You want evidence of bias on Radio National?

http://theclimatescepticsparty.blogspot.com/2011/02/abc-bias-hits-news.html

and

http://www.menzieshouse.com.au/2011/06/richard-glover-forcibly-tattoo-climate-change-realists.html

Some charming comments from Richard Glover, one of Radio National's presenters.

Sorted.

Hmmm, so Jon J "sorts" it out for everybody by linking to the right-wing 'climate sceptics party' (sic) and the equally right-wing 'menzies house' (sic) - no bias there.

Richard Glover responded to the screaming banshees here:

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/society-and-culture/a-climate-change-wave-of-hate-20110609-1ftix.html

Sorted.

Radio National - our enemies talking to our friends

No Bias huh "The listeners who respond on comments pages online, or ring in on talk-backs seem a fair cross-section of the courteous listening audience. The rude people who inhabit the Internet are not given space"

So anyone who is "rude" is not given space, which begs the question, Who decides what is Rude? Is disagreeing with the compere "rude"?

Seems like a very good way to ensure you get rid of anyone who disagrees, declare them to be "rude" .. so what was that about bias?

Nice courteous people with nice comments of course are the kind of people we want to listen to our elitist radio national, and the riff raff, "rude" people should just go away, go to shock-jock talk-back radio where they belong .. have I got that right?

Those are Australians, whose taxes help support Radio National as well, and whether they are "rude" or not, is beside the point. They are entitled to their opinion.

Radio National listeners, the ones who cannot tolerate "rude" people, or disagreement and questioning, are elitist.

Shut it down, it's a waste of time and money and only panders tot he elitists out there.

I'm sure I'll be cast now as "rude", for having a contrary opinion to the author .. BTW, Robyn Williams admitted on JJJ that in believer climate science "you have to exaggerate to get people's attention" .. nice one Robin, full of bias there eh, and he was quite "rude" to the young interviewer on JJJ who kept returning him to the point as he obfuscated and dodged and weaved around the question, but finally, cornered, admitted that 100metres of sea rise by the end of the century, was an exaggeration to "get people's attention".

Robin Williams, that's not science, it's propaganda and hysteria.

Reply to Amicus: The comments published on Radio National programs are both positive and negative as you will see by looking – but trolls are not admitted. Several well-meaning media sites open to all have gone under by allowing trolls or even not detecting them quick enough. 'Rude' means rude.

rude means rude, is completely arbitrary .. what may be rude to me may not be rude to you.

If you go online for comments, you get everything and trying to determine who or what is a troll, is usually determined over time, it's best to tolerate everyone, since even trolls may be taxpayers .. you seem to think it's OK to exclude people based on an arbitrary criteria (elitism once again) .. fine if you fund the ABC on your won, but you do not.

(I believe the Australian sites with the greatest collections of trolls, is Tim Blair and Andrew Bolt, and they deal with it and do not shut them down.)

"Several well-meaning media sites open to all have gone under by allowing trolls or even not detecting them quick enough" now that is starting to sound like hysterical exaggeration .. again, and with respect to the ABC, it would appear to be a method of skewing your data, by declaring those you do not like or disagree are trolls or rude.

What are these sites you speak of?

The ABC allows all manner of comments for and against on its Drum website from what I can see, some of them are way past "rude"

As soon as you apply filters like this rudeness test, you lose all credibility as it is obviously a method of censorship .. for the maintenance of a service for an elitist few.

Thanks Valerie. Another excellent article and worth reading just for this line, already commented on: "The rude people who inhabit the Internet are not given space." I too think RN is great even though Fran Kelly and Philip Adams are occasionally rude when they interrupt unnecessarily. I'm not sure why people commenting on this particular forum are so rude, but it does put me off. Life is difficult enough without having to battle your way past all the abuse. Censorship of rudeness? Why not? Surely people can make a point without attempting to destroy the integrity of the other in the process.

Is it not a fact that the presenters of Radio National's Science Show took a position some years back to accept anthropogenic global warming (AGW) and ignore articles that question AGW ? If not, why do they not attempt to present balance on this issue?

Instead, it is evident that they go out of their way to publish articles by AGW proponents, but ignore (or should that be censor out) articles by those with opposing views. If Radio National feels that this is not the case, perhaps it could enlighten us by releasing the number of pro-AGW items and the number of anti-AGW items that have been broadcast on the Science Show in each of the past 5 years.

