Did you read the article? The headline was taken from a voter
Yes, I did.
I have a communications degree and plenty of experience working in the industry (I once worked for Murdoch), and the main tools media orgs use to slant news are headlines and the lead they choose for their story. You can add your right of reply further down the story, but it’s the headline and lead par which are most effective in driving reaction to a story.
This whole article is hot air. They have taken a few random social media posts in order to feed the conservative led narrative that Albo is a bludger/ professional opposition leader/ not doing his job.
Let’s take the story and analyse it a bit. Putting aside the headline, which is very suggestive in its own right, the first par of the story is:
Australia’s federal parliament, which was due to return next week, will be suspended for at least 15 days after the death of Queen Elizabeth in a move that has outraged Aussies.
What do they present to substantiate this claim of widespread national outrage? Two tweets from random Twitter users, and I’d lay down short odds that both of them vote conservative.
Since when did the tweets of random members of the public with obvious political agendas become the stuff of headlines?
The article then makes the implication Albo has called for a longer than usual hiatus, citing the fact the UK parliament will only “adjoin” (sic) for 10 days.
The reality is the PM is simply following protocol by confirming parliament will not sit next week. It was due to be adjourned the week after anyway, so it’s not like Albo is calling for a longer than usual hiatus.
It’s a politicisation of the Queen’s death in a thinly veiled attack on the PM.
The ironic thing is the same news source is also publishing stories with an editorial slant which is critical of Adam Bandt for politicising the death by calling for renewed discussions about a republic so soon after the news broke. Yet news is happy to politicise the death themselves if it can give them leverage against the PM.
Completely disingenuous reporting, IMO.