The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Democratise and federalise 'Our ABC' > Comments

Democratise and federalise 'Our ABC' : Comments

By Jai Martinkovits, published 31/1/2014

Research indicates that the typical ABC journalist's political beliefs are well to the left of the general population. A recent survey found that over 40% support the Greens.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. Page 16
  10. All
Hi again Onthebeach,

Thanks for that response.

Regarding: “You are using a false comparison anyhow because the political 'Progressives' are anything but progressive.”

Depends on our definitions, don't you think?

Labels are interpreted differently by people at different positions along the spectra – progressive/conservative, right/left, wet/dry, socialist/capitalist.

Here in France I'm regarded as a right wing conservative because of my support for the interventionist policies of the world’s most successful right wing government between 2008 and 2013.

That’s according to the two major conservative policy institutes in the USA.

Heritage Foundation has the motto underneath its business name: “Conservative policy research since 1973.”

Its mission statement is: “to formulate and promote conservative public policies based on the principles of free enterprise, individual freedom, traditional American values, and a strong national defense.

Heritage Foundation’s survey of economic freedom over the last few years ranked Australia first among OECD nations and third in the world behind Hong Kong and Singapore. This reflects progress in freeing capitalists from government obstruction in starting and running businesses.

Refer: http://www.heritage.org/index/ranking

So, according to Heritage, Australia under Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd was the most effective conservative or right wing government in the Western world.

The Cato Institute “is a public policy research organization — a think tank – dedicated to the principles of individual liberty, limited government, free markets and peace.”

It also rated Australia under Labor as extremely well-managed, with special accolades for its privatized Social Security system called “Superannuation.”

Refer: http://www.downsizinggovernment.org/unexpected-praise-australias-private-social-security-system

In Australia, Labor and Liberal are sometimes seen as ‘left’ and ‘right'. But in the rest of the world they are seen as ‘conservative right wing economic rationalists’ and ‘nutters’.

This was evident to all at the recent World Economic Forum at Davos where Australia’s PM was regarded by all as an ignorant buffoon.

Refer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WGMeXeFfZRw

Re: “Would you like to address the redundancy and excess of having a several publicly funded national broadcasters?”

Yes, I agree with Paul Sheehan. Rationalisation is warranted.

For reasons expressed above, ABC News and Current Affairs should be sold off or shut down.

Cheers,

Alan A
Posted by Alan Austin, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 9:39:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi again Cohenite,

Re: “Alan you are remarkable”

Yes, I get that a lot.

Re: “you must be the only person in Australia who believes the ABC is not biased against the conservative side of politics.”

Not at all. No-one in the newsroom has any doubt about who they are employed to promote.

How else can you explain Roger Corbett on 24-hour rotation bagging Kevin Rudd as “discredited”, “incapable”, “destabilising” and so on, and lauding Mr Abbott – three days before the last election?

There was no revelation Corbett was a Liberal member. No right of reply. And you believe Labor sympathisers engineered that?

Re: “Your links were jokes, one being a photo of Abbott looking Prime-ministerial in a suit!”

No, Anthony, there’s not just one. There are heaps!

Refer: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-19/tony-abbott-question-time/4582462

Mr Abbott close-up, neat suit, furrowed brow, pondering deeply, most prime ministerial.

News value? Zero.

Refer: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-03-04/tony-abbott/4551380

Mr Abbott close-up, suit, smiling confidently, moving forward, in a TV studio, very prime ministerial.

Headline: “Abbott appears on morning TV.”

Wow! Hold the front page!

Well, what did he say? Nothing.

News value? Zero.

Refer: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-05-16/tony-abbott-delivers-his-budget-reply/4695102

Mr Abbott close-up, suit, furrowed brow, steady gaze, addressing his opponents in the Parliament, approving colleagues right behind, extremely prime ministerial.

News value? Zero.

Refer: http://www.abc.net.au/news/2013-04-16/tony-abbott/4633424

Mr Abbott ultra close-up, suit, furrowed brow, pondering deeply, penetrating gaze, addressing opponents in Parliament, approving colleagues behind, supremely magnificent prime ministerial material. Tony is da MAN!

News value? Zero.

Anthony, there is no chance a newsroom could produce so many adoring election posters unless there was a concerted campaign to promote that particular candidate.

Correct?

Re: “The ABC supports every progressive issue.”

No, Anthony. It supports some issues you disagree with, which you label ‘progressive’ to denigrate them.

