vergleiche, als in Spanien Zapatero gewonnen hat. Unzählige Hurra-Artikel.

DIE ZEIT hat noch nichts zu den Wahlen in Australien. Gibt man John Howard ein und "UND" kommen Artikel zu JOHN Kerry und HOWARD Dean. Offensichtlich klappt die und-Verknüpfung nicht.
Auch wenn man "Australien" eingibt, kommt nichts zu den Wahlen. Was ist aus der ZEIT geworden? Der Mob kauft sie wohl nicht, wenn sie nicht auch auf Bush und Sharon einschlagen.

[greg]

Dies ist in der Tat »merkwürdig«, wesentlich beängstigender finde ich wie man die Wahlen in Afghanistan durch den Kakao zieht: http://blogs.grabinski.ch/againstme/2004/10/09/und_sie_wahlen

Es wird vollkommen aus der Perspektive gerückt, es scheint so als wurde überall betrogen, während dies nur für einige wenige Lokale wahr ist. Dass alles friedlich verlaufen ist, und die Leute Schlange standen um zu wählen, wird meist nur in einem Nebensatz erwähnt.

[Transatlantiker]

It is really wonderful that we have Medienkritik to tell us what the German media WOULD report if things had been different in Australia. Preemptive criticism, sorta.

Just a little note: The Aussie polls had predicted a Howard win, so there was little surprise. Media like surprises. More of the same is always less interesting to report. Btw I doubt that 95 pc of Germans would actually know the name of the Aussie Labour candidate.

Any predictions about how the Sydney Morning Herald will report on a win of Schröder or Stoiber/Merkel in 2006?

[Jabba the Tutt]

cyllo and gabi: Is Fox News available to many people in Germany? Fox News is still growing here in the States. During the Republican National Convention, Fox News beat CNN, MSNBC and CNBC combined and beat individual networks. During the first debate Fox beat the competitive cable news nets combined and again beat the networks. Fox just had its 8th birthday, while CBS and NBC go back to radio nets in the 20's, CNN goes back to the 70's. The American People are thoroughly familiar with the networks and CNN. Why would they switch at this late date? Because, if you criticize Fox as a Krawall-Canal, you are really criticizing the audience.

Let's look at the Fox anchors. Brit Hume spent decades with ABC News, O'Reilly worked for years with Dan Rather at CBS, Greta Van Susteren switched from CNN a couple of years ago. John Gibson came out of network tv news. Chris Wallace is Mike Wallace's son (of 60 Minutes fame) and spent years with NBC. Hannity and Colmes features outspoken self-described, partisan conservative talk radio guy Sean Hannity and he's balanced by partisan liberal talk radio guy Alan Colmes.

Politically, I'd rate Brit Hume as a moderately conservative, but he has a panel that reaches from Mara Liasson and Juan Williams on the left to Fred Barnes as a conservative on every show. He plays the news straight. Gibson is a conservative. Wallace is moderate liberal. Greta is liberal, focuses mostly on court cases. O'Reilly is a self-described traditionalist, but liberal on the environment and some other issues. All shows feature liberals, conservatives, populists and even some libertarians. The spectrum of opinion is far wider and deeper than any competitors. There's lots of opinions on Fox and they play the news straight as they can.

Why are people leaving the competition? Cyllo, that's what you should ask yourself, instead of drinking the Kool-Aid and smearing everyone who doesn't.

For some wealthy investor, the media landscape in Germany cries out for a 'fair and balanced' news network. Murdoch's making big profits with Fox News. Come on someone, step up.

[Jabba the Tutt]

Here are the tv programs that Robert Spencer of Jihad Watch fame has appeared on. Just one time on CNN and Lou Dobbs is their lead business show. Spencer has not been on any CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS news program. MSNBC's Nachman show doesn't exist anymore.

C-Span Book TV
C-Span, "Washington Journal"
PBS, "Religion and Ethics Newsweekly"
CNN, "Lou Dobbs Tonight"
FOX News Live
FOX News, "Weekend Live with Tony Snow"
FOX News, "Fox and Friends First"
FOX News, "The Big Story with John Gibson"
FOX News, "DaySide with Linda Vester"
FOX News, "From the Heartland with John Kasich"
CITS, "Michael Coren Live"
CBN-TV, "700 Club"
MSNBC, "Nachman"

[amiexpat]

@Transatlantiker..
so... 95 percent of Germans would not know the Labor candidate.. but yet the Germans always accuse the AMERÌCANS of being 'weltfremd' and not knowing what is going on in the world (and yes, 95 percent of Americans would not know the labor candidate as well)
SO - The Germans are just like the Americans in this regard.. but I thought the Germans were always so well informed compared to the dunmb Amis?

