I disagree that it's the fault of the media, they're just as much in a populist bind as the politicians. Just as the pollies have to toe a tawdry line on the usual bourgeois insecurities--border protection, tough on crime, tax cuts, getting back to surplus etc., so does the media, which is just as driven by ratings as political parties are by votes. The blame lies squarely with the viewers and the electorate. Even the ABC is regularly harangued for being "leftist", what a joke! They'd love to be leftist, which is synonymous with "intellectual", to feel like the years at university weren't wasted, but if the ABC wanders from the populist script there's an immediate drive to cut its funding. So even the ABC is under pressure to convert from news to "Variety television", which just ain't the same without the product placement and the add-breaks.
Politics and media these days are part of the same science: marketing and PR. Modern democracy is a collective Henry the eighth and modern science studies his faeces.

Lindsay tanner seems to have totally sidestepped the obvious point which is that in a free society, people inevitably consume that which they feel best meets their needs. We choose what media we consume. We choose the politicians we elect. And we then we choose to blame someone else for the perceived failings we encouraged in the first place.

How anyone could claim that the media is the cause of the problem is simply beyond me. If people were unhappy with the news/current affairs they were getting, someone else would be making money meeting that need. The fact is that the need doesn't exist. The commercial media outlets would lose viewers, followed shortly thereafter by advertsising dollars, were they to significantly deviate from their currrent offerings. The truth is that the vast majority of people want their news and current affairs presented in the 'womens weekly' style. They vote for politicians who acknowledge this prediliction, and punish those who don't.

So lets not get too carried away with pointing fingers on this issue. The blame clearly starts with us.

"claque" - nice word.

Congratulations! The best article I've seen on OLO yet - Author, Author!

Somehow I feel Lindsay Tanner's arguments, and his book, are a case of "sour grapes". Sorry, Lindsay, but you always came across as a bit of a limp fish. Some in the spotlight are statesmen (or women), some are calm, venerable and erudite, others bombastic and enervated, and others yet are thin lipped and evasive. The media reveals heart and soul, as well as any nasty "zits".

"Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them". How we wish our politicians could fit into one of those categories, but, alas, so many limp fish - evasive (I'll answer your question My Way, thank you), flat and boring (samo, samo... this is the message, take it or leave it), unbelievably obtuse (we Need this Tax, you need this tax, this tax needs You), or Sun-shiny (We Can Save this Planet, but we need You to realise that we are your only hope - for your children, your grand-children, the couple next door, and all the boat people - oh, did I forget we also hug trees?). Macbeth brought down, but no Lady of the Lake prevails.

All is not lost, fortunately. There are a few knights at the round table, replete with gleaming swords, albeit not all smiles - politics is a serious business after all, decorum.

Occasionally emerges a true King, smites the enemy of the state, and rules with benevolence, but all too quickly (or slowly) develops a mistaken grandiosity, and falls on his sword.

Media, however constructive and insightful, can still fail the masses - and a GWB squeaks home. Alas, imperfect.

For all the virtues of our political system, I can't help thinking true stability and security, both nationally and internationally, may only be achieved by the adoption of a "Board" system of governance - elected "visionaries" imbued with masses of wisdom, experience and humility. Holistic governance - economy, society, environment.

Our media, whilst imperfect, "outs" the villains, and offers hope to the struggling masses.

Saltpetre,

"Our media, whilst imperfect "outs" the villains, and offers hope to the struggling masses".

...and might I inquire as to which galaxy you are posting from?

I stopped watching telly, listening to radio and reading papers at the time of the last election, because I found I had reached my limit - and I haven't returned.
However, I find I pick up enough snippets during the course of my day to keep abreast with any major events.

We have two political parties that offer no distinction between their policies, who tango with the media and trumpet vacuous clichéd sound-grabs, so that we are left with one homogeneous cloud of consumerist spin - where is the hope in that?

Well, Poirot, you either have to laugh or to cry, but you must never lose heart.

How can I paint you relevant pictures if you don't worship the idiot box? This is the information age, and it's coming at you from all angles, up, down and side-ways, in endless streams of hype, spin and spotlighting. It takes all our senses, from Id, Infundibulum and neo-cortex, to spot the "pretenders" from the true "dragon-slayers". But, try we must. (Or the bogeyman will gobble us up.)

It is indeed a pity we are presently caught in a state of flux - two steps sideways, give a little kick, two steps back. Our "hope" lies in the inevitability that all nightmares must surely end, eventually.

