Talk:The Monthly

Political inclination
This page should somehow refer to the political inclination of The Monthly. Soft left, social democratic or social liberal would be the most accurate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shippa52 (talk • contribs) 14:28, 6 October 2007

Politics
Agreed. It should in some way refer to the fact that the main contributors are often criticized as too polemically critical of the Howard government. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shippa52 (talk • contribs) 14:31, 6 October 2007


 * Responding to yourself as if you are two separate people is sock puppetry without the alternative account: please don't. Nevertheless, I think you have a point both times: if there are published descriptions and/or criticisms of the magazine's political stance and influence, we should describe and cite some of them. Thayvian (talk) 21:03, 29 April 2009 (UTC)]]]


 * What about this: http://ipa.org.au/news/1948/a-clear-majority-of-working-journalists-do-tend-to-be-of-a-centre-left-disposition/pg/10 73.166.217.139 (talk) 02:28, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Bolt article
I moved the below section here as I agree with this edit that it gives a severely undue weight to a single article out of hundreds of critical articles about many notable figures of Australian politics and culture. If notable, it surely can be summarised in a much more encyclopaedic style, and as part of a more comprehensive description of the magazine's coverage. Please do not reintroduce it before finding consensus. --Elekhh (talk) 15:20, 30 November 2011 (UTC)

On 3 October the Monthly posted on its blog, Monthly Wire, a promotional teaser of an upcoming profile on Andrew Bolt written by Anne Summers. The preview included a line from the essay where Bolt was described as being remembered as an "introverted, restless, romantic" by a "former fiancée". Bolt contacted editor Ben Naparstek directly, denying he was ever engaged before his current marriage and demanding that the magazine be pulped.

Reports that the former fiancée provided a statutory declaration and copies of letters from Bolt to the Monthly were dismissed by Bolt as being concocted. Bolt's fiancée was later revealed by Andrew Cook for Crikey as Sue Walshe, who ran the editorial floor and was secretary to the editor at The Age when Bolt was working as a cadet journalist. Cook asserted there was factual accuracy that Walsh was once engaged to Bolt.

After the article's full release, Bolt took further contention with the piece, specifically Summers' conclusion that offensive comments which appeared on Bolt's blog about David Marr in October 2009 were approved by his wife Sally Morrell, who moderated the blog alongside Bolt. Bolt took public responsibility for publishing those specific comments on the website, causing Naparstek to issue a public apology as a note in the online version of Summers' article.

On 22 October The Age published a public response by Bolt's former fiancée Sue Walshe which addressed both the profile and Bolt's reaction. The piece was entitled, "Bolt from the past: a heartfelt history lesson to the man I loved".