[fragnicht]

@amiexpat
so... 95 percent of Germans would not know the Labor candidate

thats true,
but 95% of americans would not even find australia on the map

[Joe N.]

So, fagnicht, we're all just doofe Amis?

Thank you, really. Thank you very much. Your intimate knowledge of us as individuals is a remarkable feat of mental projection, delusion, and prejudice.

Where did you get this notion of American stupidity? The study of 10 kids in a chicago ghetto that gets publicised, or the comprehensive ones that get dusted under a rug?

International studies of education place schoolkids in the US slightly lower but close to par to western europeans.

At the university level a gap opens up.

At the PhD level, at the level of advanced science, medicine, literature, Europeans do even worse.

That means it's time to stop worrying about America's flaws (wherever you can find them) and start worrying about the state of education in Europe. Wagging your finger across the ocean doesn't improve the future and well being of any young person.

[Transatlantiker]

@amiexpat

not really. Australia, while being a wonderful country I personally like a lot isn't a country whose politics have much influence on Germany.

I'd say that Germans know more about U.S. politics than Americans know about German politics but that's just natural given the impact U.S. politics has on Germany.

I have yet to hear a German who says that U.S. don't matter to Germany, while in the U.S. Germany (and even Europe) are often seen as "irrelevant".

I wouldn't judge as to who is better informed. But... apart from the New York Times I couldn't name a single U.S. paper that holds the same wealth of information on international affairs as... let's say the FAZ, the Zeit oder SZ. When I fly between Washington and Frankfurt I get handed the Washington Post and the FAZ... the contrast is startling.

But John Sixpack in America wouldn't read the NYT, and Otto Normalverbraucher probably doesn't read the FAZ.

Anyway, we can read hundreds of papers online now, so whoever wants to be informed has little excuses for not being able to.

But back to Australia. From all I read in the Aussie press Iraq didn't decide the elections, the booming economy did. Also Australians have suffered few casualties in Iraq (none in the major combats).

[fragnicht]

@joe

calm down, I dont want you to get an heart attack!
just couldnt resist to say that.....its a proven fact that average americans are not the brightest about geography..........take it how it is!

[Ralf Goergens]

I'm very glad that Howard won.

Btw, Howard got a pretty bad press in Europe four years ago because of his tough stance on immigration. Australia has the right to formulate any immigration policy it wants to, of course, but I had mixed feelings on this particular instance. It looked as if he would lose the elections for sure, but won in the last minute by being exceptionally hard on some would-be immigrants, which gained him a lot of votes.

[Ray D.]

@ Transatlantiker:

You can try to spin it any way you want, but you'd have to be awfully naive about the German media to stand there and tell us they wouldn't have engaged in an all out feeding frenzy had Howard lost. It would have been the #1 story and been touted as further proof that the coalition of the willing is failing and that the German media and their good friends in the German government were right all along. Shortly put, they would have engaged in some serious gloating and "I told you so".

I think the inability of so many in Germany, particularly in the German media, to recognize and admit their own bias is a major reason this website is so successful.

---Ray D.

[cyllo]

@ Jabba

"Why are people leaving the competition? Cyllo, that's what you should ask yourself, instead of drinking the Kool-Aid and smearing everyone who doesn't."

Sorry, I'd love to answer that, but what exactly are you talking about?

@ Gabi

"cyllo, you are naive. I did not find one article about John Howard, when I went on the homepages of the media which you quotet. That is not the same when you have to reasearch to FIND information. They don't GIVE you the information. Don't you understand the difference?"

Financial Times Deutschland has is on its homepage: http://www.ftd.de/

Sueddeutsche has it on its homepage: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/

Even Spiegel-Online had it on its homepage. Please check your facts before you go around handing out insults. (Are you German by any chance? I'm just guessing here because it's always the same with you people: whether you're conservative or socialist, democrat or fascist, pro-american or anti-american, you just can't help lecturing, can you?)

[Transatlantiker]

@Ray D.