All is not lost! We have a new budget which will surely save the day! (Why this particular day is worth saving, heaven only knows.) And, it looks as though the dreaded Carbon Tax is shortly to become a reality - future shock with brass knobs on. Is there a Tony in the wings - can he draw the white rabbit from the hat? (I'm not looking sufficiently nonchalant at this stage, I'm afraid.)

I have to disagree, however, that all is the same - I'd hate to see Julia in speedo's. (Quick, stop, don't let me think about it even.) Laughing on the outside, gritting my teeth on the inside. We have a problem, and no easy solution, but if you want a real laugh, just think about how it will be if the same mob gets back in, but with an outright majority - see, there's always a darker side, so chin up.

P.S. I come to you from about 2 blocks east of "the black stump". Brrrr.. Brrr...

Well well well a labor politician shamelessly blaming the public for not listening to the crap he's had a large hand in dishing up.

The history shows John Howard did reach the masses through public conversation and people listened. At the same time he suffered much of the crap politically biased anti liberal media comment. Then Rudd and Tanner came along using all the spin techniques crafted at state level well politic's became overrun with labor spin merchants and their flunkies in the media especially in the ABC.

What happened Lindsay couldn't your biased media get you re-elected? That should be the question being asked.

As for Windsor being an honest pollie. Wait to see the judgement from the people who elected him to represent their interests. He'll be dumped with a massive rejection simply because he didn't act as he portrayed himself to be. That was totally dishonest. And don't try to say he was always going to side with a labor government because his electorate was labor leaning. That would be as dishonest as Windsor.

Abbott is now doing as Rudd did with one difference. He intends to do as he says and he will. All the spin from the government to focus solely on him has totally backfired. They like the media expected Tony Abbott to implode. He hasn't succumbed to that crap. He's risen above it and people know that. They will vote for him in greater numbers at the next election because he is sticking to his 'script' and everybody knows that his script is workable. On the other hand Tanner's minions in the media running his party's spin are now up against a politician playing them at their own games and thrashing both them and labor.

Abbott and the Liberals have an advantage because the liberals are not perceived in the community as playing labor spin games. It's only the facile labor biased media that see and report that. Labor is seen as the party of infantile spin doctoring. Look what's happened at state level.

A fascinating analysis, Keith.
Of course Alan Jones and the other shock jocks are all Labor Party flunkies, just like today tonight and kochie's Sunrise and on and on and on. The ABC only looks left wing because the mainstream media borders on fascism! The ABC couldn't be more mainstream; if it dared to make a critical analysis it'd have zeros like you chucking hissy-fits. Anyway, the Labor Party's conservatism in drag.

squeers

Here is your mistake on Jones et al.

They are mostly daytime radio shockjocks and few people listen to them.

Most of us are too busy working or making money.

They really don't rate.

What does tend to suggest influence is the 10 second sound grab... which is mostly edited by labor media flunkies.

That you think pointing to one media commentator who has conservative values and who expresses such some how balances the labor immersed spin doctered commentary in the rest of the media (The Australian excluded) says more about you than you might realise.

Oh and what show did Rudd use to gain his short term PMship? The same show that has done no favours for Joe and especially not for Tony. Oh and they also tend to promote the Liberal member the Labor spin-miesters love to love.

Nawhhhhh you've just got to accept Tony, with his surf-club speedo's, has got them all buggered.

You watch how fevered and expastered the usual labor minions and spruikers in the media become in the next few months.

Watch what happens when labor falls below 30% in polling.

What all the labor spruikers in the media continue to ignore is the labor leadership woes and the leadership pressure the current great saviour is under.
(Where is the commentary on that? If it was Liberal leadership it would be headlines ... everywhere ... daily).

Watch them all switch to the new leader and then make claims that they are the next great labor saviour whether that be Bowen or Wong.

Laughable really, when you actually sit down and think about it.

And as is reflected in the polling everybody except the pigheaded rump have woken up to them.

Keith,

I'm a swing voter. I'm not particularly impressed by the Gillard Gov't and they have made a mess of a few things. But to pretend that the current liberals are somehow the party of substance is flat-out ridiculous.

Tony abbott is doing his level best to be a policy free zone, which is undoubtedly the correct course for a politician with his extremely limited talents.

And Joe Hockey could not possibly be more vacous if he tried. Please explain to me how telling the banks how much interest they can charge constitutes a liberal policy?? Or how giving handouts to people on 150, 000 dollars a year fits with a smaller government agenda?

