Its no secret that I am rather chuffed about the clear success of the the Bolt report because it certainly has exceeded the expectations of its makers, blown away the latte-sipper’s predictions of utter failure. In fact despite a little stiffness in his presentation on the initial show it has become much smoother and more at ease with each subsequent episode.
Bolt’s most strident critics over at “Pure Playschool” keep insisting that they are not going to watch it yet I bet that they do, Doctor Jason Wilson owes me a latte because he was one of those who predicted its failure and I quite like Joel Silver’s take on the show which is very even handed in the way that it considers the program and why it is succeeding in the ratings;
The Bolt Report has rapidly gained itself a loyal following. I do not believe, however, that this is simply a flow-on from his column. Indeed, the program is a different kettle of fish from Insiders and its academic roundtable of journalists (perhaps explaining why Insiders and Meet the Press have only a stable, not growing, audience). The show is what might be called “editorial television”, programs that discuss, assess and often indicate a view on the issues. That does not make the program a trailblazer; Lateline has long editorialised, and that is fine. But Lateline is evening viewing, which the unengaged will only come upon if the sandman is left shivering on the side of the road after phoning into the RACV. By that point, they’ve watched the evening news, maybe caught up on the morning paper, and are too tired to hear more. Unfortunately for them, when the television is back on at 6.30, Virginia Trioli stands in the place of Tony Jones. And News Breakfast is certainly no Lateline, having been influenced by the “news-lite” approach taken by Today and Sunrise.
Bolt is a morning commentator. Problem is, I haven’t got patience to read his opinions at 6.30, or anyone else’s for that matter. But read it out to me, and you’ll have my attention. Better still, put him on television and radio, and the person who would have read it out can go about fixing my breakfast. That gives the program appeal: the type and quality of commentary on Lateline, morning radio and in newspapers, but which is rarely found on morning television. That Bolt fronts The Bolt Report is only part of the attraction, although few journalists could effectively engage with an audience that has just gotten out of bed. Had the ABC commissioned the show, it might well be called Lateline Mornings, Tony Jones having turned it down the role in favour of his morning siesta. And while The Bolt Report is an exclusively Sunday affair, if its strong performance continues, we could be seeing the beginning of a more engaging and editorialised breed of morning television news program.
And after reading the article I naturally scanned the comments and who did I find sprouting hate but our old pal Richard Ryan:
Richard Ryan said in reply to Shinsko…
Well he is known as Melbourne’s “village idiot”,but methinks that is an insult to a village idiot.
Richard Ryan said in reply to Pia Robinson…
Andrew Bolt the promoter of the Lord Monckton tour of Australia—-and all his beloved bloggers ready to dish out their 25 bucks to see this British fake.
Richard Ryan said in reply to Leo Lane…
AND I expose Bolt as a stolen generation denier,who is a legend in his own mind, a nobody.
Richard Ryan said in reply to Rod…
Bolt will ask the hard questions to suit his political requirements——I class him as a media clown, with no principles—–but then it’s not his fault, he is of Dutch origin.
Richard Ryan said in reply to gordo…
gordo—the lover of all things Bolt!
Richard Ryan said in reply to Michael Sutcliffe…
AH YES! Andrew Bolt the Herald Sun’s resident nutter.
Richard Ryan said in reply to
Bill O’ Reilly is an Irishman with his brains knocked out—makes Bolt look like an altar boy. Go and listen to a real journalist like Julian Assange.
Richard Ryan said…
Andrew Bolt is a self-promoter, 800 bucks every time he appeared on ABC Insiders I hear,—-Bolt’s principles are in his wallet, but good on old smirkey
Richard Ryan said in reply to Elizabeth…
IF you want to hear vile comments, click over to Bolt’s blog, there you can pick from Muslim bashing, racist comments, boat people scorn, Aborigine bashing. Go away Elizabeth you are a Bolt blogger lackey. Bolt is a specialist in the art of Trolls, but David Marr cut him down to size—-when he had to say sorry to him, unlike his book, “Still Not Sorry” Shalom.
The thing that the anti-Bolt collective fail to realise is that their “arguments” for all of their piss and vinegar, just fail to convince the vast majority of people who don’t have any frothy residue on their top lips. Then again in my experience people like Richard( or our learned friend) have a view of politics that is far too black and white. There is no room for nuance in their world view, no appreciation that someone can hold a different view of politics and not be evil as a result , ah but that is the reason that People like Richard Ryan probably vote Green and dream of the undesirable and unobtainable socialist utopia. Well they can rant insult and demean and all the while sensible souls will get it and enjoy the Bolt report…
Cheers Comrades
Iain Hall's SANDPIT 
why are Liberal Environmentalists such angry people? their negative attitude does not provide good public relations for their agenda
That is a good point Tessa but it is also sensible to try to persuade rather than to bully those who disagree with you but it seems to be something that the worshippers of Gaia just don’t get.
yeah, I guess you’re right — they’d rather vent than have a discussion
Well venting is just what they do Tessa
yeah, liberals and volcanoes — where is everybody? we’re the only ones here! did we miss the big party?
Hmm speaking of volcanoes I wonder how much Co2 that on in Chile is spewing at present?
Andrew Bolt and David Irving have a lot in common, both deniers, Irving a Holocaust denier, Bolt a stolen generation denier. Both of them I detest, Irving was jailed as a denier, so should Bolt.
Iain! Trying to get a spot on Bolt’s poor man’s Fox News Show are we? Hope not, you can do better then that!
Iain, I hoep the volcano spews enough CO2 to keep the trees healthy
Richard
If I wanted to I could always try to get on the MTR talk-back, but that is not my thing, I am merely taking note of the way that a new star is shining bright in the media firmament and the way its gets up the noses of lefties like you.
