Going after the media is a tried and true tactic of diversion

analysis Attacking the media for asking legitimate question is straight out of Trump's playbook Sat 18 Jul 2026 at 8:01am "This really irked me today." Five simple words. How many of us could utter them on any day about an issue, or a person, or a thing? I try to practice the "nothing's going to irk me or live rent-free in my head because there are so many wonderful things to think about", but I digress. But when these are the carefully crafted words used by a minister of the Crown, specifically Tasmania's police minister, to ridicule a journalist for asking a legitimate and tough question about the government's approach to gun control, red flags should go up and normal law-abiding voters should ask: what is going on? It could be a dead cat strategy. That's where someone makes a shocking statement to divert the media/public's attention from other problems, or failure of the government. I don't think that was Felix Ellis's strategy. Some might disagree. Or it's a ploy taken from US President Donald Trump's playbook to punch down on the media and throw red meat to conservative elements in the community as a nod-and-a-wink: "don't you hate these pesky questions and lamestream reporters?" It might be the latter, amid current polling showing a large number of voters tilting towards the conservative side of the spectrum. Voters are disenchanted by the traditional parties as cost-of-living pressures erode their way of life and they're attracted to unrealistic, simple solutions to complex problems. So what got under the minister's nose? Last Tuesday, a reporter from another media organisation asked Mr Ellis about an alleged burglary at Coles Bay last weekend, where we now know 15 firearms were allegedly stolen. The house subsequently burnt to the ground and the owner of the guns was allegedly bashed and tied up. Thank goodness he is alive and there has been a great outpouring of community support for him. The journalist, who we have chosen not to name, asked Mr Ellis: "Isn't it the case, though, that if there were more people with more firearms, a robbery like this will occur?" The background to being asked is that the Tasmanian government revealed recently its proposed legislation for tighter gun controls sparked by last December's Bondi Beach terrorist attack. While most state and territory governments immediately agreed to pursue options for limiting the number of licensed weapons a person could hold, the Tasmanian government decided to ignore weapons caps. Even though that is what Tasmania's police commissioner recommended, and we know this because her letter has been published through right-to-information laws. This is how Mr Ellis responded to the question: "Can I say, that is the most outrageous example of victim-blaming. "Our hearts go out to this fellow and this is an awful event that has happened to him. It is a crime, and to say that his possession, as a law-abiding firearms owner, the firearms that he needs and has been approved for his genuine reason, for a permit to acquire, to say that he is the problem, I think that is just totally wrong. "Now what we need to do here in Tasmania is to have some of the strongest penalties in the country if you steal a firearm, for possession of stolen firearms and for theft of firearms . "It is the criminals who are the problem and it is the criminals we need to take action on. "Now we have a beautiful community here in Tasmania and I want to thank everyone who has wrapped their arms around the gentleman at Coles Bay. "But for people in the media and others to say law-abiding firearms owners are the problem in this case, is absolutely wrong and disgraceful." The minister was so outraged by the question, he edited and captioned it "This really irked me" and posted it on his Facebook page. Cue outrage. Lots of it. Comments inciting extreme violence against the journalist and homophobic commentary, including demands from pro-gun posters to identify the reporter. For 13 hours, the pile-on ran unrestrained. That's just how the digital giants like it, algorithms delivering anger-tainment in spades to those who revel in it. It only stopped when the journalist's colleague contacted Mr Ellis's office to say he feared for his safety, given what some messages were promising. The journalists' union, the MEAA, has written to Premier Jeremy Rockliff pointing out that Mr Ellis's actions breach the ministerial Code of Conduct: "Ministers are committed to ensuring and enabling for both women and men a safe, respectful and inclusive environment that is free from discrimination, harassment, sexual harassment and bullying." Mr Ellis yesterday made a point of apologising to the reporter during a media conference. "You know, obviously, I hope things are going okay," he said, gesturing to the reporter. "I've a huge amount of respect for you personally, I think fair comment for both of us. "But I think more broadly, this is a [social media] moderation issue, and we could have done more when it comes to moderating the comments, and in good faith when you contacted us about that we took those down. "Just as similarly when we contact the media organisations for moderation, support, on your own social media pages, I appreciate that." Not a full apology, just sorry the comments were not moderated. No apology for inciting hate against media reporting. The media is a major pillar in our democracy. Its job is to ask tough questions to ministers and MPs on behalf of voters, seeking information about decisions and actions, holding governments and oppositions to account. How else would it happen if journalists were not there? How would the public respond if this kind of treatment stopped journalists from asking questions because they feared a ministerial-led pile-on? Sure, the media doesn't get it right all the time. If the minister was genuine about the "respect" he had for the reporter he would respect that he has a job to do. And if he was genuine about respect, he would know many in the community wanted that question asked and the reporter was doing their job by asking it. Yet the minister put the reporter's safety in danger, dumped on Freedom of the Press, and incited hate. How's that for a police minister? It's also a challenge for the premier, Jeremy Rockliff. If he stands by that behaviour and the police minister cannot exercise the kind of restraint he expects of other everyday Tasmanians we are in a dangerous era. I asked a series of questions to the premier's office yesterday about the code of conduct and MEAA's letter. The response: Mr Ellis has apologised for the "short delay" in moderating the messages and the "apology was accepted". It is often said that the standard you walk past is the one you accept. Tasmania, beware.