Talking about "bias": It's funny when you read Daily Kos, they find the U.S. media biased "wingnuts" (against them, of course), if you read LGF, they find the MSM (Mainstream Media) biased "leftist moonbats" (against them, of course). Tough job to please them all, isn't it?

Please stop looking at "THE GERMAN MEDIA" as one evil biased Medienfront block against you... this is a weird attitude. Thousands of journalists work for THE MEDIA, everyone has his own (biased if you will) opinion. But we have a free press. Journalist are critical by definition. Howard's reelection was "dog bites man", Latham's victory would have been "men bites dog"...it's as simple as that.

Blame your tax inspector for being biased as hell for not applauding that 95% of what you stated in your tax return was accurate...

[Joe N.]

Frag nicht:

Fragst du niemals immer? That has been disproven as a myth. My feathers aren't even up.

This is what I can tell you. My brother had a three year gig teaching econ in what was pimped around to be the premier institute for the study of new economic theory in europe.

The students from year 1 to PhD candidates were so bad, the faculty so incapable of getting anything published in a serious journal, that her had to leave for the sake of his own future. Another year would have latched his academic reputation to those deadweights.

Try questioning the euro-phantasms about the rest of the world... scratch the surface and the veneer quickly falls away.

[Gabi]

cyllo, da muß ich aber wirklich schmunzeln. SZ hat also einen einzigen Artikel. Wunderbar. Da liege ich ja völlig falsch mit meiner Einschätzung. Ein einziger Artikel, und ich dachte schon, es würde gar nicht berichtet. Lassen wir es einfach dabei. Schlafen Sie schön weiter.

[cyllo]

@Gabi

"cyllo, da muß ich aber wirklich schmunzeln. SZ hat also einen einzigen Artikel."

Again, why don't you check your facts? If you cannot count to two, get some help. You are wrong, again. Sueddeutsche had two articles on 11th Oct alone:

John Howard Australiens Wahlsieger mit ungeahnten Qualitäten PROFIL
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/sz/2004-10-11/meinungsseite/artikel/sz-2004-10-11-004-profil-a-a.profil/

Vierte Amtszeit für John Howard. Konservative gewinnen überraschend deutlich
http://www.sueddeutsche.de/sz/2004-10-11/politik/artikel/sz-2004-10-11-007-7urw_austral-a.7urw_austral/

"Schlafen Sie schön weiter." Yeah, and you wake up. And spare me your "subtle" irony. Germans and their attempts at humor...

[Jabba the Tutt]

Cyllo: Sorry for being unclear. Fox News's audience is growing, which you slammed as a Krawall-Kanal. The competition; ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN, MSNBC and CNBC are all losing audience, as are the major newspapers, like the NY Times, LA Times, Boston Globe and Washington Post. The credibility of all of these organizations have also taken tremendous hits. The Old Media is losing influence like a leaky balloon.

Thus I come back to my question for you. Rather than slam the audience who've turned to Fox News, why not ask yourself why people are leaving the established news organizations?

[fragnicht]

@joe

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz, wake me up if you have something interesting to tell

[Ray D.]

@ Transatlantiker,

We are very precise about who we criticize. Of course when I say German media, I am generalizing. Any 2 year old would understand that there are thousands of journalists and not all are biased. When I say German media I mean the general slant, and that is what we are against. I don't mean each and every journalist. For you to deny that there is a general bias out there is (again) a failure to see the reality for what it is.

As for the US media, that is not our focus here, but I am sure that they are also highly biased. That is why the blogosphere exists and thrives, more power to them. I only wish there were more blogs like ours in Germany covering the German media. They are still the arrogant monopoly that the US media used to be more than 5 years ago before blogs and talk radio and Fox came along and provided an alternative.

And oh yeah, what the f*** does my tax collector have to do with this?

[Henning]

Also ich bin in Australien und habe den Wahlkampf hier intensiv mitverfolgt.

Frag mal, wieviele Amerikaner den Labour-Kandidat kannten und noch besser wieviele Australier?!!

Mark Latham ist weitgehend unbekannt und genauso eine Pfeife wie Howard - Debatte und Kampagne waren auesserst poor!!

Die Wahl in Australien war in deutschen Medien schon vorher kein grosses Thema, aber auch allgemein ist in deutschen Medien nicht viel von OZ zu lesen - ist einfach sauweitweg und hat nur 18 Millionen Einwohner.

