When Michael Staindl chose to question Josh Frydenberg's right to sit in parliament (his Constitutional right) the first phone call he received was from a journalist from the Guardian

The call came 30 minutes after the court documents had been submitted. https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/oct/03/questioning-daniel-andrews-how-reporters-came-under-attack-in-victoria

Unaccustomed to speaking to media, Michael chatted to the journalist as if it was a normal phone conversation.

He had no idea his words were being put directly into the Guardian's live blog for immediate publication.

It was the beginning of a media hurricane for Michael.

The following day Michael woke to strange cars parked outside his house.

A photographer from the Australian hid near his rubbish bins and leapt out to take a photo.

He did not identify himself. Michael in his morning track suit screamed thinking he was being attacked & robbed.

After this, the @australian & @smh were fed attack pieces by Michael Sukkar & several other prominent Liberal MPs.

The advantages of being a politician with unfettered media access hey?

No media outlet acknowledged Michael's position of weakness in these attacks.

Michael is a quite man, who lives a quiet life with a wife who has a long term illness. He looks after her in their private home in Melbourne's east.

He is a private citizen, without the happy protection of being a member of the media pack.

So no journalist cared.

At all.

Frydenberg's team - including the two journalists he had working on his behalf at the @australian - waged a relentless war on Michael Staindl - the private, mild mannered citizen who unfortunately wasn't a journalist.

His finances were looked into, his wife's illness, everything

And yet no journalist or media outlet wrote a long piece grieving for this private man who wasn't a journalist having his life turned upside down by powerful politicians & powerful media outlets.

They were all silent.

Even the Guardian who we contacted about it. Not interested

The threats and intrusions into Michael and his wife's lives continued for months.

Michael did not want to go outside, his wife was fearful.

Their social circle avoided them due to threats from Josh Frydenberg.

His radio program dropped him due to the media scrutiny.

The Prime Minister even declared in a national press conference that Michael was "anti-semitic and disgraceful".

Nothing like being called a racist in front of the whole of Australia (when you are not).

I didn't see any journalists defending Michael then.

Or now.

Michael and his wife were almost destroyed by what the Liberal government and their media acolytes did to him.

The publicised name calling, the phone calls, the harassment.

But Michael wasn't a journalist.

Nobody wrote a 1000 word article on his trials.

None of them cared.

.

To clarify (it's confused some) there is no suggestion the Guardian is responsible for the ensuing pile-on Michael Staindl. They had a small part in a very big game

Their name's raised here because of their lengthy article on the bullying of an Oz journo (but none about Michael)