You say mistook, I say misled

Sydney’s Daily Telegraph Confidential column had a nice little scoop, with Chris Lilley confiding that his follow up to Summer Heights High will soon air on the ABC.  

But how on earth can the paper have landed such a scoop for the man it describes in the article as “uber-shy”?

The clue comes in the phrase: “Lilley mistook a Confidential staffer for a punter in Melbourne”

Dr Mumbo suspects that Lilley isn’t in the habit of accosting random members of the public to tell them his plans, what with him being uber-shy and all. So perhaps a more accurate phrasing would have been ”Our Confidential staffer pretended to be a punter”.

August 26th, 2009 at 1:22 pm

  • Email This Post
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • MySpace
  • Digg
  • Yahoo Buzz
  • Sphinn
  • Technorati Favorites
  • Delicious

Comments


  1. Graeme Rodda - Prahran
    26 Aug 09
    7:36 pm

    2. Yes Dear Dr. Nothing’s changed; never has and never will with this tabloid “scrag”. Even though Lilley’s humour is not quite mine; we all recognize that he is a brilliant innovative world-class talent that should be nurtured, sustained and supported. No wonder the media’s reputation is going downhill fast; there was indeed a time when newspaper, radio and television “writers and reporters were proud to call themselves journalists. But this type of gutter journalism, mis-reporting and/or gross mis-representation is all too prevalent in the media today – witness THE SYDNEY DAILY TELEGRAPH, A CURRENT AFFAIR and TODAY TONIGHT as prime examples of mass media representing themselves as something else. The standard of reporting, sticking to the AJA and OZ PRESS COUNCIL standards as the ones to aim for and attain are, sadly, long since gone.

    Why doesn’t the management of the “TELE” take a leaf out of its sister tabloid THE HERALDSUN in Melbourne. It had a reputation of “running fast and loose with the truth” before the turn of the century, but has now evolved to a stage where it is at least on a par, if not ahead of the pondorous MELBOURNE AGE for standards of truth in reporting and quality of journalism. And because of its stature as the largest-selling newspaper in Australia, thrashing Sydney’s tabloid flagship and achieving this in a much smaller marketplace,

    If anyone doubts me, just ask the “old heads” in the press area. Not just the Laurie Oakes of this world; also try the ‘grizzled’ sub-editors and Leader writers of any paper, who will certainly back this up convincingly. The HERALDSUN has certainly regained respect ; sadly the TELE hasn’t and doesn’t even look like getting close to it. The citizens of NSW are much the poorer for it.

  2. AdGrunt
    26 Aug 09
    10:05 pm

    3. Crikey.
    It takes quite something for the first comment to be longer than the original article, even on Mumbrella.

    Gossip Reporter In Tawdry Lie Scandal Shocka!
    becomes a polemic on the decline of journalism.

    The ugly bit which guts me to the core is that people buy / watch this stuff. If they didn’t, it wouldn’t be there.

    Now let the “race for the bottom” debate start…

  3. Graeme Rodda - Prahran
    26 Aug 09
    10:21 pm

    4. ADGRUNT; you are so right. But upon reading that garbage; as one who is more thn a bit “old-fashioned” (obviously), I took great offence at that scurrilious report. We all know ;that it is just another crappy one in the annals of so-called ‘journalism”; but society must take a stand sometime. But I bet that it will not even draw more than another one or two responses; if that. Let’s hope; and see.

  4. AdGrunt
    26 Aug 09
    11:02 pm

    5. Graeme,
    I’ll momentarily take my acerbic hat off. Your response is correct and heartfelt as I echoed, but I suspect that the place we should both start is at the top, not the bottom.
    Telling anyone that gossip columns are full of bottom-feeding, rumour mongering, moronic twaddle is obvious and indeed why they’re read and have been in various forms for millennia. Hey – I read them occasionally, but expect lower professional standards than say the cartoon strip or the horoscope.
    So the greater and more serious issue that you touch on of journalistic dumbing down, tabloid sensationalism, political sway etc is sadly unlikely to get much comment around this topic – right site, wrong article.
    Wait until the morning. It’ll be Thursday, so everyone should be alert by now…

  5. Graeme Rodda - Prahran
    26 Aug 09
    11:12 pm

    6. Thank you ; again you are “spot on”. It is only, after all, a “sleaze page” dressed up and falsley promoted “as news”. But it says two things to me, being: 1) the standard of reader is lower than ever, and 2) even though this is a “goss” section unreservedly, the whole mis-representation of the paper to the poor young man was typical of the “gutter journalism” practised in Ezra Norton’s heyday. and when One adds that this standard is replete throughout the pages of that paper with headlines that the Washington Post would be proud of; I just shake my head sadly.

    Let’s hope that the new young “journos” coming through now do at least aspire to far higher standards of reportage, and, more importantly, are allowed, even encouraged to by some of their muck-minded editors and seniors.

  6. eyeswiredopen
    28 Aug 09
    11:20 am

    7. What’s your problem? Journos are members of the public too. Do you always announce your profession first up when chatting casually with people you dont know? If Lilley wants to keep this secret then how about he keep secrets to himself instead of balbbing to someone he doesnt know who could well be a journo or -increaisngly likely these days – a blogger, or an employee from a rival network?

    Secondly, how do you know the Tele hack misrepresented him/ herelf?

    Thirdly, the story seems to have elicited the truth from Lilley, rather than a lie that he’s been instructed to parrot by the PR department. The problem with this being…????

    Baffled.

  7. mumbrella
    28 Aug 09
    11:45 am

    8. That’s probably one you should take up with the Australian Press Council, Eyes Wired Open. Here’s what its rules say:

    “Generally, journalists should identify themselves as such. However, journalists and photographers may at times need to operate surreptitiously to expose crime, significantly anti-social conduct, public deception or some other matter in the public interest.”

    I’m not sure that the news that the ABC has recommossioned Chris Lilley quite counts as investigative journalism being conducted in the public interest.

    Cheers,

    Tim – Mumbrella

  8. eyeswiredopen
    28 Aug 09
    12:22 pm

    9. Tim- Mumbrella, you’re not answering my point. Do you always announce your profession first up when chatting casually with people you dont know? “Hello , Mrs Lilley who’s just moved in Next Door, my name is Tim and I must first of all inform you that I work for a website called Mumbrella before you decide to speak to me either on or ff the record as I’m about to politely ask what your husband’sp to. Get real.

  9. Graeme Rodda - Prahran
    28 Aug 09
    12:37 pm

    10. Thank you MUMBRELLA.. “eyreswiredopen” doesn’t even have the guts to put their full name to their comment; let alone their publication or suburb. Typical. So THAT ALONE tells us just how much belief or truth we can place in his/her comments.

    As for them falling back on the old chestnut of “blaming the PR department”; what a joke. HE, because it’s probably a gutless “he”, totally ignores the fact that information WAS AGAIN OBTAINED BY DECEPTION; a favourite trick of lazy and incompetent so-called “journalists” and those wankers who stick up for them. As as for “slamming” journalists, which he says I did by (at least) inference; “just wake up to yourself man, and get your hand off it”. I did no such thing. Sounds like you could either work as a supposed “journo” on that paper, or are maybe one of their hack bosses. Or should that read “boss hacks”. Or alternately; are you “a failed” real journo? We don’t know; because you hide under a pseudonym. Oh well; . . . . . , that’s Life in the 21st Century; I suppose..

    Lastly, and for the record, as someone who has known and worked with serious journos over a number of years, AND for leading publishers and orgnisations where I had to firstly pass their unspoken but known “ethics and standards tests,” let me tell you that I have the greatest respect for good decent honest and hard-working (genuine) journalists; they are indeed almost the last safeguard and bastions of society. And the real ones certainly don’t stick up for lazy easy-to-write- snippets that attempt to pass for real journalism.. Since you obviously disagree with this, why don’t you come clean to all of us in a reasoned, clear and concise manner, instead of just “waffling” on. And while you are at it, have the guts to put a name, publication and/or suburb to your scribbles here, so that we all can see not only just who you are and your “interest” if any in all this, but put any reputation you have on the line as well. I, like many other people, look forward to seeing this, writ large in good old black and white. Her; and very shortly. “C’mon baby; c’mon”. JUST DO IT!

  10. eyeswiredopen
    28 Aug 09
    12:53 pm

    11. Chill man. You still havent answered my point. Try doing that before foaming at the mouth one more time.