Look folks, its pretty simple really. As per the well researched statistics in this article, 10% of Austrlians are smart and the smartest 20% of those listen to RN.

Since I listen to RN that proves that I'm smart and all those commentors above who don't listen to RN are, by definition, not smart and ought to just shut-the-hell-up.

Just sit back and do as your betters tell you. Strewth, is that so hard?

Then we, the 10%, can get on with doing things to save the country like spending your money on programming that WE approve. That's the path to a clever country..you 90%ers will just have to take my word for that because its to hard for us smart-ones to explain it to you unsmart ones (I don't want to use the word 'dumb' because it might upset you 90%ers...we 10% are sooo considerate).

So enjoy Masterchief in the knowledge that the elite are getting on with it.

fancynancy,

You are not the subject of the comments I directed at the ABC because you are a teacher not an ABC employee. One has to wonder what you are doing teaching any children when you can’t master reading and comprehension.

There are two possible reasons for your reaction one, that you have not mastered the basics of English or two, you did not “read” the content of the post just the “emotion”.

You also add that I should “Be very scared as I will try to teach them tolerance and respect for all”. Now that would be a novelty and you should indeed “try” to do that. In the meantime I suspect you are one of the “progressives” that are frightening the pants of my grandchildren with the impending doom and gloom predictions of climate change.

And yes I am very scared about that, scared by the fact that my daughter and her husband are having a monumental conflict with their school principle at the distress inflicted upon their children. The principle was asked to provide answers to some questions related to climate change, otherwise to stop distressing their kids with this nonsense.

Interestingly, a number of other parents are now joining this challenge. So if you are indeed one of those responsible for teaching ideological dogma to grandkids like mine, then you are eligible to be inducted into the “dysfunctional, ideological, festering sleazebags” club.

God forbid that you are teaching English.

Charming, spindoc...."dysfunctional, ideological, festering, sleazebags' club".

Just goes to show that being proficient in language doesn't automatically bestow on one a sense of constructive civility.

You've obviously been listening to too much commercial radio where amongst the vacuous platitudes, words like dysfunctional, ideological, festering and sleazebag abound with odious regularity.....you should try listening to Radio National - it might lift your game.

The lady writes "only ten per cent of the population has high intelligence." She didn't say anything about being 'smart' but there seems to be a lot of discussion about this topic.

She bases her claim on the results of studies using IQ tests that show that there is a range of abilities that we categorise as 'intelligence' - in all human populations or groups. The majority of people fall into the average category, 10 percent are well below average and 10 percent are well above average.

It doesn't make them better people - or 'smart'; this isn't a term that has been defined so we all understand what it means, anymore than being able to run fast means you are a better person than others. It doesn't mean one is a better person but it does mean that some people have the capacity to understand some things better than others. But like naturally fast runners, they need to work at using their intelligence for it to be of benefit. Perhaps, the lady is saying that the ABC provides somewhere for these people to go where they can run fast.

It is unfortunate that the highly intelligent people who don't like the politics of the ABC refuse to acknowledge that it is a progressive part of Australian public life.

It's really useful to understand what people are actually saying before one attacks them. It seems to me that if you want others to understand your own point of view, you need to understand theirs so you can effectively change what they believe. But perhaps it's too difficult to do this and it's easier to 'abuse' people with a different understanding of the world and the way things work?

If you do want to persuade other people that your view is the right one - or even a better one - it's useful to define the terms. Studies have shown that we don't all understand 'critical' words like 'intelligence' and 'smart' in the same way. We are all individuals and construct our own idiosyncratic understandings based on unconscious emotional responses.

I hardly ever actually listen to the radio, but it seems I subscribe to about a quarter of Radio National's shows by Podcast. Future Tense, Late Night Live, Big Ideas, etc are all great podcasts. The advantage is you can listen to them when you want to, pause them, play them back again if you missed a bit or just want to listen to a great podcast again a year on.

And you don't have to download the titles you're not interested in.

So I'm wondering if they are also counting how many people listen to their podcasts? A lot of my blogging is provoked by these great shows and spreading awareness of them around the net in very interesting discussions.

If you are going to cast aspersions at my general literacy and comprehension spindoc, you had better get someone to proof read your own work first. I understood perfectly what you were trying to say and was just expressing some comradely solidarity with the ABC workers.