Institute of Public Affairs runs ad in The Australian campaigning for freedom of speech

The IPA would be better off donating the money spent on this ad to Wikipedia, because thats apparently where Bolt got his ‘facts’ from (the ones that turned out not to be true such as the ‘fact’ about Larissa Behrendt’s parentage).

On second thoughts, maybe they should spend the money on sending Bolt back to do a Comms degree, because students in first year are told. with no room for debate, that Wikipedia is an unacceptable and unreliable source of ‘facts’, and it seems Bolt could do with some basic, journalistic standard, fact-finding skills.

I too, am all for freedom of speech (which btw is not guaranteed under the Australian constitution), but I also oppose opinion columnists, posing as journalists, using false information to satisfy their personal agendas. The judgement of the Federal Court was clear on this aspect, but as usual, Chris Berg and his ‘Ponds Institute’ have interpreted it in their own, very special, Far Right, paranoid, scare mongering way.

Do a bit of research on the Institute Of Public Affairs and you’ll find they’re not exactly dedicated to transparency in media. They are a right-wing bullshit machine.

gotta agree A-A-I

Totally agree with @Anti-anti-intellectual. Well said!

I second what he said.

But by putting Bolt’s name in the title of the ad, surely this implies it IS an ad in support of Andrew Bolt, and not just about free speech.

Keith Windschuttle, Nick Minchin, John Stone, Micheal Kroger, Ian Plimer etc. The list reads like a who’s who of spooked out, cardigan wearing, conspiracy theory-subscribing nutters.

I oppose any right to disseminate erroneous information. People with access to public speech (whatever medium) have a responsibility for ensuring that their opinions are based on fact (to reasonable limits of verification). Andrew Bolt is only careful in not letting facts spoil a good rant, and such intellectual dishonesty deserves as much kicking as can be administered. All such others need similar treatment.

Oops. That was actually the birthday party list from back in July.

“It is alarming that in 2011 someone can be taken to court for expressing an opionion.”

I have an opinion about the IPA and what its members spend their time doing with each other which, previously, I would have considered defamatory. I am glad I now have the IPA’s support to publish this opinion. Widely. Everywhere. If they truly support freedom of speech, I expect them to also publish it in their journal.

Gee, I recognise many names of current IPA staff in that list. Did they have to “donate” as well?

Who on earth do the IPA think the Oz people are?
There’s a craziness upon this land if these hokie folk think that ordinary Aussies are going to fall for their crap.
This is akin to a redneck revolt against the ordinany rule of law (and it’s not near in the same camp as the butterfly on a wheel ad in support of jagger’s dopesmoking conviction).
It makes me worry for what kind of reactionary values are bing spreasd in this country. The IPA is a Reaganesque bunch of master of the universe wannabe manipulators, viz Greald Henderson in the SMH.
This is reactionary crap and anyone eho dared to put his/her name on this should hand his/her head in SHAME.

Only 1,261?

Can we get a comparison with GetUp campaigns of a similar type? (ie. donate to get your name on the ad)

Also, EoR, you are my new favourite person. One can only take freedom of speech claims seriously when they come from those who have never sued (and publicly refuse to do so).

What a bunch of fucking numpties the IPA is on this.

‘free speech’ is one thing. ‘making stuff up about people and printing it erroneously as fact’ is something else again.

Bolt got slapped down in the Federal Court because he presented mistruths as facts. God knows, the fact that he’s still got a column after all these years tells us that ‘free speech’ is still alive and well in Australia.

From Sourcewatch.org” “More recently, the IPA has been the driving force behind the establishment of a number of new non-profit front groups, including the Australian Environment Foundation – which campaigns for weaker environmental laws – Independent Contractors of Australia – which campaigns for an end to workplace safety laws and a general deregulation of the labour market, and the ironically named Owner Drivers Australia, which campaigns against safety and work standard for truck drivers.”

Maybe we could bring back slavery too.

A-I-I

How dare you reduce the stature of the IPA to that of the Ponds institute. Their (Ponds) work on reducing the visible signs of aging is some of the finest scientific material ever published, whereas the IPA folks are just making it up as they go along…

shame on you…

Bolt’s “outrage” at being “censored” is a smoke screen – he’s been caught out and shown to omit facts, not do his research and more.

The other joke is that the judgement hasn’t censored him at all.

The judge has only asked for the publisher to place corrections next to the online version of the article. The article iteself is to remain unchanged and openly published. True that the judge supports this more for practical reasons, but still Bolt hasn’t been gagged or censored.

He’s seems to want to be portray himself as a martyr for the cause of free speech.

Hilarious. He sure does have chutzpah.

Not only is the IPA supporting him, but there’s friedly articles in the CIS. That’s the current state of Australia’s “independent” think-tanks.