Stan Grant telling a Pro-Russia audience member to leave live on television
Article#1: ‘Uneducated, brainwashed’: Stan Grant ejects audience member in sensational Q+A blow up over Russia
What is this article about? Why is it in the media?
The article is about the viewers’ reaction to Stan Grant kicking out Sasha Gillies-Lekakis over an unprompted question live on television about the situation between Russia and Ukraine.
Where did you find out about this article? What media organizations did you access:
I found out about this article by accessing the News media organization.
Were a range of opinions presented: YES
Was the issue predominately presented positively or negatively? NEGATIVE
What were some of the opinions provided in the news story?
“You’re an idiot. And you proved it on national television. Maybe you can pack a bag for Russia if you support Putin so much,” one man wrote on Facebook.
“You are a fascist, murderous supporting, uneducated, brainwashed, ideological idiot,” another man said.
One woman said: “You were given a platform on national TV & you’re moaning because it didn’t go the way you wanted? Get out.”
“Well good on *you* Stan Grant! Good riddance, Sasha. #QandA” - @StellaSpoons
In his online statement, Mr Gillies-Lekakis said he was looking to make the point that he “supports Putin’s grievances regarding the breaking of the Minsk Peace Agreement by Ukraine and the ensuing loss of life, particularly in the Russian-populated areas of the Donbas”.
“My question, furthermore, sought to question why these Russian deaths were seemingly less important compared to Ukrainian casualties in our media coverage, and whether the panelists thought there was any hypocrisy in their positions as a result,” he said.
“This is reflected in my question as published on the Q+A website. Unfortunately, I was unable to fully finish asking my question nor clarify myself despite trying, and so believe that my words were misrepresented and incomplete.”
What is your opinion on the article? Why:
This article had some questionable sources as there are few actual credits for the quotes. The opinions that were expressed were mainly negative, and Sasha’s defense for what had happened and his actions were listed extensively, but because the opinions were displayed in first and right after Sasha’s statements, it seems that the writer had intended the article to paint a bad light on Sasha.
The way the article was structured was very peculiar, as it fluctuates between re-telling of what had happened live on Q+A, the viewers’ opinions, Sasha’s statements, and commentary from other people about the political events happening. It comes off as a bit messy and could trip readers up while they’re reading.
Article#2: The ‘small’ question change that led to Sasha Gillies-Lekakis’ Q+A ejection
What is this article about? Why is it in the media:
The article is about what happened live on Q+A, when Stan Grant ejected Sasha Gillies-Lekakis after he asked a question
Where did you find out about this article? What media organisations did you access:
I found out about this article by accessing the Sydney Morning Herald media organization.
Were a range of opinions presented: NO
Was the issue predominately presented positively or negatively? NEGATIVE
What were some of the opinions provided in the news story?
In a statement, a spokesperson for the ABC said Mr Gillies-Lekakis “did not ask the question that he had agreed and what he said instead contained major inaccuracies”.
Mr Gillies-Lekakis professed to be “genuinely sorry that things took the turn they did”, but asked “if my question was not appropriate for the show after being vetted and edited, I wonder why I was invited at all”.
On Facebook, Mr Gillies-Lekakis – who did not respond to this masthead’s request for comment – disputed the suggestion that his question was “rogue”, claiming it had been submitted in advance as per normal protocol.
What is your opinion on the article? Why:
I think the writer for this article had wanted to make Sasha Gillies-Lekakis out to be the “bad guy” in this situation, as he provided quotes and opinions that would discredit Sasha. He, the writer, also ends the article with quotes that support Stan Grant and the ABC’s actions.
This article was mainly re-telling the events of what had happened, and then some sentences that disagrees with Mr. Gillies-Lekakis’ opinions and actions. It flowed better than the News’ article, and was easier to read.
Comments
Post a Comment