As for Bolt’s attitude to the “stolen generation” I think there is absolutely no equivalence between that and what David Irving says about the Holocaust. You are welcome to make the argument , with evidence, rather than just an empty assertion though.
Liberals certainly do paint with a very wide brush
I think that Richard is actaully using a 12 inch paint roller on this occasion Tessa 😉
IMAGINE! IF we were all like Bolt, self interest, self promoting, and it’s all about me—-no thanks. But he did look cute in his flak jacket, telling the world the war was over in Iraq, so my gay friend informed me.
MAYBE! When Bolt’s program takes a dive, which I hope will happen shortly, he may get a job as a pin-up-boy, in his flak-jacket, in a gay magazine,
Hi Ian, long time reader first time commenter.
I’m surprised that the wager with Dr Jason Wilson was only for a latte; I only ever see him drinking Drambuie from a schooner, and figured that a more likely wager.
But I wonder what your criteria for succes of The Bolt Report is? My understanding is that viewer numbers have dropped every week, from a high of about 180k to just over 115k now. Do you consider that slow rate of dwindling numbers a success? You are within your rights to expect it to dwindle much faster.
It is also good of you to raise the Volcano’s CO2 emissions, because this is something that many people who don’t understand the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming get wrong. AGW is a rate of change problem, not a rate problem. I’ll explain further:
The content of all GHGs (greenhouse gasses, because as I’m sure you know, this includes gases other than CO2, like CH4, SF6, the NOx’s and SOx’s, hydroflourocarbons and the R-series refrigerants.) in the atmosphere is the sum of natural (N) and anthropogenic (A) sources, less natural sinks and human sinks. SInce there are effectively no human GHG sinks, we can summarise that as just sinks (S). Keep in mind all of these are RATES, not amounts.
So, GHGs at any instant can be described by N + A – S. Since N and S remain virtually constant over time, wobbling back and forth a little with volcanoes and the like, the only important equation is the relationship between A and time. IE, the rate of human emissions is the only thing that influences the content of the atmosphere.
But, since this is a rate of change problem (the amount of GHGs being added to the atmosphere over time) the ket relationship is dA/dt. Since this is still positive, we have a lot of work to do in reducing our emissions. Even funnier though is that d2A/dt2 is also positive! So we’re really screwed!
Ev.
Richard as they said in “the Castle”
” Yer dreamin!!!!”
evcricket! IT’S not the number of viewers that counts——-but how the numbers are counted. Same principle of rule, as used on Bolt’s blog count. One big media hoax, I would say.
Firstly welcome to the sandpit EV
My understanding of the ratings for the Bolt report is that it has has an increase in viewer-ship with each new edition of the show . as to the wager it was like the best wagers entered into in a spirit of friendship all about symbolism rather than greed. So a Latte is fair enough in my book.
As for your explanation of why we are screwed, it does carry with it certain assumptions about the actual effectiveness of an increase in those GHGs in changing the climate and that is very much a “known unknown” that has a very wide spectrum of values.
finally you omit the most significant GHG of all from your explanation and that is water vapour.
Richard
you do raise a significant point even if you don’t realise it, most people assume that the actual number of people watching are being counted instead of the reality that the numbers cited are based upon the same sort of sampling that is common with all sorts of polling based upon a limited number of “boxes” put into selected viewers houses. Even so given this has been the industry standard for many years we can have faith in the results at least as far as they show general trends even if the precision of the numbers cited may be a little fuzzy .
Bolt Report, is also repeated at 4-30pm—Bolt Disciples would also watch it twice—–with comments such as Andrew you were fantastic , Andrew Bolt for PM, Andrew your hair was fluffy. A week of woofering in the Navy would do these Bolt Bloggers the world of good. I have never seen so many brown noses in a mob, on Bolt’s blog of bile, and all blogging under screen names—–a mob of informers, and cowards, who are too timid to use their real names. I have no respect for people who blog under screen names, I don’t treat them as real people, more like aliens. Regards, Richard Ryan.
Richard
I have seen just as many sycophants posting at lefty blogs
some of us have good reasons to use screen names — my friends know who I am
Memo to busby: AH YES! Andrew Bolt’s favourite mantra——–“free speech” to his requirements of course. Bolt will be gone from CH.10 by September, and Bluey ( Gillard) will still be in power. Bolt’s favourite blogging whipping girl.
Richard
while Gillard is obviously going to hold on to the keys to the lodge with a deathlike grip fro as long as possible I am rather sure that your prediction about the demise of Andrew Bolt’s channel Ten show will not be fulfilled by September,
I’ll bet you a latte that it will still be on air then 😉
Iain, I will take that bet! I still think it’s obscene that this man is given a spot on CH 10, a “stolen generation denier”!
Why is the “Stolen Generation” such a hot button issue for you Richard?
My understanding of Bolt’s argument is that he concedes that children were taken, not entirely because of any “racism” but more because they were either neglected or abandoned by those who supposedly cared about them. As I said before If you want to mount the argument (with evidence) that he is wrong you are free to do so, heck if you write it up as an article I’ll put it up as guest post here at the Sandpit.
Shall we say 1500 words?.
Come on Richard can you do more than just make snarky assertions?
As for the latte, glad to take your beverages !
OF course Bolt’s comments on ABC Insiders not long ago, that electing a Green to the NSW upper house was a mistake akin to the election of Nazi’s in Germany, is on par with his mate Lord Monckton, who likes to use that word Nazi on anyone who does not suit his political requirements.