Euer Argument, von wegen Ergebnisabhaengiger Berichterstattungsintensitaet ist alo RUBISH!!!!

Jedes Land hat hat das Recht auf seine eigene Immigration-Policy... ihr wuerdet ihnen wahrscheinlich auch die klar rassistische "White-Australia Policy" aus der Mitte des letzten Jahrhunderts zugestehen!

Darueber hinaus haettet ihr vielleicht erwaehnen koennen, dass der gute John in weiten Teilen der Bevoelkerung regelrecht verhasst ist und einen erfolgreichen Wahlkampf mit Angst gefuehrt hat, bezueglich National Security und Interest Rates!

Das kommt mir doch irgendwie bekannt vor...

Guten Morgen Deutschland!

Henning

[Henning]

Ein fruehaufstehender Polemiker-!

Willst du bezweifeln, dass Australien in den deutschen Medien keine grosse Rolle spielt?!

Auf der anderen Seite sind deutsche Politik und Ereignisse uebrigens ein relativ groesseres Thema in der australischen Presse.

Und danke fuer deine Ausfuehrungen bezueglich der Relevanz Australiens fuer Deutschland... polemische Vergleiche mit Israel ziehen sowieso immer-!

Aber das aendert nichts daran, dass ich den Vorwurf der selektiven Berichterstattung nicht fuer gerechtfertigt halte.

Warum Howard gewaehlt wurde: Die meistens Polls sagen aus, dass Howard richtig unbeliebt ist und von 80% der Bevoelkerung fuer einen Luegner gehalten wird (Children Overboard Affair). Trust ist nicht gleich Truth und die australische Oeffentlichkeit war nicht davon ueberzeugt, dss Latham "delivern" wuerde. Meine Meinung ist, dass Labour nach einer erheblichen Krise in den letzten Jahren keinen guten Kandidaten hatte. Und da du ja lesen kannst, muss ich dir die Problematik der 'Interest Rates' nicht erklaeren... oder doch da Australien auf der deutschen Agenda nur so unbedeutend ist?

Don't hesitate to ask if you needed help-!

Die 'White Australia Policy' habe ich erwaehnt, da durchaus jedes Land das Recht auf seine eigenen Policies hat, aber manche auch in der Tat fragwuerdig sind und hinterfragt werden duerfen!!

Lieber Niko, findest du wirklich dein polemischer Erguss hat die Debatte bereichert? Hast du etwas zu sagen oder wolltest du nur plappern??

Cheers,

Henning

[Wired]

Was war denn jetzt mit national security und interest rates?

[cyllo]

@ Jabba

"Fox News's audience is growing, which you slammed as a Krawall-Kanal."

I have never even mentioned Fox News on this blog, let alone criticized it. I think you were referring to remarks made by someone else? Obviously a misunderstanding. No problem.

[cyllo]

@ Niko

Neither irony nor sarcasm is argument, as a famous US statesman once remarked, yet sometimes they are misused as a feeble excuse for a lack thereof.

[Ray D.]

@ Henning,

Sure, Australians hate Howard, that's why he was re-elected for a fourth term by a huge margin. I guess in Henning's book you have to have the SPD's popularity ratings before you can qualify as a truly beloved political party.

You know Henning, your accounts of events somehow sound about as accurate and objective as those of the German media. I guess if you are blinded by hate for men like Howard and Bush, it is kinda hard to see reality for what it is. In the meantime, Germany's Socialists are running the country into the ground and imploding politically, but the media doesn't seem to care because they are so busy slamming Bush and the USA...sad but true.

---Ray D.

[cyllo]

Well, Niko, that wasn't so hard, was it? You see, even without your cute sarcasm you can still make a meaningful albeit somewhat less prolific contribution to the discussion.

[WhatDoIKnow]

Looks like the German Hennings/Gutmenschen/idiots are finding comfort in a new theory explaining Howard's victory. He won, sure, but you now what ? He is not loved by the Aussies ! Ha, take this ! He won just because the Labour had no good candidates.

Henning should meet jo/unwichtig/matthesar and start a blog with them. This way their truth, the only truth, would be spread around the German landscape. But hold on, this job is taken already ! The German media has been doing it successfully for quite some time now. The result ? People like Henning/jo/unwichtig/matthesar. (Not a record to be proud of, isn't it ?)

