Disgruntled Fourth Estate

The favoured tweet at the moment, which is being re-tweeted continuously after yesterday’s revelations by the 3 amigos, is this one:

RT @jgwr: Condolences to News Limited on losing the 2010 federal election. #ausvotes

I have no idea who JGWR is but his/her tweet would appear to be right on the money in expressing the perceptions of a great number of politically aware social networkers. At least those in the Twitterverse. I also heard it mentioned, or at least a question asked of someone on RN Breakfast this morning – can’t recall who right now – as to whether the Fourth Estate, Australia’s domestic media, has too much to say in political terms about who should and should not be destined to govern this country.
What has become patently clear, as if it wasn’t already crystal to those of us who pay attention, is that certain sectors of the Fourth Estate in this country have taken on a perceived roll of appointees and judges of who should and should not be in positions of power. I point the accusing finger at the Murdoch press in general, and The Australian in particular.
The Fourth Estate has no call, and has no right to make calls on what belongs to the voters. The vitriol which is pouring from The Australian’s pages today is a prime example of why journalists should stick to reporting the news and questioning the executive on issues of public interest. Not purporting to represent that interest by editorialising the views of their employer. There is no right to rule belonging to any given political or ideological mindset. Only the individual’s right to decide who appears best suited to do the job required, which is what Messrs Oakeshott, Windsor, Katter, Brandt and Wilkie have done. Our convoluted and I say, perverted electoral system aside, the rest of us clearly couldn’t decide as a majority which major party could do that job, so we’ve abrogated that right to five individuals. So be it. If News Limited don’t like that expression of democracy in action, then tough titties.