Wake-up calls, patriarchy and parking: hard questions at the Herald

It’s Liam Phelan here, standing in for editor Bevan Shields, who is on leave. This week I have started reading the wonderful Wifedom, a book about George Orwell’s wife Eileen O’Shaughnessy and her overlooked place in history.

Written by Sydney writer Anna Funder, Wifedom does a lot more than shine some much-needed light on a wonderful individual and her significant contribution on many levels to the works of Orwell – it also uses her situation to take a fresh look at patriarchy and its influence in our relationships today.

I have always admired Orwell’s writing, and still do, but it’s impossible to read this lively work without reappraising his character and some of his shocking shortcomings. On a personal level, it has also challenged me to look at my own relationship as a husband and father. I won’t share all the details, but it’s safe to say I am paying renewed attention to the laundry and the bathroom!

Perhaps the most shocking revelation in Wifedom is how O’Shaughnessy was erased from the public record. Six biographers of Orwell managed to ignore her, twist her words or completely misunderstand Orwell’s actions towards her and vice versa.

I have been thinking about this failure to examine, to ask hard questions, to think outside a narrowly defined set of parameters, or even to see some things at all, and how they have had an impact on some of the big stories of this week.

For instance, how did the board of Qantas allow former chief executive Alan Joyce to so relentlessly pursue his profit-driven agenda based on highly dubious and possibly illegal treatment of both customers (selling tickets for cancelled flights) and the workforce. Our columnist Liz Knight had a great piece on Wednesday looking at whether the board can now survive in the light of the reputational damage to the company.

Another shock this week has been the Voice and how this important national debate has become increasingly nasty and polarised. Bevan wrote very eloquently about the Voice and the Herald this month. I won’t go over the same ground, but I think the ramped-up vitriol this week is indicative of a hardening of views and an inability to consider the points of view of others. This is a worrying development and, hopefully, is not a portent of the closing weeks of the campaign as both sides chase undecided voters to clinch the win on October 14.

On a more local level, I have been conducting interviews this week with prospective candidates for a crime reporter role at the Herald. We recently hired Perry Duffin as a crime reporter and have been delighted with the types of stories he has uncovered, including some outstanding reporting on the Tasering of Clare Nowland.

In hiring someone to boost our coverage in this area, inevitably the question arises about what stories and subjects we are interested in. What will we “see” – and what will we ignore? Chief Herald reporter Jordan Baker has been part of the interview panel, and has been asking some hard questions of our shortlisted candidates, who come from a wide range of media organisations and are all very impressive. We want someone who, as well as covering breaking news, can look at the causes of crime, uncover stories in under-reported areas, and, when needed, ask the hard questions of NSW Police.