User talk:Sirupy Jester

May 2019
Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to News.com.au. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. Alpha3031 (t • c) 17:00, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I understand where you're coming from, however I would like to say that the tone of what was written was quite formal and perfectly in line with what is expected of an encyclopedia - noting that Wikipedia is not really encyclopedic in nature at all, given it is created out of user contributions. This aside, a large part of my work involves writing professionally to a high standard, so I don't see this being an issue. The more important point to note here is that whilst I can see how the edit may appear to be based on personal analysis, it is in fact more nuanced than that. News.com.au articles are generally written in a subjective tone which imports or implies value judgments on the part of the individual writing, hence the assertion that it is publishing opinion journalism. Additionally, reading and researching articles over a long period of time, 10 years so far, has shown that on the current hot-button issues politically in Australia - gender, sexuality, race, workplace relations, politics more generally and social justice, News.com.au articles generally show a noticeable implicit bias towards the political left in this country. That is, supportive of the idea of gender as a social construct and concepts such as the male/female wage gap, initiatives such as safe schools in Victoria, strongly supportive of LGBTI rights and representation - which I see as a good thing, by the way - supportive of racial segregation and enclaving, supportive of unionisation in the workplace, generally leaning towards support for more left-wing members of parliament and MP hopefuls; and in general, News.com.au implies in many of its articles that its contributors generally are supportive of the previously-listed and other similarly left-wing positions on a multitude of issues. There is actually nothing inherently wrong with any of this, except that any reputable news source should be capable of recognising and acknowledging its own biases. This is something News.com.au consistently fails to do, so the edit was simply aimed at shining a light on that fact to enable members of the public to consume media from multiple sources at all points on the political spectrum in order to form fully-developed and balanced opinions of their own. I will be more than happy to add edits to the pages for Packer/Murdoch-run media outlets pointing out their right-wing bias in order to balance the ledger in this area. Kind regards, Jester.