The population density in Germany is about 600 persons per sq mi. Can you imagine how that poor square mile feels ? 590 Hennings/jos/unwichtigs/matthesars stomping on you, defecating on you constantly. Terrible...

Well, anyway... EU has become the land of self-righteousness, looking down at the US from the heights it thinks it has reached. One thing they forget though. The building stands on very shaky ground. If they continue like this they will fail, and the higher they think they are, the harder they will fall.

[tyranno]

trans posts:
"But back to Australia. From all I read in the Aussie press Iraq didn't decide the elections, the booming economy did. Also Australians have suffered few casualties in Iraq (none in the major combats)."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And so we have come full circle to david's original point. Do you believe that if Howard had lost we wouldn't have been inundated with headlines like
"Iraq costs Howard his job!" or "Bush Sinks Howard!" Or if Tony Blair wins there will be any number of stories of his trickery, but if he loses it will say "The Poodle Pays a Price!"

Tyranno

[Henning]

@ Ray D. & WhatDoIKnow

You guys seem to be real experts of Australian politics!?!
In fact Howard is really unpopular and a mojority of people thinks that he is a liar (Iraq and Children Overboard and if you don't know what that is, you don't need to try to discuss with me!). But the polls show that the electorates actually don't need to like their politicians, they want them to deliver - deliver good economical data, wealth and national security.

Don't tell that Howard is popular here - that's rubish!

That shows us the difference between trust and truth.
The Australians didn't believe that Latham has the potencial and experience to deliver.
I don't know if he has!? I just think Labor's candidate was to weak to defeat Howard despite is popularity-rates.

@ Wired

Das Interessante bei den 'Interest Rates' ist, dass eine ueberwiegende Mehrheit der Australier verschuldet ist (fuer Immobilien, aber z.B. auch Overseas Reisen oder Zahnbehandlungen). Wenn der Leitzins steigt, steigt die Rueckzahlungssumme auch laufender Kredite. Meines Wissens ist das in Deutschland anders, da wird bei bestehenden Vetraegen nichts veraendert.
Der Wahlkampf und die Fernsehwerbung bestand fast ausschliesslich aus Warnungen, dass unter einer Labor-Regierung die Interest Rates steigen wuerden, da Statistiken zeigten, dass sie unter bisherigen Laborregierungen vergleichsweise hoch waren.

Der Punkt ist jedoch, dass auch in Australien die Federal Reserve Bank den Leitzins festsetzt, nicht die Regierung und genau betrachtet sind hohe Zinsen eigentlich ein Indiz fuer gutes Wirtschaftswachstum (Inflationbekaempfung). In Konjunkturkrisen dagegen werden sie gesenkt, um Investitionen zu foerdern.

Deshalb meinte ich, dass hier mit dem Schueren von Angst und halt auch der Unwissenheit der Leute Wahlkampf gemacht wurde-!

Urspruenglich ging es in dieser Diskussion aber um den Vorwurf der Ergebnisabhaengigen Berichterstattungsintesitaet. Bei soviel unangebrachter Polemik ist das leider ein wenig untergangen. Australien spielt auf der deutschen Agenda schlichtweg keine grosse Rolle und ich bezweifle, dass dies im Falle eines Labor-Sieges anders gewesen waere!!

@ cyllo

Ist nicht schlecht. Mir scheint, dass bornierte Polemik und billiger Sarkasmus hier von den meisten deutlich bevorzugt werden - das ist schwach!

Das ist hart: die Rechte meint die Massenmedien seien komplett links und die Linken erzaehlen irgendwelche Verschwoerungstheorien von wegen rechter Medienmacht und am besten staatlich gelenkter Medien, oh je!
Der Name "Medienkritik" ist sehr hochtragend - ich glaube "permanente Kritik der vielzu linken Medien" wuerde es besser treffen und ich bin mir sicher es gibt irgendwo ein linkes Aequivalent, dass versucht ein "skandaloese" staendige rechte Berichterstattung aufzudecken-!

Herrlich - einen schoenen Tag im Alten Europa-!

Henning

[Henning]

@ WhatDoIKnow

Just read on your own what you've written and ask yourself if this was a political statement, an argument or just rubish!?

That's poor-!