Keith:
"Jones et al.

They are mostly daytime radio shockjocks and few people listen to them".

Well this is nonsense; apart from the fact that the Laws/Jones et al conservative 'phenomena' is huge, albeit dominated by the grey demographic, Jones et al also publish their opinions and are widely reported in the media.
But I pointed to commercial media in general; tell me about one single mainstream leftwing commercial radio or tv programme?
But what about newspapers; I don't know of any that isn't dominated by a rightwing editorial bias; again please name me a few?
Even the ABC is "necessarily" rightwing in its content because the paranoid bigots who dominate the agenda in this country are the ones who have to be patronised.
Have a read of this article from the drum: http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/55436.html
A quote from it says, "Let me spell it out: the big lie of Australian political debate is that the mainstream political media is left-wing. It most resolutely is not, as even a cursory examination of various outlets will show".

As for your gloating that Abbott has the left buggered, as I say, there is no mainstream Left in this country. I'm ideologically a Labour voter but haven't voted for them for decades because their policies are rightwing.
The Drum article implies that this Labor-conservatism is a flawed tactic because Labor thereby alienates many of its progressive supporters, but I don't agree; these are just those at the noisy margins, many of whom will at the end of the day relapse into fostering their private interests long before their altruism is practically realised.
Sadly, in my opinion you can be comforted, Keith, that when it comes to the crunch on any vital issue--climate change, humanitarianism, social welfare--Australia will vote conservative in the true bourgeois tradition.

Keith

>> Abbott and the Liberals have an advantage because the liberals are not perceived in the community as playing labor spin games. <<

Har, har, har!

Er, no the Libs 'are perceived as' playing Liberal spin games.

Neither party appear to be concerned about Australia either in humane terms or have the vision required for future concerns of failing infrastructure, alternative energy, welfare for people who actually need it (just like the Libs, Labor is hitting out at the most vulnerable; disabled people, single mums, unemployed etc), fair and free education (the chaplaincy program only satisfies the religious right). How you manage to discern the difference between the two major parties? Well fact is Keith, you don't - if you had any ability for analysis you would realise what posters before me have told you Labor is as right-wing as the Liberal party.

PS

No politician should be seen wearing budgie smugglers.

Squeers,
/// The ABC only looks left wing because the mainstream media borders on fascism! ///

/// Even the ABC is "necessarily" rightwing in its content …///


You must be tuned into a different ABC!

The ABC I hear/see systematically favours the asylum seeker narrative –despite the fact that the majority of electors are wearied & cynical of the whole scam.
The ABC hear/see systematically hypes the AGW narrative—despite the fact the majority are either neutral of sceptical.
The ABC I hear/see continually promotes a hardcore left-liberal multiculturalism—despite the fact that the majority
either favour a softer version or are opposed any (state sponsored) version.

/// ideologically a Labour voter but haven't voted for them for decades because their policies are rightwing///

Interesting.

So -- since we are all anonymous here -–which party do you vote for Squeers?

Which party has shown itself authentically leftwing & class conscious & new age & progressive enough to merit your vote?

SPQR,
I do the only thing I can do in our homogeneously conservative political spectrum; I vote Green and direct my preference to Labor in the hope that if enough people do that, Labor will forced to acknowledge that it has to embrace a representative ideological agenda.
I'm rather hard on many well-meaning or altruistic Australian voters above. Rather than plain cynical, I think it's possible for Australia to produce a majority prepared to embrace positive change in many areas, but that the media and consumerism generally is dominated by an established neoliberal agenda that confounds it with its spurious "common sense". I think, that is, that swathes of the public are too easily swayed from their purpose--on green and humanitarian issues, for instance--by the scare tactics employed by vested interests that are trumpeted by narrow mentalities such as your own, which punch above their weight.
Not all the media consciously manufactures this conservative agenda, and neither does Labor, but they contribute to its dominance by pandering to rather than condemning it.
So where a great many might support Labor and Green ideologically, they are too weak-minded to follow through; they will talk progressive but vote conservative; just as "you" don the mantle of Christian values but dump on humanitarian action. What do you think Jesus would have said about the "refugee problem"?

Squeers,

Christ wasn't muslim, he was Jewish and as was his practise he would have tended their earthly needs, spiritually forgiven them their sins, their rejection of him. He would have especially forgiven them as they beheaded him and his followers when they would have refused their attempt at conversion or as he and his followers tried to convert them to christianity.

