Australian politics flashes before us in the wink of an eye
Type Tony Abbott into google and the first prediction that follows after is ‘wink’, a search that produces 188,000 results and counting.
There is no doubt that the wink on everyone’s lips was a low moment for Abbott. We can postulate what it meant, perhaps a distinct lack of empathy, and ill-timed at best. However, a wink is a wink, George Bush Jnr. gave one to the Queen and Sarah Palin can’t participate in a debate without giving them compulsively (note pattern in said winker’s politics).
Debate surrounding #winkgate (nee ‘the wink’), can be divided into two camps. One contends it was a friendly message to Jon Faine, confirming he continue with the call, and at the same time, a response to Faine’s smile (who thought a wink couldn’t speak a thousand words). Another states the wink was a sexist, disrespectful and disgusting remark regarding the caller, Gloria, a 67-year-old pensioner. In fact not only Gloria, all sex-workers, women and everyone, actually.
We cannot base political opinion and commentary on such minor issues. We continually lament the loss of debate on major issues in politics, and moan that our leaders instead choose to participate in nitpicking and cheap shots. Yet if we get stuck on a wink, how can we expect more?
Tony Abbott, you are a disgusting creep. http://t.co/nR5rljHREC #winkgate #smirkgate #auspol
— Tracey Spicer (@spicertracey) May 21, 2014
I can only wonder how, one small facial gesture, a momentary movement, can tell so much about a person. Perhaps even more interestingly, so much about a nation. Are we really moving into the territory where we extrapolate a wink into an all encompassing profile of a man’s personality and politics?
#winkgate is now trending in Australia http://t.co/P15oTtFddX
— Trends Australia (@TrendsAustralia) May 21, 2014
A wink should not provide for debate, it shouldn’t provide a basis for blanket statements regarding Abbott’s character and politics. If anything, it should be evidence of much bigger issues, catalysts to find greater evidence that provides for well-reasoned opinion and debate.
Alongside the Prime Minister’s wink yesterday, Joe Hockey gave an address at the Australian Council of Social Service lunch, and the Shadow Treasurer Chris Bowen gave his budget reply. Yet what appeared to dominate news rooms and social media around the country?
Sadly, the contents of the interview with Jon Faine wasn’t given a mention. Abbott’s fumbling (a character trait now) over budget details was not examined, although his eyelid was, in depth.
“In the same interview Abbott made a mistake about the budget changes to university fees. Not being across the detail of an area students were taking to the streets about was, to say the least, careless.” – Michelle Grattan, The Conversation
Let us move on from such squabbling, and decide that the policy at hand, not a wink, is worthy of consideration, debate and analysis.