"The threat to democracy with a nobbled ABC"

How can requiring the public broadcaster to be apolitical, unbiased and objective be a threat to democracy?

The ABC has become the Left's propaganda arm. The equivalent of Pravda. It's entirely controlled by the Left from top to bottom and its audience is the inner city elitists.

They are wealthy enough to pay for their broadcaster. The SBS should be paid by subscription to those who what to watch it, and the ABC should be purged of all those who show any sighs of political bias. Since it is publicly funded it should be aimed at correcting the market failures where the private sector cannot provide services profitably - e.g. the bush.

We all appreciate the ABC when it is objective impartial and unbiased. But it strayed far from that now. It must be cleaned up. If it can't be cleaned up it will inevitably be privatized eventually.

Peter Lang
The ABC can only report on whats reportable at the time. When you say biased do you mean making things up.
At present we have a coalition govt; so they are going to report on coalition issues.
You are not explaining why the ABC are biased.

Journalism is at an all time low with the public because reporting in newspapers only offer one side of what's happening in the world, Murdoch papers are right wing and anything to do with the left is omitted full stop, we have had three weeks of reporting on Phillip Hughe's death, unnecessary reporting day after day, almost to the stage of cancelling one's subscription, with any reporting we want to know the truth, truth comes from obscure papers, mainly paid by subscribers, this is what we want, the truth, the ABC and SBS perhaps are biased to the left and should include the opinions of the right as well, democracy is failing owing to Government intervention where we are only being told what they want us to hear, dictatorship is becoming the norm , it is already happening

Why on earth is this bit of bumph here Graham?

Is it to show us just how far the ABC supporters have got from reality? I know it is ridiculous to try to use film plots to describe reality, & predict the future, & would have believed any thinking adult would be able to differentiate the two, but not so it seems.

I suppose it is good for us to know how the strange thinking of some ABC supporters really is, but this is irrational. I guess it does show us how far from reality one can become, when sucking on the taxpayer teat.

I guess a bit of vested interest might be sneaking in here too. Surely the ABC is the most likely TV station to inflict some dreadful local production on it's audience. You can do that when you still get paid, even when just the author & their mum are watching at the finish.

The ABC is great for news, there could be a problem with investigating as far as the coalition are concerned.
Political parties do not like being investigated, it uncovers corruption, and wrongdoings. Some political parties create more reportable news than others, but to be biased would be difficult. Newspapers are a different media and can hide behind a host of excuses to misreport something.
It comes down to the ability of the person being interviewed also. If they can not sell their explanation of a question to the interviewer, they will be pursued for more information, this does not happen with print media, you accept the writers interpretation of what was said, and that usually is enough to start a barrage of talk, even if it is only one persons opinion.
That can not happen on TV, you get it straight from the interviewed persons mouth. We all know face to face interviews can result in direct lies being told on numerous occasions, by all sides of politics

all of these questions arise from the fact that you like to think you live in a democracy, when in fact you live in an oligarchy. it makes a big difference. logic is only useful when it begins in objective appreciation of reality.

in an oligarchy such as oz, politics is a trade. in a democracy it is a duty. tradesmen must get paid one way or another, so all pseudo-political chat is either biased, or empty. it is patently unfair to load onto tradesman shoulders the tasks done by every citizen in a democracy. and generally, they refuse- they take the money. so they should.
some media tradesmen find social or emotional benefit in reporting the 'truth,' for less money, sure enough. but how do you know if the rot is set in?
there are many benefits to living in a democracy, but it requires effort, even more effort just to get it, when you don't have it. and of course, when you don't realize you don't have it, when you don't even know what democracy is, the difficulty in getting it is insuperable.
but the puzzling and insurmountable questions that bubble up in oz society are the result of fundamental lies fed to every child, about 'democracy.' oz is a demonstration of the failure of oz mothers to tell the story of the emperor's new clothes to their children, except possibly in support of the lesson that whistleblowers get driven into the ground.