Miranda Devine today tries to build on the argument she advanced last week that environmentalists’ opposition to controlled fires made the Victorian bushfires worse than might otherwise have been the case.
If you really must, check out her piece here.
What I find most interesting is not her argument, but the SMH’s opacity in terms of helping a reader understand how it was constructed. I say this because the story quotes numerous documents and a website or two along the way.
So why not link to all the sources, so the reader can see if the quotes are in context or representative of the whole document?
It seems to me that when one is advancing a contentious argument, failure to provide those links is a missed opportunity.