Andrew Bolt: Media pack attack on ScoMo misses the big issues

Canberra journalists are playing a mean-girls game with Scott Morrison while the country faces massive challenges, and all that really matters is whether he can get the job done.

I’m no big fan of Scott Morrison, but the media pack attack on him this week has been vicious, hypocritical and totally unconnected to making life better for Australians.

Take the big gotcha moment at the Prime Minister’s car-crash appearance on Tuesday at the National Press Club.

Morrison had announced something important – a $2bn plan to make us stronger and less dependent on countries such as China by helping inventors and entrepreneurs develop their ideas here, rather than sell them overseas.

Journalists there didn’t ask him one question about this. Who cares about our future!

Instead, they demanded to know if Morrison knew the price of milk or bread. Whether he was a drag on the Liberal vote. Whether he’d say sorry for every mistake he’d ever made.

The media pack attack on Scott Morrison this week has been vicious, hypocritical and totally unconnected to making life better for Australians. Picture: Gaye Gerard

Then came that big gotcha: Channel 10’s Peter van Onselen announced he had copies of texts between former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian and some Liberal cabinet minister van Onselen refused to name, probably to protect the weasel who was his source.

Van Onselen told Morrison Berejiklian had called him a “horrible, horrible, person” and the unnamed Liberal cabinet minister called him a “fraud” and a “complete psycho”. What did the Prime Minister think of that?

Morrison looked shot. But what the hell was he supposed to make of it?

Who was this minister? We didn’t know until the next day that they were in Morrison’s government and not the NSW one. And what was the context?

But, more seriously, what does it matter if Morrison is a bastard privately, as long as he’s our bastard and gets the job done?

Bastards can be effective. Vladimir Putin is a bastard. Paul Keating was, too, and Victorian Premier Daniel Andrews is a political thug.

The whole drama is nuts, but what makes it worse is the hypocrisy.

I don’t just mean that the biggest bastard and psycho in this story is actually the Liberal minister who vilified Morrison and leaked the texts to van Onselen.

Why is this rat being protected by van Onselen, while the rat’s hapless victim is kicked in the head?

But no sooner had van Onselen sat down, having won gratifying publicity, then we read another free character assessment by colleagues – only this time of van Onselen himself.

Channel 10 journalist Tegan George has launched Federal Court action against her employer that accuses van Onselen of belittling her, undermining her and leaking against her. She said in her court documents Ten’s executive editor dismissed her complaints of bullying, despite calling van Onselen “bat-shit crazy”.

Channel 10’s Peter van Onselen announces he had copies of texts between former NSW premier Gladys Berejiklian and some Liberal cabinet minister. Picture: Getty Images

As it happens, I’ve read details from George’s statement of claim to get the context, and now have a lot of sympathy for van Onselen, who denies the claims.

Of course, it is for the Federal Court to decide who’s right, but I’m certainly not assuming the accusations against van Onselen are fair. He wouldn’t want you to, either. At least suspend judgment until all facts come out.

Nor do I think these allegations – whether true or false – make any difference in assessing van Onselen’s work.

But I’ve heard no Canberra journalist be as fair and balanced with Morrison. No, too many seem excited by the chance to join in another Australian pile-on.

How often do we now see this – Australians gleefully bonding over some target of mass hate. We all hated Cardinal George Pell, journalists insisted, even though he was innocent.

We all hated Novak Djokovic, we were told, even though he’d arrived legally and posed no extra health risk. We all hated Australian Open runner-up Daniil Medvedev, Channel 9 said, even though Medvedev had simply criticised the booing by feral fans.

If Morrison stands up to China, funds an innovation scheme, and spends $50m to save koalas, should voters ignore it because some minister once texted he was a ‘psycho’? Picture: Adam Taylor

I guess it’s part of the Twitter mentality, that’s made many younger Australians keener to join a mob to destroy someone than to praise them. They’re also more eager to seem good than actually do any.

But why are Canberra journalists playing this mean-girls game?

Is this really how they want voters to think? So if Morrison slashes unemployment and keeps the economy growing, must voters grumble: “Yes, but some no-name minister once said Morrison is a fraud.”

If Morrison stands up to China, funds a big new innovation ­
scheme, and spends $50m to save koalas, should voters really ignore all that because some treacherous minister once texted he was a “psycho”?

Talk about in-the-bubble stuff.

This country faces massive challenges – from China, the virus, our huge debt, global warming hysteria – and whether Morrison is a bastard makes not the slightest difference.