Julia Gillard Leadership Debate Erupts Over The Age Editorial You have to give supporters of Julia Gillard credit for their loyalty. They have lashed The Age editorial that calls for the Prime Minister to step down. As the election looms, her most strident supporters see the end but are backed into a corner and are lashing out. It's sad that Australian politics has come to this. It's a surprising reaction because The Age is a late entry to the "Gillard must go" camp. Under pressure: Prime Minister Julia Gillard. The Sydney Morning Herald editorial said the same thing a fortnight back and this columnist called for her to make a dignified exit four months ago. One possible explanation for the backlash against The Age is that readers do not easily see a difference between news - objective reporting of events - and opinion writing - personal views of columnists - and the editorials - also known as leader columns - in newspapers. Editorials express the view of the editor. They should never influence how reporters report the news or what personal commentary appears in the newspaper. The test of the independence of any newspaper like The Age or The Herald is how well it retains the "Chinese wall" between news and comment. In fact, the writers of editorials - rarely the editor - will very often disagree with the editor's opinion. Much like a speechwriter or lawyer, though, the editorial writer must argue the case for his boss. Perhaps readers of The Age - a paper with a traditionally soft-left world view - expect its editorial to be objective like the news reporting and to reflect their outlook. In that case, the anti-Gillard editorial is a shock to the system for Melbourne's social progressives, as well as those welded-on supporters of the Prime Minister. They see it as a reflection of how The Age reports news, when in fact it has nothing to do with that. The second reason for the backlash is that maybe the timing is right. One week to go in Parliament and the frustration with Labor is palpable. And the third one is the biggie. In fighting to save her leadership, Gillard has divided people across the political spectrum, on gender terms and on class terms. She's making desperate moves to install policies like the 457 visa crackdown and workplace entry rights that reek of union influence. The die for Gillard's leadership was cast months ago. You were crazy brave or just a masochist to say it back then. My Fairfax column on February 20 called on Gillard to make a "graceful, dignified, humble, selfless exit from the prime ministership" and suggested she was enduring five stages of grief as her dream of re-election gradually dwindled away. Many readers lashed out, saying I was Judas, a rabid dog, a pathetically compromised Latte Leftie, a right-wing bigoted twat and patently sexist. Plus more. That's fine. I was stating an opinion; they were stating theirs. Then ALP numbers man Graham Richardson came out two days later and called for her to quit as well. Readers pilloried Richo as just another Rudd backer. Fair enough. Their opinion. But 12 days ago, The Sydney Morning Herald editorial called for Gillard to go, likening her position to that of former Labor leader Bill Hayden when his mate John Button convinced him to quit in 1983 for the popular Bob Hawke. "In the nation's interest, it's time for senior Labor members to heed the lessons of history," the Herald editorial said. Many know they must act ... The nation needs a Labor leader for the future who, in government or opposition, can pursue those reforms and rebuild voter trust ... Many voters have given [Gillard] a chance but her message is not getting through. That's the opinion of the editor. Strangely, few readers complained about the Herald editorial. In fact, many agreed with the sentiments. Two days later I restated my personal view that Gillard should leave so Labor - "a party run by factions, apparatchiks and unions irrelevant to most people" - can reform for the good of democracy. Never has the gap been so wide between what Labor is and what the nation wants it to be. How does Australia reconcile this? Rudd as Labor leader would be competitive with Tony Abbott," I wrote. This time, a mere handful of angry comments, with many others agreeing, with much regret, that Gillard's time is up. Now Mike Carlton in the Herald has agreed Gillard must go. If Labor MPs had done the right thing in February, Gillard would have been able to make a gracious, dignified exit. Now, even if she tries to, only a core group of very angry Gillard supporters will be listening. Alan Stokes is a columnist and chief editorial writer for The Sydney Morning Herald. He was chief editorial writer on The Australian and author of The Australian on Australia (2003).