The ABC should not use fact check to push an agenda!? (If it can be said, it may or may not have?) Neither should any anti-abortion advocate, including the Author.
Alan B.

If you are relying on the abc to report anything beyond its lying liberal feminist agenda you are either naive or extremley optimistic. One wonders when someone will have the guts to drastically cut their funding in order to drastically cut their lying narratives. They are champion virtue signallers lacking any morality.

Having had some experience with ABC current affairs over many years, I can sympathise with the authors that its coverage of topical issues is typically agenda-driven and this particularly dictates what is not said and who is not interviewed for fear of undermining what the broadcaster wants to convey.

This is far from objective journalism, but it is really only apparent to those who already have a solid knowledge of the topic at hand. To the vast bulk of the ABC audience who have little in-depth knowledge and are in any case already supportive of the ABC's various agendas, its current affairs coverage is beyond reproach. To them, it is entirely appropriate to have, for example, Four Corners coverage of the Murray Darling Basin Plan dominated by (12 to 1) interviewees who believe we are diverting too much water to food production.

Just to hand and minutes ago, the NSW parliament has passed the abortion bill.

As for the water in the Murray Darling Basin, its allocation? Conflicting interests have conflicting views. Clearly, there would seem to be a green view on the ABC?

The hard left of the green movement would seem to be a brainwashed element with absolutist views on everything and the allowed green solutions.

They demand carbon-free power but eternally reject the only reliable dispatchable energy that fits that description, based entirely on a mountain of misinformation and selectively selected "facts"?

Have an agenda that allows for one billion human survivours (all of them) to inhabit the planet and all the natural disasters ought be allowed run their course and take out all the surplus population.

Not understanding, this hidden green agenda is a death warrant for that which they, allegedly want to save, as the human race struggles against environmental adversity as they always have. Consuming everything in a desperate survival mission as evidenced in drought-ravaged Ethiopia, as the effected dirt poor population ate everything that clawed swam or flew!

Chopped down entire forests in that endeavour and consumed what couldn't be eaten as firewood! Leaving in their wake a lunar landscape where once stood verdant forest alive with life! This is our future if we allow fundamentalists like the greens to take charge of anything and or effectively decide outcomes as the play both ends against the middle and promise/say anything to achieve power and then, their insane hidden agenda?TBC
Alan B.

There shouldn't be any shortage of water on an island continent, surrounded on all sides by water and with a large inland much of which is both permanently arid and below sea level, by up to 15 metres in places.

Along the length of the entire Muray Darling there are are a number of salt springs, some of which would reportedly, be twice as salt as seawater?

Many of these with substantial permanent flows have been piped to divert them from the river system and piped directly to sea. This same water could be first put through deionisation dialysis desalination and the desalted potable water returned, the remaining much smaller volume allowed o continue its piped seaward flow!

This would ad Gigalitres that could be channelled to critical food production permanently, as could much of our treated effluent! Which currently flow out to sea as millions of annual litres. As does also wasted stormwater, on the driest inhabited continent on earth!

Piped to underground taped applications, this same water could be reserved for both our current water-hungry cotton and rice crops much of which could be grown on arid land only needing an application of permanent reliable water. What prevents any and all of this now essential water recycling infrastructure? Just the asinine privatisation of the public's water. Water that first fell from the skies as God's gift!

What will it take to reverse this insanity and the blatant theft of increasingly scarce, privatised water! The complete de-privatisation perhaps and the affected compensated for proven financial loss!

Finally, there are parts of our coastline that are principally, sandstone. This could be drilled about five hundred metres inland, the bottom of the holes made into very large tanks with a jet of circling water at the bottom of the finished hole and then allowed to fill via natural reverse osmosis from endlessly abundant seawater, thus ensuring endless reliable drinking water, that then can be diverted after, to the above!
Alan B.

Why not admit openly, that television is a propaganda tool to sway the masses.

It's uninteresting, irrelevant and totally unentertaining.

Now from there, the AB what?

Dan