Something small, but odd

Reading Stuchbery's piece on Margaret Court, something occurred to me. It was specifically to do with the Op-Ed space the Herald Sun gave her.

So, look at these points;
• The Herald Sun gives Margaret Court Op-Ed space to explain that she's being persecuted, because she believes gays are disgusting, immoral and sinful, and isn't shy about trumpeting that out aloud.
• The Herald Sun gives Robert Doyle Op-Ed space to explain why OMEL people had to have the shit kicked out of them.
• The Herald Sun gives their star columnist, Andrew Bolt a double-page spread to wring his hands about being found guilty in a court case, where he told a bunch of racially defamatory lies.

Do you see where I'm going with this? In any reading of impartial journalism the following should have happened instead;

• The Herald Sun declines to give Margaret Court space as her position is bigoted, could be construed as vilification, and is rambling and nonsensical in any event.
• In addition to Robert Doyle, the Herald Sun gives equal space to an OMEL spokesperson to explain OMEL's position. The public can then make up their own mind what happened that day.
• When legal action was first threatened, the Herald Sun should have offered a same-size, same-page right of reply to those Andrew Bolt vilified. After being found guilty, he should have been given his own regular column space to respond.

But, who said they wanted to be impartial? Pro-homophobia, pro-violence, pro-racism. That's the Australia the Hun wants.