Spin doctor Sue

By Bob Gould

Sue Bolton in her two contributions on the question of Media Monitors
is engaged in what might kindly be called spin doctoring.

Firstly, Bolton attributes to me something I didn't say: that the
bloke in question who taped the meetings "has crossed over and is a
class traitor".

I certainly did attempt to sketch out what socialists can reasonably
do in the way of jobs, but I didn't prejudge the issue concerning this
bloke. I carefully asked some relevant questions, so Bolton is
verballing me in this instance.

The questions I asked remain relevant, and I think the key questions,
and they have to be answered by the leadership of the Socialist
Alliance and the bloke himself.

Bolton says in passing that she can confirm that the bloke is a member
of the Socialist Alliance. Big deal, that was never in dispute. The
question that I actually asked, by implication, is whether the bloke,
at least up to Friday when the story broke, a member of the Victorian
executive of the Socialist Alliance? Bolton should answer that implied
question.

Bolton acts as a kind of attorney for the bloke, who should in fact
speak for himself, and she recounts his version of events.

Well, Dean Mighell and other militant union officials have a somewhat
different version of events, one that's different to Bolton's and
which she doesn't adequately describe.

Bolton baldly asserts that it's only public parts of union meetings
that are recorded, but of course the quoted union officials deny that,
and some say that some tapes were obtained in a way not authorised by
the union. All that is in the public record in the newspapers.

Useful clarity on these questions might be achieved by answering the
following questions:

1.Has the bloke in question or Sue Bolton, or anyone else on behalf of
the Socialist Alliance, had any direct communication with Dean Mighell
and other affected union officials since last Friday, when the story
broke?
2.What version of events have the bloke in question, and Bolton or
other leading members of the Socialist Alliance, put to Mighell and
other union officials, and what has been their response? It's hard to
plead privacy on these aspects of the events because the events are
now very public and the radical and working class public is entitled
to have a more comprehensive explanation than the bland spin of Bolton.

I stress here that I'm only asking reasonable questions, which should
be answered, and I'm not prejudging the issue. I just want some
answers to these questions.

A further aspect of Bolton's spin-doctoring is her second post, which
has obviously been produced after a geeing up from someone in
authority in the DSP. She tries to divert discussion of these concrete
events into a general diatribe against Rudd and Gillard. I agree with
quite a bit of what she says on that matter, as I've said similar
things in more cautious language in several places. But it's pure spin
to try to divert attention from the concrete questions raised about
Media Monitors.

A further part of Bolton's spin is her equation of my justifiable
request that the curious man Raven withdraw his assertion that I'm an
agent provocateur, with my carefully asked questions about these
events concerning Media Monitors. I haven't accused anyone of being an
agent provocateur. I've simply asked questions that any experienced
socialist has a right to ask and have answered. Raven, on the other
hand, made a despicable accusation against me without any evidence.

Bolton and the bloke in the eye of the storm, so to speak, should
answer the questions that I've raised above.