[Henning]

Hey Niko,

I think it's definitely boring for you if someone doesn't agree with you and you are not competent enough on the issue-!
Silly teenager.

Cheers,

Henning

[Henning]

That's great. If you're not able to argue on an issue you simply start blaming your opponent or say it's boring.
Now, I'm convinced-! Great style.

I thought it might be possible to have a serious discussion on an intresting issue here - wrong place, wrong way, wrong time... wrong guys!?

Henning

[Richard O]

Henning,

I cannot read German, so I cannot directly tell what you have written. However by reading the other comments regarding your comments, I think I get the drift.

As an Australian please let me give you my take on the election. Howard is loathed by the liberal media in Australia and a number of the "moral" middle class as they certainly did not support the Iraq adventure. They do make up a substantial minority and they do make a lot of noise in the media. However to the "blue collar" worker Howard is respected as being steadfast and not tied to “bullshit” politically correct thinking. Their historical ties to the Labor Party is weakening as their Labor Party cannot decide if it is for the workers (as it was originally) or for the inner city elite. Therefore these people are drifting to the Coalition. In addition Mark Latham (the Labor Party leader) has only been in the job for 10 months, he was seen as a bit of a wild card, and the last thing anyone wanted was a new, untried leader taking Australia down the failed path of his mentor Gough Whitlam (the only Australian Prime Minister to have been sacked).

With regard to refugees. Australia takes in 12,000 refugees every year from camps from trouble spots from all parts of the world. In addition Australia takes in approximately other 120,000 immigrants. For a country of 20 million this is a lot. Over 50% of Australian citizens were born overseas or have both parents born overseas. However the average Australian (even those who are recent immigrants) take a dim view of people smugglers and those that use them.

[Henning]

Hi Richard,

I aggree on almost everything you've said! But every poll I've seen says that Howard is quite unpopular and actually seen as a liar. I agree with you, that Latham is regarded as to unexperienced with his 43 yrs and I know about the chaotic situation inside the Laborparty during the last years.

I have just added, that the mainpoint or argument of the Howard-campaign was friegthening the people with the danger of increasing Interest Rates under Labor - and that's a little bit strange because the Federal Reserve Bank defines the Interest Rates and high Interest Rates normally indicate adequate economical growth!

I tried to explain the differences to Germany about debts. In Germany the amount of money you have to pay back can not be changed.

Apart from that: This thread had started to discuss the abstinence of the Australian election in the german media and these guys were saying it would have been a bigger issue if Marky won.
I think that it's not true. Australia is in general very small in the german media - the other way round you read quie often about Germany in Australian Newspapers.

Most guys in this blog prefer blaming each other if they have no more arguments - that's a pitty!

Cheers,

Henning

[WhatDoIKnow]

The argument that if Howard had lost the election, the German media would have reacted the same way they did when he won - ignoring the results as much as possible - is simply stupid, nothing more and nothing less.

I am not calling Henning an idiot. Why should I to do that ? It's not polite. I am only saying that only on idiot would talk like he does. Does this make him an idiot ? No idea, it's up to him.

Anyways, even today, months and months after the glorious socialist victory in Spain, the argument "Aznar lost because he was to close to Bush" finds its way, once in a while, in German newspapers. Even today !

Would the German media have done the same with Howard if he had lost ? Of course not, you backwards conservatives !! Henning has precise information that the situation would have been totally different.

What can I say ? I only hope that Henning will choose to share as little as possible of his wisdom with us.

Hey silly teenager,

thanks for your nice answer!

Just compare the bilateral relationships of Germany to Spain and to Australia!

Are you able to percept any difference?

I have no empirical proof, but some countries are generally more important for Germany than others and for that reason they appear much more often on the german Agenda!

I really hope that's not to difficult for you but try to image why Spain is more important that Australia?!?

You are not the first guy trying to compare the relationship to Autralia with a another totally inaccurtate country.

WhatDoIknow, what you do know... not much-!

Cheers,

Henning

Notiz von David: Henning, versuchen Sie sich bitte dem Stil dieses Blogs anzupassen. Vermeiden Sie alberne Primanerscherze und dümmliche Unterstellungen, sonst sperre ich Ihre Beiträge.

[Henning]

Dies werde ich gerne tun - allerdings ist der Stil in diesem BLog genau das, was ich in Frage stelle-!

Eine Beitraege sind reichlich uncharmant..