Tim Blair

Why won’t Labor bite the bullet and promise to do what needs to be done to halt the mainstream Australian media’s slide into effectively lying, consistently, to its readers, listeners and viewers for profit.

Does hypocrite Margo write for free? And where's the question mark?

Who allows this crap to be published, even online, in this form?

"Why won’t Labor bite the bullet and promise to do what needs to be done to halt the mainstream Australian media’s slide into effectively lying, consistently, to its readers, listeners and viewers for profit. BAN CASH FOR COMMENT. Criminalise the disgraceful, unethical practice of media selling the news and comment it pretends to be independent? AND ban compnaies from offering to buy media comment?"

So we have no question mark at the end of the first sentenc, which is a question. Then a demand. Then two more sentences, which do end in question marks, one of which starts with 'AND".
Honestly - what the hell are they thinking? Allow me to make a statement to the SMH:

Why do you emplyo Marhgo Kingston. Webdiary is utter BOLLOCKS? DELETE WEBDIARY. It pollutes the INternet? Its soul redeeming feeture is to provide amusement valu to blogers and there reeders?

"what needs to be done to halt the mainstream Australian media’s slide into effectively lying, consistently, to its readers, listeners and viewers for profit"

Sounds pretty much like the SMH to me. Sister cure thyself!

That august tome, that purveyor of honest reporting, saviour of the universe.....

You should not confuse "ban Margo" and "ban Webdiary".

The webdiary concept is a good one, and possibly holds more promise for the future of the media than say, blogging, for instance.

Your problem is not with Webdiary, but the fact that it is chaired by someone whose bias is opposite to your own. (And almost as entrenched, I fear).

Imagine if you will, a webdiary hosted by Timmy B. You'd love it.

Timmy B would of course not allow his personal agenda to colour his communications in a webdiary, because Tim has never uttered a biased word in his life. And there would be fewer typos.

Webdiary in its current form is Margo, therefore ban margo = ban webdiary.
Webdiary as a concept is not completely flawed - it is just a blog hosted by a major newspaper. As such, it should at least have a basic grasp of spelling and grammar.
As for your other condescending point - this already is a webdiary hosted by "Timmy".

I like the new layout of smh. If only they'd remove the link to the webdiary.

BTW, we haven't heard much of the anti-gravity technology lately?

Perhaps John Howard used it when he flew into Baghdad.

Shakespeare himself started sentences with 'and'.

Webdiary is a valuable and worthwhile inclusion in the online edition of the paper. Regardless of whether one agrees with or likes Margo or other Webdiarists, their content contributes to healthy public debate within the mainstream sphere.

For once I’d like to see someone here actually criticise the ideas that Margo and other Webdiarists put forth rather than continue with banal, self-defeating and childish ridicule. Tim clearly has a personal agenda, but what’s your beef? Are you merely jumping blindly onto his bandwagon, or are you just unable to pen an intelligible critique?

I hoppe Alan Jones has a lawyer looking at that comment.

Sorry Liz - Shakespeare was writing a play, and/or sonnets, when he started a sentence with "And". A more appropriate analogy for Webdiary's butchering of the english language would be Joyce I think.
As for the healthy public debate - may i refer you once again to the anti-gravity article that was posted as part of the diary.
There may be an occasional valid or worthy point, but it is written in the style of a frothing rant, and mixed in with non fact based conspiracy theories.
If webdiary contributors start making intelligible points, I shall start making intelligible critiques.

I used to follow Webdiary and enjoyed the exchange of ideas. Margo was less ideological in the past than recently. I don't know what has happened but it isn't good. Perhaps she needs to free the brains to free the mind, or something like that.

Liz,

of late, the level of intelligent comment on Webdiary has been appalling low: by way of example, read the recent unintelligible drivel contributed by Jack Robertson and the uncritical sycophancy of Robert Bosler.

If Webdiary wishes to remain relevant, why does it not refer to the recent UN oil for aid scandal (which is far worse than any of the alleged Haliburton rip-offs) or, regarding today's spray, the recent visit to the Murdoch house by Mark Latham?

Sorry Liz - Shakespeare was writing a play, and/or sonnets, when he started a sentence with "And". A more appropriate analogy for Webdiary's butchering of the english language would be Joyce I think.

Heck, Virgil started book 4 of the Aeneid with "But" (well "At" actually, but he can't be blamed for the fact he wrote in Latin rather than English).

Margo-kkrrrawk...

[The Parrotese-English Translator has been turned off by the Management.]