Monday, 4 January 2016

Am I really expected to sympathise

with people who do idiotic, stupid, vile, absurd or ridiculous things?
There is a media kerfuffle at present. One of Downunder's ministers in the federal parliament was forced to resign because, if reports are to be believed, he got a little too friendly with a female member of staff over late night drinks at a bar somewhere in Hong Kong. 
Apparently he put an arm around her, told her she had nice eyes and gave her a peck on the cheek. I suppose it is the sort of thing a fool does when he or she is a little tipsy. It was inappropriate.
There was, I believe, no complaint made for several days. The female in question then complained. The minister in question then apologised.
What happened after that is less clear. Apparently there is a picture of the two of them together. Apparently it got disseminated before and after the information became public. The female's name has not been mentioned in the media but the picture was published with her face blanked out. Right. 
And the media has had a field day. It's a hanging offence. It isn't enough that the minister has apologised and resigned. Disseminating her picture has been proclaimed to be a worse sin - although there is no suggestion that the former minister was responsible for doing this. He is held to be responsible.
I don't for one moment condone his behaviour but I don't condone the behaviour of the media either. They have had a field day on this incident. It has been used to question the judgment of the Prime Minister in appointing him, to have a shot at the man who previously held the seat - now the High Commissioner in London - and a good many other people as well.
It would be all very well except that quite recently there have been far worse incidences of inappropriate sexual behaviour by other members of parliament in even more senior positions. These have been mentioned in varying degrees by the media. Those in question have been "condemned" but there have been suggestions that they need to be forgiven such transgressions. Far worse behaviour has been portrayed as being "the lower end of the scale". Others around them have not been condemned in the same way and the same demands to resign have not always been made. It is of course all about politics, about keeping a government in power or trying to undermine it. Using inappropriate sexual behaviour like that is surely also inappropriate? Apparently the media thinks otherwise.
I find that abhorrent. 


jeanfromcornwall said...

I know nothing of this situation, but I do recognise the same elements that we see so much of all over the press. Are they realy expecting us to believe that they are as pure as the driven snow? What happened in the bars of Fleet Street was notorious. I doubt if things are any different now!
Pot! Kettle! you are as black as each other!

Anonymous said...

It IS the silly season with not much "real" news so the B team has to find something to titilate the consumers.

That said, what a change has taken place in that a person complaining of being treated unacceptably received and accepted an apology, rather than the perpetrator denying all or claiming it was "just a joke".

The episode probably has not done her career any good either, says this old cynic.

They should have left it at apology given and accepted --- but then the photo came out....


catdownunder said...

Yes, much the same sort of story appears in your part of the world Jean. And LMcC you are so right about it being the silly season.