Your subreption paragraph, Anthony, is just too silly. Please go to the ABC website and search those topics.

For example, here: http://www.abc.net.au/

Enter ‘union corruption’ in the search box.

You will get “Page 1 of 6,553 search results for union corruption”

If you are genuinely seeking the truth on this, Anthony, it is not that hard to find!

Cheers,

AA
Posted by Alan Austin, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 10:29:27 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Go to Catallaxy Alan, test your views!

I'll leave with a superb example of investigative reporting which really demonstrates the subreption practised by the ABC. Michael Smith compares the failure of the ABC to cover the Gillard scandal and the reasons the ABC gave for not doing so with the ABC's coverage of the phony Navy torture stories and the reasons it did that; first the Gillard story not covered:

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2014/02/this-email-exchange-between-a-very-diligent-reader-and-the-abc-leaves-many-unanswered-questions.html

And now the Navy non-story covered:

http://www.michaelsmithnews.com/2014/02/3-formal-statements-from-the-abc-including-md-mark-scott-on-what-sort-of-untested-allegations-abc-ne.html

Not an ounce of consistency or intelligence; the same reasons offered for not covering the Gillard story are the same reasons for covering the Navy story.

That's as blatant an example of bias as you could see.

Go to Catallaxy Alan; you deserve it; being as you're a "right wing conservative" and all. Ha ha ha.
Posted by cohenite, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 10:49:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Alan Austin, "Yes, I agree with Paul Sheehan. Rationalisation is warranted. For reasons expressed above, ABC News and Current Affairs should be sold off or shut down."

Thanks for your civil replies and dry wit.

I reckon that some of the current affairs shows while intended as a public service and to appeal to a younger set, have negatively affected the ABC's credibility, acceptance and broad appeal as well.

While I would much prefer to keep Aunty, the creation of the SBS and indigenous national broadcasters showed that Labor did not trust the ABC to perform those roles. I am not saying that to score petty points. Claimed 'diversity' in broadcasting is parasitic for the ABC, and corrosive of its raison d'etre.

Since the victim lobbies and PC are powerful forces in Australian politics, it is likely that the other 'PC sensitive' public broadcasters will cannibalise the ABC. They have done that already. The trend towards celebrity journalists on Aunty will hasten that outcome, exposing the ABC to the complaints being seen here.

What do you say to that?
Posted by onthebeach, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 2:55:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hey Alan, how about this as a classic example of subreption by the ABC:

http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/the_abcs_priorities/

Is that you with the flag?

Actually I think this is funny and Bolt is being a bit of a wowser complaining about it.
Posted by cohenite, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 4:22:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi again Onthebeach,

Yes, I agree with most of your observations there.

Re: “some of the current affairs shows while intended as a public service … have negatively affected the ABC's credibility, acceptance and broad appeal as well.”

Yes, perhaps. But news and current affairs by their very nature shine light into corners someone usually wants kept dark. So negative responses from someone will usually follow sound reporting.

The questions then are: who is upset by the reports, and why?

Re: “the creation of the SBS and indigenous national broadcasters showed that Labor did not trust the ABC to perform those roles.”

Not sure. The Indigenous broadcasting network was funded as part of a positive move to give substance to Labor’s policy of Aboriginal self-determination and self-management. I don’t really know about SBS.

Re: “cannibalise the ABC” and “trend towards celebrity journalists”, you may be right. Not sure.

My principal concern has always been limiting the misinformation which is so rife in Australian news services and ensuring that important topics are covered.

@Cohenite:

If you read and listen to Andrew Bolt and Michael Smith, then of course you are going to misunderstand what is happening, which clearly you do.

They are ludicrously wrong on the ABC’s reporting of the Navy. And, along with several other Fairfax and Murdoch reporters, have seriously distorted the Gillard/AWU allegations, as the Press Council determined last September.

Refer: http://www.independentaustralia.net/business/business-display/press-council-finds-fairfax-fabricated-awu-gillard-stories,5741

You will never understand the world as it really is, Anthony, if you read Smith and Bolt and other liars employed by the criminal Murdoch organisation. They are paid to fabricate and distort. They know they are fabricating and distorting. And when they see people like you believe their fabrications and distortions they laugh at you.

Don’t let them suck you in, Anthony. Stay with evidence-based research and reporting. You will be a lot happier as well as a lot more useful to the world.

Cheers,

A
Posted by Alan Austin, Wednesday, 5 February 2014 7:14:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 13
  7. 14
  8. 15
  9. Page 16
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy