Welcome to the new (old) moralism: how the media’s coverage of the Joyce affair harks back to the 1950s
The media’s treatment of Barnaby Joyce’s affair is an uncomfortable throwback to the busybody moralising of the past, writes the University of Melbourne’s Dennis Muller in this crossposting from The Conversation.
The Barnaby Joyce saga has given a great boost to what might be called “shake-the-tree” journalism: you shake the tree by running a sensational story and see what falls out.
The Daily Telegraph’s original public-interest case for publishing the first story of Joyce’s relationship with ex-staffer Vikki Campion was weak when weighed against the privacy intrusions on Joyce, his estranged wife, his daughters, and Campion.
However, that story has resulted in the emergence of three genuine public-interest justifications.
This is no throwback to pre-sexual revolution, it is the rank hypocracy of Joyce targeting LGBTI rights with his “Traditional Christian Marriage” views while simultaneously bagging a young staffer.
Joyce made himself a target. And is being taken to task for that no more or no less. All of the coverage is warranted and in the public interest. Either live by the standards you shout at others, or shut up.
This phenomenon can be summed-up in two phrases:
1. moral posturing
2. virtue-signalling
This is the New Narcissism of the Left, and it’s toxic.
I think this article was well thought out and dignified given the subject matter. The media should have done its job properly and investigated the other stories jobs for the non-partner etc. much earlier & given the voters of NE the chance to appraise BJ then.
The tele is out of order, but when isn’t it?
That said they have been far worse to the other side of the aisle far more often
With the news about to break, did Barnaby / LNP call up the Tele, because it would have softened the blow vs The Guardian breaking the news?