Let me get some things straight:
- I am not a fan of Ms Hanson and her politics. In fact some of her views repulse me; and
- Publishing photos of a public person supposedly taken about 30 years ago without consent on a national platform is wrong.
That said I have found the media reaction to the photos interesting. Of most interest has been how the newspapers who bought the pictures in the first place have reacted.
- First it was her.
- Then it wasn't.
- Then it could be even though she said it was not her.
- Then the expert says it isn't.
- Then the ex husband says it isn't
Now most other media outlets coverd it for two days basically showing the pictures and then when it became quite obvious it was not Ms Hanson they dropped it. But not the news group. Oh no. They paid good money ($15,000 apparently) so they want to milk the story for all it's worth.
So even after everyone is quite certain the pictures are not of Pauline the news corp crew keep going. I wonder if they had this planned all along? Like on ACA. Each day roll out another element to the story to make it drag out over a full week?
If that is the case then they have been deliberately misleading and Hanson has all the rights in the world to sue them.
6 comments:
Oh, the ambivalence. On one hand I think, this is really appalling. And on the other hand I think, who cares? It's Pauline Hansen.
There is of course the argument that it will create sympathy for her though and we can't have that.
FL - I can sympathise with Pauline for having false allegations made about her. I do not have any positive feelings regarding her political position.
I was more commenting about the process used by the papers to milk it for as long as they could.
Someone has published picture of you in the nuddy too?
FL - No Comment
Oh, you're no fun.
FL - Ok not that I am aware of!
Why has someone published any of you??
Post a Comment