Distasteful though the Tom Knowles affair is, the Melbourne Age, splashing the "scandal" on its front page, has acted maliciously and possibly illegally in breaching Father Knowles's privacy as a citizen. He has done nothing against the law. There is no conceivable way the report serves public interest. There is no "news value" in it since before this few had ever heard of him. Reprehensible as his conduct as a priest has been, that is no business of the Age. Indeed, one strongly suspects that it is solely because Knowles is a Catholic priest that the Age carried the story at all. If he had been, say, a Greens senator or in some other Age-preferred walk of life we would never have heard a thing about it. The Age has deliberately acted as a publicity machine for an angry and, it would seem, vindictive woman. She is disabled, but she is not saying that Knowles raped her. That she allowed the "relationship" to go on for fourteen years hardly suggests that she found it utterly repugnant. She is described as "vulnerable"- well, not half as vulnerable as Catholic priests in the present wave of anti-clerical hysteria, whipped up by such publications as the Age and, as I have written before, all part of an ideological campaign to neuter the Catholic Church's opposition to abortion and other causes dear to the secularist heart.

Father Knowles should sue the Age for its unwarranted, unjustifiable and shameful intrusion into his personal life.

Talk about the media regulation deemed so essential by the Left. If anyone needs it it's not the Murdoch press but such impeccably Left-liberal organs as the Age.

22 January 2013


A copy of this post has been sent as a Letter to the Editor at the Age, where I somehow don't expect to see it in print.

1 comment:

  1. interesting you can make such definitive and negative comments about an account you know nothing about. Whose angry and vindictive eh?