@Jeremy backwards masking is a hilarious term coined by anti-pop music Christians for subliminal messages they claim you can only hear by playing a recording backwards and interpreting the results. Wikipedia has decided its backmasking now.
New music for a new format Matthew. It was sad listening to the opening bars of our old theme for the last time, but we both love the new music and we hope you will too.
I listened to the first couple of minutes of Alan Jones' rant - that's about as much as I can stand. He says that there are many people who are angry and confused about the 'Carbon tax'. The sheer audacity of the man is amazing. He, along with assorted political opportunists, special interests and rent-seekers, has wilfully worked to sow the anger and confusion. Why is he allowed to get away with it? He obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, as illustrated, for example, by his outrageous slandering of institutions such as the CSIRO and the nonsense of many of his claims (e.g. the recent 0.001% fiasco). Like anyone else, Mr Jones is entitled to his opinion and to bring others to his view. In that, especially in a matter of such public importance, he and anyone else trying to influence the debate in such a public way must take into account things like facts, logic and the need for evidence if they want to be regarded as having any credibility. When they don't, it should be called loudly and clearly.
Here's something interesting that might deserve SW attention.
Josh Dowse has an article up at The Drum, and the little author blurb at the bottom states that he "works on "sustainable" business, "responsible" investment and related issues."
Scare quotes.
I haven't leapt entirely on to the post-Howard conservative ABC takeover theory, but I strongly doubt that the IPA or any other right-wing commentator would have their stated business values framed that way.
Reader Comments (16)
Huzzah! Great to hear you guys in a new podcast. Hope it's got a liberal dose of mindless cackling each week.
Yes!
Ange and I, and my mum, will be so pleased :)
Thanks.
I hope this new podcast has backwards masking too!
Backwards masking?
Backward masking?
Is that when you dress up as {insert name of RW opinionist here}?
Hoorah!
I'm not sure how I'm going to cope only being able to Pure Poison once a week, though.
Oooh - new music!
Miss puss is very excited.
Fuuuunky guys!
@Jeremy backwards masking is a hilarious term coined by anti-pop music Christians for subliminal messages they claim you can only hear by playing a recording backwards and interpreting the results. Wikipedia has decided its backmasking now.
Oops, sorry Chris.... Judt getting used to the new platform and axcidentally deleted your comment!
New music for a new format Matthew. It was sad listening to the opening bars of our old theme for the last time, but we both love the new music and we hope you will too.
The new site looks great and I like the new intro music, very funky!
I was a big fan of the PP podcast and its great that you guys are going to do something new together.
Was a huge fan of the original PP Podcast, and looking forward to this new enterprise.
Glad you guys have finally gone 'mainstream' ;)
Looking forward to Something Wonky. The impotent rage I used to feel listening to LOLbolt was begining to wear me out.
I listened to the first couple of minutes of Alan Jones' rant - that's about as much as I can stand. He says that there are many people who are angry and confused about the 'Carbon tax'. The sheer audacity of the man is amazing. He, along with assorted political opportunists, special interests and rent-seekers, has wilfully worked to sow the anger and confusion. Why is he allowed to get away with it? He obviously doesn't know what he's talking about, as illustrated, for example, by his outrageous slandering of institutions such as the CSIRO and the nonsense of many of his claims (e.g. the recent 0.001% fiasco). Like anyone else, Mr Jones is entitled to his opinion and to bring others to his view. In that, especially in a matter of such public importance, he and anyone else trying to influence the debate in such a public way must take into account things like facts, logic and the need for evidence if they want to be regarded as having any credibility. When they don't, it should be called loudly and clearly.
Here's something interesting that might deserve SW attention.
Josh Dowse has an article up at The Drum, and the little author blurb at the bottom states that he "works on "sustainable" business, "responsible" investment and related issues."
Scare quotes.
I haven't leapt entirely on to the post-Howard conservative ABC takeover theory, but I strongly doubt that the IPA or any other right-wing commentator would have their stated business values framed that way.
http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/4114426.html