Listening to commercial stations means unadulterated unashamed bias repeated over and over.
As for rudeness on these stations! If you accept the definition, ' lacking refinement or propriety', (Penguin dictionary) - it's often unbearable!
I cannot understand why people get so het up re bias on the ABC.
If it is so biased I wonder why I find the need to argue loudly so often with presenters - especially during breakfast programmes.
I maintain that dear aunty does a very good job and she gives balanced views.
PS My taxes are used to support heaps of things I disagree with. I like to live in a democracy.

Thanks Valerie for this piece. I couldn't agree with you more. After listening to almost every Radio National program over the course of the past 5 years or so, I have to say a big 'Thank you' to the ABC.

Listening in has raised my awareness of issues, inspired me to question and research further what I read and hear about with respect to various issues and offered me much to think about.

There is no other station that offers the broad variety of topics and access to information. Long live Radio National!

A science program deciding to report science isn't bias - it is sticking to the topic.

If there is a slant to RN it is to the cerebral, reflective and academic. Some friends of mine find it quite bemusing that just about everyone interviewed has written a bloody book!

This is quite different to political bias. Here I think the 'bias' is to accepting the current institutions. There isn't a program that regularly explores anarchism, sociocracy, deliberative democracy, citizen juries and so on. There isn't any party political bias that I can detect.

Hi Valerie,

I too like you like to hear the opinions and evidence that backs the opinions of experts.

At this point I'd like to refer you to a finding of one of Graham Young's survey regarding bias on the ABC after numerous complaints regarding it's favourable Labor bias and anti Conservative attitudes.

His survey found the ABC was a case of labor commentators talking with their labor friends. I took that to mean that the vast majority of the ABC audience is labor leaning and the commentary and programming merely reflect that, or vice versa.

My personal experience with the ABC seems to reflect that. I once used to contribute but found my conservative comments were always met with stoney silence and a polite thankyou from the presenters, criticism from other callers and a focus on rebuttal, as opposed to leftie views being discussed by presenters, almost universal praise from other callers and absolutely no rebuttal.

yep but of course I'm biased.

imajulianutter .. you completely define "rudeness"!

You are exactly the type of person who would respond rudely to a survey, or when you contact the benevolent society, the ABC management, who of course, quite rightly banish you and your rude opinion.

Yes, the majority of ABC listeners are lefties and ALP types, because all the conservatives have given up and gone elsewhere, rather than listen to the constant blather of the self obsessed prattling class.

Their bias has created what they think is an objective, all encompassing intellectual beacon, when in reality they have a lot of complete burks, like Robin Williams and his ilk, who are entertaining, but not easy to listen to if you have any clue or wider education.

I turn to music ..

There is no more rude than the ABC local radio presenter in Perth who got caught out tweeting disgusting remarks about John Howard.His bias and blindness is obvious daily. Chris Ulman is a breath of fresh air with the ABC as he gets past the prescripted ABC dogmas and asks some decent questions to all politicians.

Amicus,

huh?

I don't understand your accusatiuon at all.

Are you using irony?

If not please be specific and explain how holding and expressing conservative views is rude.

yes, imajulianutter, irony, because any conservative gets short shrift from the ABC, whether it's local or radio national .. they preach middle of the road inclusiveness, but in reality cannot stand it at all.

I doubt, on reflection, the author actually knows what a troll is ..

you can cut the bias with a knife it is so solid, but if that's all you know, then you wouldn't realize it .. if you actually went and sought corroborating information, or actually looked up on the web the many guests, you would get an amazing insight into the bias that is the ABC in all its forms.

Tell me one conservative show on RN .. please.

Tell me all the conservative comperes at RN .. please

Michael Duffy Counterpoint. Macca Australia All Over

The ABC will always love the Labor Party because they feed their excesses the most.It is a symbiotic relationship.Just like the Bush Turkey in my backyard.Today I had to stop feeding him.His nick name Crapper was well earned.

This is exactly what the ABC has done to the truth.We have to stop feeding them.

Imajulianutter I have never done a survey on the ABC and bias so I am not sure what you are talking about. I once did an analysis for The Australian of the Drum's online polls using some academic analysis of agendas and came to the conclusion that they were biased in the direction of their audience. No surprise there really. We all cater to our audiences.

Valerie Yule

There are may not be many conservative shows on the ABC as some lament, but, has old Aunt ever put a show that can be said to be progressive?

It is undeniably elitist in the exact manner in which was the RAI (Radio Audition Italian) under Mussolini, as I remember.

