Carlton can't take the micky-taking

Carlton & Puppets
The journalist in happier times: detail, back cover, Mike Carlton's News Review (1982, Hammard)

I'll admit: a horrible summer man flu had hit and I was delirious. I did think I was in fine form, reading status updates on Twitter and Facebook and replying wittily. I stumbled upon some chatter between a Herald journo I follow and a journalist, columnist, broadcaster, author I've admired for the better part of thirty years… (apologies for the repetition below - haven't quite got the hang of embedded tweet coding)



What? Because I won't buy SMH I'm clearly one of Murdoch's minions? Not likely. Forget for a moment the entire history of 'knowledge sharing' that went on amongst 'cafe society'; apart from the routine I follow with - that probably made it easier for my services to be dispensed with the first time I freelanced for News Magazines - there are earlier blog posts suggesting I'm no News Corporation stalwart...


I thought my last few comments were worthy of reply, but none was forthcoming, so I called it as I saw it, at which point an old uni mate joined in:


The Word Was Gough
And The Word Was Gough… - Peter Luck and Mike Carlton (1975, M7)

Carlton News Review
Mike Cartlon's News Review - Mike Carlton (1982, Hammard)

Carlton Takes The Micky
Carlton Takes The Micky: 1983 in Review - Mike Carlton (1983, 2GB NewsTalk 87)

You know, cos he's old and grumpy (said the slightly less old, but probably just as grumpy, man) so perhaps he may do a Charlotte Dawson number…


A night later, the irony is I still have not seen the front of the Sydney Morning Herald. Was it amazing? Was it so amazing that it was worth the fuss?

Meanwhile, I did send Carlton an apology. Not unreserved. I explained that I would write about this, but being a journo, he'd understand. As Joan Didion once pointed out, a writer is always selling someone out. Given his history of taking the micky, I expected a better sense of humour.

I remain unemployed by News Ltd and Fairfax. Perhaps that's why I never purchase their papers - although I'm less impressed with SMH since it became, literally, a tabloid. (Its engagement in tabloid journalism was inevitable once it ceased to be a newspaper of record.) However, I'm also not employed by Crikey or New Matilda - and I subscribe to those.