EDITOR'S NOTE: Catherine Deveny's column will no longer appear in The Age.Ms Deveny's comments on other media are not in keeping with the standards we set at this newspaper.
This is an absolute disgrace. Has the editor been approached by the rabid right-wing reactionary religious bigoted establishments to deny Catherine a voice in The Age?
What are the comment on other media to which the editor has taken exception?
We won't get an explanation, but we will be censored because Catherine dares to mock our society and in the process to give us something to think about and to have a laugh.
The Age has became a pathetic shadow of its former self - editors like Michael Gawenda and Andrew Jaspan haven't help lift the standard of what was once a great newspaper.
How art the mighty fallen??
Time to get rid of the current editor and try to restore some balance to this pathetic rag - now only one degree better than the other daily rag, but plumbing the depths of that one by publishing - or not - what it thinks its delicate readers ought to read.
Newspapers are rapidly sinking below the horizon, and it is easy to see why, after this effort to silence one of its better journalists who is not afraid to open her mouth. Pity all those others who have to shut up because their livelihoods depend on working for these disgusting people who control the media.
AND THANK GOODNESS FOR THE WORLD WIDE WEB AND ITS GREAT INVENTOR WHO HAS ENABLED US TO GET WHAT WE NEED IN THE INFORMATION HIGHWAY FROM AROUND THE WORLD!
--------and all this in response to a letter by Nicholas Yallop - who? I hear you ask? Oh, yes, Nicholas's father had some involvement with The Age some time ago. Here is Nicholas's letter:
Calculated to raise a profile - and offend
FOR someone of her experience in the media industry, Catherine Deveny seems quite naive to the power and reach of her insensitive Twitter comments.
The Age may employ her for her controversial and allegedly funny commentary, but I think many readers see her as an intellectual imposter doing nothing more than indulging her warped view of the world.
While she occasionally makes valuable points, Deveny seems intent on making them in the most vulgar manner. Just as with her disgusting attacks on Anzac Day, Deveny's comments regarding Rove McManus and Bindi Irwin were crude, thoughtless and merely said to provoke a reaction.
In her defence, she described Twitter as some form of intimate social networking platform, akin to ''passing notes in class''.
That is rubbish. Politicians and celebrities are using it to shape their brand and Deveny appears to be no different. Every tweet seems to be a calculated attempt to promote her shock-making ways, which are often nothing more than offensive.
Nicholas Yallop, Surrey Hills