But, it is the only source of that little news that breaks the culpable silences of the commercial media.

A couple of months ago I was watching Q&A hosted by Tony Jones.They were discussing AGW amongst other topics.One of the young students who was a AGW believer made the observation that the case for the negative has not been given a fair airing.Tony Jones shut this conversation down instantly,saying this was enough discussion on this topic and moved on.

Tony Jones constantly and emphatically demonstrates his predjudices.
We need to have a separate system of finance for our Govt media that is free from political influence.ie the finance for the ABC be determined by a truely independant board.Also Public servants should not have secure tenure for decades.They all should be on 5 yr contracts and made to work in private enterprise before seeking future contracts with the ABC.

The ABC has an ingrained culture of the "Nanny State", whereby individual responsibility has been replaced by big Govt.

Evan Hadkins, responds to Amicus with .. Michael Duffy and Macca ..

"Michael Duffy presents Counterpoint on Radio National and is a columnist for the Sydney Morning Herald." Which is a bastion of conservatism .. oh wait ..

"worked in the public service for six years, in the Department of Social Security and the NSW Premier's Department. He has been a delegate in two trade unions."

Yep, sounds like a conservative .. not!

Macca runs a music show .. doesn't he? How would you even know what he thought politically.

So there you have it folks, the two "conservatives" thrown up as evidence that Radio National is unbiased. One has been a trade union delegate and journo at the SMH (itself extremely short of conservatives) The other presents a country music program.

Just goes to show just how biased Radio National actually is, and that's the best they can do for balance .. what a joke.

I don't think rpg could have listened to either of the shows.

One of the best things I have ever seen, on the ABC that is, was the election night show, when Howard won, & kicked Keating out.

It was nothing to do with Howard, or who won, it was the tear in the eye of that commy red head twit from the 7.30 report, or Late line, which ever he was making into a lefty propaganda session at the time.

How anyone could ever consider the ABC biased, I just can't imagine, but the dill was crying.

Provocative RN Yes! But not aggressive even predictable as are those other self opinionated uncompromising cocksure stations where bellicosity capped with relentless cultural alienation appears to be the key name of the game serving merely a few.

RN's diversity is gold. There are the experts I do and don't like as there are the Talkback range of comments on Local.

I enjoy observing the genuine nature of presentations and the courage when the subjective leanings of one or another presenter is sometimes revealed. We are all people after all living in a human world. Objectifying the world we live or divesting in human characteristics that cater for our unique forms of individuality depersonalises the asthenic sound-byte hence loses the value of substance through the airwaves if it is too clinically practiced. The dig throughout ABC for knowledge is deeply reflected and appreciated. When the continuity follows it shines.

Mostly I think there is a professional practice that comes through across ABC that cuts through well when it comes to bouncing thoughts, opinions and facts.

As the writer said we get; 'Architects, designers, philosophers, dramatists, poets, religious thinkers, linguists, and travellers, in programs on other six days of the week, I have a pretty rich diet. World experts are happy to speak on Radio National' - A full menu with not too many blank spots. TA.

What more could we want.

Thank You Valerie Yule. The detail you presented is remarkable.

http://www.miacat.com/

Graham

Yes you are perfectly correct. You did not undertake a survey on the ABC and Bias.

Yes it was your survey undertaken for the Drum as refered to in your article,

'Word of warning Auntie - your slip is showing : Comments'
By Graham Young, published 10/8/2010

The conclusion you arrived at in that article, after comparing your Drum exercise and it's results with a 2004 study by Professor Clive Bean, was

'Memo to Graeme Morris - it's your enemies talking mostly to your enemies.'

I recalled that clearly. I laughed at the time. It seemed so accurate.
However I didn't recall how you arrived at that conclusion. On checking I'm sorry for the initial incorrect assumption.

To refresh your basis for argument; the opening of your article.

'Liberal spinner Graeme Morris is credited with observing that the ABC is "our [the Liberals'] enemies talking to our friends". How right is he?'

Now while I wasn't quite precise, I am quite correct in believing: You are an expert polster and political commentator. Your conclusion resulted from both the expertise of others, your poling and political expertise and your subsequent comparison. As you stated, the ABC is indeed a case of liberal enemies taking with liberal enemies.

evan, I've listened to macca .. bores me almost to suicide, seriously have you ever listened to it, I'm not from the country, I'm a city person and love it.

