A lot of the criticism is pushed most strongly by Murdoch related newspapers, so I have a feeling a Liberal Party leader would have been given a slide on that.
For example, the media could have focused on Jenny Mikakos, who is the actual health minister in the government and who resigned over the whole thing. She was actually the person with direct responsibility over the matter, not Andrews.
Yet most people have barely heard the name, while everyone has heard how Dan Andrews is to blame.
That's not an inevitable way to frame this story and not an accident: it's a deliberate framework set up by the media. They're doing "The buck stops here" but they get to decide where "here" is, and if it was a pro-business right wing leader, you'd be hearing all about the incompetent underling letting the side down and not about how Glorious Leader must take the fall for mistakes by anyone who works for him.
And the other side of that, is that their argument is that responsibility goes all the way to the top, so it had to be Dan Andrews. This isn't built into the story either, it's a deliberate framing decision. The hotel thing is about returning international visitors, why isn't that a federal government responsibility? If you know how the media works then let me tell you, if left-wing Julia Gillard was still the prime minister when this happened (instead of our current right-wing leader) and the state leader was a right-wing Liberal, then they'd frame the story as being a federal government failure and the state government as victims. That's how the shell game works at it's core.
So this is how they'd frame the same story differently depending on who's in power: Liberal State / Liberal Federal: blame the health minister or a public servant, limit the fallout. Labor State / Liberal Federal: blame leader of state labor party: "the buck stops here". Liberal State / Labor Federal: blame federal labor leader, he/she didn't provide needed leadership. Labor State / Labor Federal: they all suck, sack the lot of them.
Right now the response by the individual states is a shambles, but somehow according to the media that's not a federal government issue, it's up to the states to sort it out themselves. According to the media it isn't up to the federal government to do anything about the virus and anything that goes wrong isn't their fault. This is pure spin on party lines, and a Labor prime minister wouldn't be getting a free slide like Scott Morrison is.
So, nothing is ever a liberal party person's fault unless they can be proved to have personally done the thing themselves, and you can't reasonably blame anyone else, while everything is a labor party person's fault unless you can prove they weren't involved and they didn't take all humanly possible steps to prevent it. And even then we'll play down the Liberal wrong-doer by taking the most limited possible interpretation, demanding proof before passing judgment, while taking a "where there's smoke ..." stance for any labor party wrongdoing. For example the Liberal leader of NSW was recently revealed to have had a secret sexual relationship with a minister who was taking bribes/kickbacks related to developments, and there are police recordings of her apparently giving the nod about it. Mere weeks later, the story isn't headline news anymore. You can bet that if leftie Dan Andrews was within 1000 miles of a sex and bribery scandal we'd never hear the end of it. Even if he wasn't the one doing it: "What did you know about these other crooked people boinking, Andrews, and when did you know it?" Labor leaders are held to the standard of all-knowing commissars who clearly must have known the sex lives and corrupt dealings of literally everyone else in their party, while a Liberal leader can literally be fucking a criminal and claim they didn't know he was a crook, and the media just says "well that's fair enough, then, how could you have known?"
Author
Topic: Untamed Virus Containment Thread:COVID-19: Lurking Omni-Flu Edition (Read 477994 times)