Inky Retch

THE clotted cream of unionised Australian journalism gathered last night for the annual Walkley Awards, which it turns out are something akin to the Academy Awards, just recast with dumpy gals in school-social satin and men who didn't pass the screen test for Brokeback Mountain. Well the guys looked caring and sensitive anyway, and these days that is probably enough to get ahead or, more realistically, to secure regular appearances in Good Weekend, where women outnumber men 15-to-1 on the list of people, published near the front of each edition, who labour weekly to bring out that magazine insert. Everyone had a lovely time, apparently, and if there was any discord when the ladies reclaimed the plates on which they brought their lamingtons and sausage rolls, well it doesn't figure in the official results. They say politics is Hollywood for ugly people, and it seems journalism is something similar: a celebration of bravery and independence for the craven and co-opted.

There were some oddities and oversights about this year's categories and winners, however.

Where was the award for best excoriation of the Zionist Entity by a reporter married to a leading Palestinian activist? If only that category had been included, the annual lauding of Paul McGeough would not have been interrupted.

And where was the award for the media company chieftain who makes more money than his newspapers, which actually aren't making any money at all? Indeed, there might even have been a minor, associated award in that category: The CEO who won't reform his organisation because $50,000 a week is a very nice screw for doing nothing much.

Not that fairfax was the only organisation to be stiffed. You would think departing News Ltd supremo John Hartigan warranted a couple of nods. He would have been a natural to he honoured for the remarkable achievement of standing tall without the benefit of a backbone, and also for the sustained, running-scared dash after a single irate call from our no longer quite-so-young-and-naive PM. Those awards could have been presented by Glenn Milne, who could use the work, and whichever law firm it is that will not be handling the abandoned appeal against Judge Mordy's dutiful denunciation of Andrew Bolt.

And finally, where was the award for bad subbing in support of bug-eyed notions -- a category that has seen Fairfax this very morning leave all potential rivals in its dust, thanks to a multi-part video series purporting to expose the real truth behind the destruction of New York's World Trade Centre. Here is how one of those videos is described, and do please note the professionalism, grammar and compelling logic of the blurb that introduces the 90-minute expose of George W. Bush's covert demolition initiatives:

About this episode

9/11; the actions that took place on this single day in 2001 effected the greatest changes to modern civilization, global politics and human interaction more than any other. However, the media assault and political spin that raged during the aftermath has also given 9/11 the dubious honour of being the most disputed story of the 21st century. This documentary feature film presents a series of arguments which - if true - suggest that the unprecedented events of 9/11 were an orchestrated stepping-stone designed to provide the US government a pretext for their declaration of War on Terror.

 Marvellous, ain't it? The boss pockets $50,000 every week  while his semi-literate minions promote Truther crackpottery.

Well, there will be an award for that achievement soon enough. The receivers will be stopping by to present it in person.