Journalism hits new low.

[i-need-a-martini]

That newspaper for morons owned by Murdoch, The Daily Telegraph, has decided to run a story that no other journalist/paper was willing to touch for obvious reason - Nathan Rees had an affair.

Given that the story has no public value, why on earth would they do this??

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/

And people read this garbage and think it's news??

[i-need-a-martini]

John - this woman pitched her story to every newspaper and tv station in the country. None were prepared to take it on until she got to the Telegraph who ran their 'exclusive' story yesterday. Others then followed suit but with nowhere near any of the venon and sleaze shown by the Telegraph. Refer my comment from 2 posts ago.

[*crikey*mate*]

That's not what your OP said or implied.

[red_wolfey]

Journalism hit a new low years ago.

They are digging now with their bare hands now that the shovels have broken.

[freshwater-2]

Why did this low life woman report the affair.   It reflects just as badly on her...knowingly having an affair with a married man.

[i-need-a-martini]

---

@my*mum wrote:

That's not what your OP said or implied.

---

What did I imply exactly or not say in my OP?

When I posted my OP, the Telegraph had only just 'broken' the story. 

But of all the other links you provided, all referenced the Telegraph and all released their story only after Rees issued a public statement.

And not one of them repeated the accusations the Telegraph 'reported' nor resorted to lowbrow name calling nor did they report that the accusations were true. They simply reported the facts as they were - Nathan Rees issues a public statement after the Telegraphs story about an extramarital affair. Even the MSN showed showed some dignity in their reporting.

My OP was about the low standards of this newspaper in issuing a story no one else was prepared to break. That is why the title says "Journalism hits a new low." and the OP goes on to explain why. 

[i-need-a-martini]

And the hide of the Telegraph today to issue a barrage of criticism to the ABC for reporting the Indonesian spying incident.

Apparently (according to Bolt and a couple of other no-name editors), THAT should not have been made public. The ABC 'betrayed' Abbott because the ABC 'hates' him. Oh boo hoo.

So we can ruin a mans life without doing our homework to find out how much is true with impunity. But we aren't allowed to know about a political event that would have been made public by a whistleblower? 

Hello??

Something is missing in this puzzle methinks.

[red_wolfey]

---

@i-need-a-martini wrote:

And the hide of the Telegraph today to issue a barrage of criticism to the ABC for reporting the Indonesian spying incident.

Apparently (according to Bolt and a couple of other no-name editors), THAT should not have been made public. The ABC 'betrayed' Abbott because the ABC 'hates' him. Oh boo hoo.

So we can ruin a mans life without doing our homework to find out how much is true with impunity. But we aren't allowed to know about a political event that would have been made public by a whistleblower? 

Hello??

Something is missing in this puzzle methinks.

---

Bolts is the same guy who stated anyone reporting on climate change should loose their job........that was after accusing Juliar of taking away free speech.

He also once said his 'ignorance helps him be non bias' when it comes to writing about political subjects.....the guy is a cartoon character.

[acacia_pycnantha]

http://www.sbs.com.au/ondemand/video/61454403739/The-Feed

start watching at 4:45

[silverfaun]

So no outrage that Rees is an adulterer, fixed up his mistress public housing , fixed her son's legal problems?? just outrage that it has been made public & it was made public before Murdock press released it.

Hypocrite much, your hatred for News Corp is boundless but nothing about the British owned Guardian  releasing damaging leaks to damage The Abbott government eh?

[silverfaun]

Good research again MM. This is not turning out as the op wished it had, poor thing.