The ABC is clearly and perhaps irrevocably compromised by political interference by the Liberals.

New ABC boss, Mark Scott, 'deliberately' - his word - presented his maiden speech at the Sydney Institute, well-known for its harping right-wing attacks on the ABC. Imagine it being presented, say, at the Evatt Foundation - oh the outrage! Scott was clearly showing his political masters - at Kirribilli and at the ABC Board - the white flag of compliance. From today, the ABC means to tilt the balance further in your favour.

Scott's appointment has a context. As David Tiley says: "No less than four people on the ABC board were or are op-ed writers for the Murdoch press, and use their columns to run highly partisan rants. Brunton, Albrechtson and Windschuttle are prominent Right wing intellectuals, known for a hostile attitude to the ABC." And all recent Howard appointees.

Of all the programs run by the ABC why in his speech did Mr Scott single out just one program, Media Watch, for a 'review' of format and content? Scott said this review would 'ensure there is more opportunity for debate and discussion around contentious and important issues'. Remeber he is addressing the Sydney Institute which has felt the sharp end of comments on Media Watch. The message is clear.

The decision (just days before Scott took up his appointment) to renege on the book "Jonestown" is clear evidence of a deterioration of the ABC's independence and integrity. The ABC was leant on by friends of Alan Jones, a powerful supporter of John Howard. The rationale given by the ABC - that the book was not likely to pay its way - was totally unconvincing. The commercial publishers are making a fortune at the expense of an intimidated and impoverished ABC.

The costs to the ABC for the Jonestown fiasco amounted to $127,126.50 of which the ABC has recouped just $49,626.50 from a smiling Allen and Unwin, who picked up the book after the ABC went ot water. Allen and Unwin got themselves a bargain.

Scott's speech to the Sydney Institute is at http://abc.net.au/corp/pubs/media/s1766775.htm

Dear Frank....

are you suggesting that the previous appointees were 'politically unbiased, completely fair minded and represented the whole of Australia' ?

c'mon mate. The corrollary to 'they will be more biased' to the right is that they were previously biased to the left mate.

I'd prefer a centrist approach, but I guess this kind of thing is the price we pay for a political/social environment of 'us/them' in Labor/Coalition.

I think I'd vote for Maxine McQue though. She is a beautiful person inside and out.

We deserve truth and honesty from 'OUR' ABC and we are going to get neither from the left or the right.
From Media Watch to Kerry OBrian, we get a slanted [their way] version of events. Can there ever be neutral anchor person?
I notice that when ever there is a school room scene on the news , the camera is nearly always aimed at an Asian scholar. Are there any Anglo Australian scholars or have they all become extinct? One would never know from watching our ABC.

David, you missed the key point - that Brunton, Albrechtson and Windschuttle had been actively and publicly undermining the ABC including writing anti-ABC stories for competing media outlets, and that alone should have disqualified them from membership of the ABC Board. They brought a particular bias to their Board seats. Can you give me an instance of an ALP appointee to the Board who had that kind of track record?

Mickij, perceptions are not always reliable especially if you have an inclination towards a particular view. Do you have any statistical evidence to support your perception that 'Asian' scholars hog the cameras in Australian education stories? Second, are you referring to Australians of Asian background or to Asian students?

frank gol, I am referring to the ABC's fondness for portraying pictures of Asian students as part of their PR for Multiculture. There is no other reason for it, it is not the student vying for publicity, it is the camera man who aims for it .Probably under orders to do so if possible

mickij, I asked you two specific questions:

1. Do you have any statistical evidence to support your perception that 'Asian' scholars hog the cameras in Australian education stories?
2. Are you referring to Australians of Asian background or to Asian students?

Your reply ignored both. So we still don't know if you have hard evidence or you're just telling us how you feel. Nor do we know what you mean by 'Asian students'.

Why am I not surprised at your evasion?