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 > Green agenda to defang the News > Comments

Green agenda to defang the News : Comments

By Graham Young, published 4/8/2011

The proposed inquiry into Australian media is about one side of politics wanting to dominate the media, not phone hacking.

  1. Pages:
  2. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
I'm very concerned about an Australia where the Govt monopolises the broadband network and proposes their own form of internet censorship, the Prime Minister tries to bully the media and will not disclose the outcome of clandestine meetings and together with the Greens she seeks to suppress freedom of the press. It is certain that the Greens, like all totalitarians despise democracy, because it gets in the way of their wish to impose their ideological righteousness on the rest of us.

Imposed secularisation of society, centralisation of power, huge and inefficient infrastructre schemes, the decreasing wealth of the individual and the diminishing status of democracy are a very concerning trend and bear an eerie similarity to some very dysfunctional regimes from the past.

For a Prime Minister to threaten certain parts of the Press because they express opposing views is concerning and a denial of the fact that it is the voice of at half of the nation who don't vote for the Left. The community must fight against this to the very end because if we lose freedom of the press, we have lost all freedoms.
Posted by Atman, Thursday, 4 August 2011 9:51:38 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
I'm also concerned at concentration of media power, but to suggest that the government is the main culprit is ridiculous.

Right commentators like Graham laud private ownership because it allows control of the media by their ideological soul mates. Note the glib way in which Graham notes that News Limited 'might dominate newspapers in the eastern states', as if this is unimportant. The dominance of the media by a small group of powerful individuals and companies is bad for democracy, and does not provide the diversity we need. Does anyone think that an editor of The Australian who suddenly began to run good news stories about unions would keep his/her job? Consider the right wing rent-a-crowd who dominate The Australian's opinion pages. Look also at the very calculated plans by Murdoch/Rinehart to shift Channel Ten to the right.

Without limits to media ownership, the Murdochs of this world would have complete control. The UK hacking scandal is of peripheral relevance here, but it does indicate the unscrupulous activities which journalists are capable of, and therefore is another argument for limiting domination by a few and placing the media under constant scrutiny.

It's important to remember Connell's comment years ago that the media don't just favour big business; the media ARE big business.
Posted by Godo, Thursday, 4 August 2011 10:17:50 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
Is this opinion or is this news? It's so hard to tell these days...

When a media outlet runs what seems to be a campaign for or against something, should I be worried?

Editorials used to be restricted to one page, but then it;s all about the advertising. Real news does not attract lots of "clicks" and comments.
Posted by Bugsy, Thursday, 4 August 2011 10:25:59 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
Graham,
You wrote “It's all about "bias". Of course it is! You are a good example of the unavoidable fact that humans are incapable of objectivity. You seem to be an intelligent, liberal, caring person who values open debate, and yet – to cite just one example you refer to the Greens statements as ‘platitiudes’. This is an unsupported value judgement, no?

Do you chose not to, or are you unable to, use value neutral language when discussing the Greens or any group or idea you disagree with?

Re an inquiry into Rio Tinto; I did think that this would have been a good thing. I assumed it didn’t happen because big corporations do pretty much whatever they want. That is my bias and I am fully aware that this assumption is biased and based on the way I see the world. Why is your world view more 'true' than mine?

“Calls for News to be investigated are all about political advantage.” So is there anything in politics that isn’t all about political advantage? Do you examine everything that Tony Abbott does with the same attitude that things done for political advantage are bad? If not, why not? Incidently, do you think that Malcolm Turnbulls comments yesterday were motivated by a desire to ‘tell the truth’ or was it for political advantage?

You also say.“ They are rife with conflicts of interest and not to be trusted. They also illustrate the Greens' tendency towards authoritarianism and paranoia, as well as a failure to grasp the new media reality.” So if the Greens are this bad why worry about them? Surely this ‘fact’ will become obvious to people over time? Do you think that emotive and unsubstantiated assessments will persuade anyone to your point of view
Posted by Mollydukes, Thursday, 4 August 2011 10:39:13 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
There is not much disagreement about the growing failure in ethical reporting in the media, many breaching their own Code of Ethics in relation to fact checking, inviting opposing comment and a commitment to writing in a more bipartisan style.

BUT there is not much any government or political party can do about it formally and nor should they. The only people with that power are consumers and while they are soaking up the growth of inanity and entertainment there is probably not much hope in that either.

Prime Ministers all over the Western World are meet with media moguls for more than a cup of tea. Lots of schmoozing on both sides - the business end wants access and the politicians want more favourable reporting.

It is hardly a positive state of affairs in a modern democracy.

An inquiry into the concentration of media ownership is more than warranted. A 70% Australian holding is too high to promote a wide variety of viewpoints.

It is no better than the Chinese governing by suppression when media is owned primarily by one player in print, online, digital and radio.

There is no agenda that I can see to suppress the media more one to address the issue of power distribution. The media is not like any other business and inquiries into media ownership are not new. This link makes some good points about the importance of distribution of media power.

http://ec.europa.eu/information_society/media_taskforce/pluralism/index_en.htm

The Greens and the ALP are not pushing for suppression of the media - this is nothing but scare mongering tactics. All politicians accept there will be both negative and positive commentary throughout their careers.

An Inquiry into concentration of media ownership and tightening up laws about intrusions into privacy that go beyond normal investigative journalism (such as hacking) are discussions worth having IMO.

I have faith that any Committee in Australia and Australians in general would buck up against any efforts to reduce accountability of government via the media and the Greens are no different.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 4 August 2011 10:54:52 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
I don't mind seeing an inquiry into media in general, but only if it can be balanced and deal openly with corporations. Corporations don't like being looked into, so good luck with that.
My guess is they will simply stonewall the Greens, and wait for the exigencies of political power to pull them into line.
The most interesting side show in Canberra over the next little while might be watching the Greens struggle from rural conservationist into urban socialist.
And what's with Senator Conroy's mandatory internet filter? Any news agency willing to hound him and his PM over that is doing the public a favor.
Posted by halduell, Thursday, 4 August 2011 12:02:20 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. Page 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

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