Doh.

When you speak of radio you seem to limit yourself to talkback and that is opinion dominated by the callers. I doubt Jones would be listened to by "conservative 'phenomena' ... dominated by the grey demographic," if he spouted left biased opinion. I don't know anyone outside of Sydney who listens to Jones.

Laws retired years ago.

Every mainstream radio and TV News is leftwing dominated.

The Courier Mail, Sydney Morning Herald, Melbourne Age, Adelaide Advertiser, to name but a few, are all left wing dominated provincial rags... with plummeting circulations.
At he independant and balanced The Australian circulation is rising.

The Drum is the perfect example of a left-wing ABC dominated program and any reference from it must be viewed as such.

Non-issues or completely settled issues in the community at large are the former issue of climate change and broad social welfare issues. What is angering most people and are now the relevant issues are wasteful spending, boats and the weak and intergrity lacking labor leadership that is lead by the nose by the idealogical left policy mantras of the Greens.

The 'bourgeois tradition' well you applying that out dated label from a defunct idealogy simply defines you. You need say no more. Obviously most Australians opinions and our way of life are quite distasteful to you. You could always emigrate or flee or seek refugee status in Venezuela, Cuba, North Korea or any of those now crumbling socialist dictatorships of the Ba'ath parties in the Middle East

Ammonite,

The full quote included
'It's only the facile labor biased media that see and report that.'

Obviously you've fallen for the facile spin.

And I suppose no surf-life saver should wear budgies either. Why criticise a great Australian tradition! I wore them until middle age and was proud to do so.

PaulL
'Gillard Gov't and they have made a mess of a few things.'

Name something they haven't completely stuffed?

Tony Abbot will stop the fiscal waste, stop the boats and reverse a carbon tax. He'll also attempt to limit cost of living increases (Especially power costs). That's hardly policy free.

Most of the current liberal leadership when last in Government actually did those things. Have you forgotten? It doesn't fit with your labor spin doctor mantra does it?

Joe hockey will be a safe pair of hands when it comes to economic deficits and surpluses. Their are now more Commonwealth Public servants than ever before and the intrusion of Government into industrial affairs, the ceilings and lounge rooms of Australia, under this current labor rabble, has been an utter disaster.

Oh and why can't they get anybody to build their bloody precious NBN?

Cheers chappies.

Keith,
perhaps I can prevail upon you to suspend your "common sense" for an hour and read this:
http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/The%20mass%20media%20today.pdf

Amongst its scholarly findings: "a rough sketch of the West and its media today. Much of the
scholarly evidence to fill in this picture is still missing, but there is enough evidence
that shows that its outlines are already clear. As media scholars we may be pessimistic,
and simply observe the general trends towards increasingly market-oriented,
neo-liberal, conservative, populist, nationalist, and xenophobic media. We may also42
take a more critical position, and move to the side of a fast growing number of victims
of these dominant ideologies".

Indeed I must revise my own notions apropos the relative innocence of the media I've propounded, though in self-defence I'd assert that Tanner's position is far more naive than mine; it's not merely the dumbing down of journalism that's culpable but the wholesale manipulation of it by vested interests.

According to Kevin Doogan, "in the US, “The Business Round Table, an organisation of CEO’s, ‘committed to the aggressive pursuit of political power for the corporation’… together with the US Chamber of Commerce”, were central to the mobilisation of “a veritable constellation of think tanks, pressure groups, special interest foundations, litigation centres, scholarly research and funding endowments, publishing and TV production houses, media attack operations, political consultancies, polling mills and public relations operations”.
This neoliberal agenda is international.

It is foolhardy to blame the media alone for the demise of substance although they play a huge role in perpetuating the lightweight entertainment aspect.

What about politicians deciding to be more honest in their policies and more transparent in their deliberations. That will put a stop to any wild inferences drawn by a media overly-focussed on entertainment, scandal mongering and the game of politics.

Politicans playing into that mind numbing mindset are also to blame.

The robotic responses and droning repetitive policy statements are not the fault of media. Some of the most honest speaking politicians of the past have been the most respected. Give the public some credit.

It is bleedin' obvious that the public is growing more cynical as reflected in the increase in 'none of the above' votes. Clearly the media focus is not as popular as people believe.

Politicians just need more spine - tell it like it is, we are not so fragile that the truth has to be veiled in spin.