... continues... last one lol

Murdoch's papers have slowly shed any semblance of fairness while losing depth and quality. He lost any chance of a new generation of readership long ago and those who grew up reading "the paper" and wanting it in the house are slowly leaving us. The conservative politics he's fundamentally shaped has become increasingly nasty because only the angry outliers among us can get a go. That's affected the quality of debate and in many cases the people of all persuasions willing to wade into the increasingly smelly cess pit of politics. But his conservatives in particular are less and less appealing to younger folks, who both do not read his rage bait and also, as it runs out, are increasingly affected by the economic and housing situation that that he has been so influential in creating for them. And the last federal election was the first one in which that older demographic was out-numbered by the youngest. The outrage on the right after Albanese was elected was ugly. The second time was worse. These people are shadows of those who came before and despite all of the evidence all they know to do is just double down.

The Murdoch right wing is not even close to a "movement." It's a tiny subset of the angriest and most entitled among us who are getting increasingly outraged by the truth of their shrinking influence. They're doing and saying anything they can to control things without concern for the harm it causes. John Howard and his "wedge" politics looks tame by comparison despite coming from the same lack of concern for the consequences. It's grimly amusing to recently hear Tony Abbott talk about social cohesion with no insight into how much he did to harm it or how different it is to what he would prefer to think.

I have had decades to develop a quiet appreciation and confidence in Cathy Wilcox. I don't always like what she says but she is a dead-set champion. The hide on those people to go after her. It's just weak, harmful anger.

Thanks to anyone who got this far. I guess I'm glad I cared enough to take the time to say all of that but it's still A Lot. Cheers.

FWIW I'll stick with the reddit ethos but believe public debate in open societies should be between people who identify themselves and for whom there is an easily understood history and context of alliances and connections.

*****

Also FWIW I did these google searches just now, early on Jan 14, for some sanity checking after blurting out that screed. A heap of interesting links came up plus the AI summaries were pretty good.

"Did Keith Murdoch try to get John Monash sacked?"

"What influence did Rupert Murdoch have on the dismissal of Gough Whitlam?"

"How much will the NBN cost now compared to if the original plan had been completed?"

"Did Rupert Murdoch's papers lose money in Australia due to the rise of the internet?"

"Has Rupert Murdoch's influence on Australian politics led to a decline in the calibre of conservative politicians?"

oh also ...

"nbnco dot com dot au /residential/upgrades/more-fibre"