No, never listened to the other and am not about to try to hunt down his show just to satisfy curiosity, because I am not curious enough after reading his own Bio to see if he has changed spots.

it underlines the complaint of bias though in the ABC and Radio National, that you can't find any conservatives and at best find 2 people who might not be as far left and progressive as the rest.

The ABC and Radio National are not inclusive, they pander to their favorite crowd, the ones who think the way they do, which is "correct".

They employ people who will fit in, with the existing crowd and do not stretch to cover other areas, a vessel of same thinkers. Yes some of the programs are good I'm sure, they can't possibly stuff everything up. At least that's why we challenge them constantly otherwise I'm sure they would be, progressively, off the map.

I notice the defenders of the good ship ABC dismiss any accusations of bias by saying there are commercial radio stations available .. why should I go to those when I have the ABC, which is meant to, by charter, have a wide range of programming, and not just for the prissy few elitists who think it is only for them.

Fair reporting and legitimate criticism are always seen as bias from those being criticised.

Unlike the supposed "free-to-air" networks, the ABC is probably the only media network that must demonstrate a lack of bias and is continually monitored for that reason.

Like those who cite other totally unbiassed commentators, such as Alan Jones and Andrew Bolt and just about any other commercial DJ, you are free to turn Radio National off at any time you like.

Wobbles I long ago turned of Radio National, that's not the point.

As it is a lefty rag, I think it should be paid for by the lefties.

That is why, what most of Oz would like to do, is turn off our subscription to that lefty rag.

Wobbles, I am sure many lefties do not buy The Australian, but they sure bitch and moan about it, and feel entitled to insist it is investigated for fairness and if possible, closed down.

They are equally free to ignore it .. but don't.

If no one buys The Australian, it dies, it is a commercial enterprise.

They have to appeal to a demographic to survive. (I'm waiting for Fairfax to appeal for funding, to survive and they will probably get it, since the ALP rely on the bias from that source as well .. no mention of bad polls for the PM lately in the SMH/Age, how convenient, how "friendly")

The ABC doesn't have to appeal to anyone to continue to survive, but we see it as quite unfair that it boasts of balance, but doesn't practice it.

If the ABC came out and said, "right, we're a leftie rag and mouthpiece, and we don't care about all the other Australians we ignore and insult regularly", at least that would be approaching honesty.

To say it is objective and balanced is just stupid, count all the conservatives at the ABC .. see how "balanced" they are. Watch Q&A, it is excruciating, I no longer bother.

I don't listen to Bolt or Jones .. does Bolt have a radio show now?

What sheer arrogance on the part of the ABC to broadcast AT HOME WITH JULIA.

It not only pokes fun at the Prime Minister, but also her partner, at a time when the PM is under extreme pressure. How biased and insensitive.

The ABC introduces an offensive TV program at a time when it is upsetting thousands of regular viewers by axing such favourites as THE NEW INVENTORS and BOWLS.

The ABC has wasted thousands of dollars on buying the program. Yet it has the audacity to plead for greater funding , ignoring the fact that the Government is under enormous pressure to cut Federal spending.

This warrants nothing short of a rigorous inquiry into all aspects of the ABC.

“The 62 presenters on Radio National are being judged on the bias of three or four presenters.”

That by-line of Valerie Yule’s article says it all really but again we have a coterie of OLO’s usual suspects demonstrating they can’t read past a headline, or discern the contents of what really is a very good article.

Metaphorically, all these denouncers (of the ABC) are doing is behaving like a pack of jackals circling their quarry snarling and sniping from the periphery.

However, what they are literally displaying is their own confirmation bias, cognitive dissonance, and motivated reasoning.

http://whywereason.wordpress.com/2011/09/07/psychologys-treacherous-trio-confirmation-bias-cognitive-dissonance-and-motivated-reasoning/

While some commenters here champion rhetorical populism (demonstrated by the likes of 2 GB’s Alan Jones) and denounce ‘elitism’ (demonstrated by the likes of ABC and SBS presenters) – I would ask, what is so inherently wrong with the aspirational goal of elitism?

The corollary (imho) is much worse: the dumbing down of society to its lowest common denominator by an ever increasing clique of whingers, whiners and grovellers who can’t aspire to much more than a bunch of green bananas in pyjamas. Apologies to B1 and B2.

bonmot, so apart from abusing other posters .. anything to "contribute"?

No, thought not. Hollow vesseling and whining again I see.

To the author, now you can see trolling in action .. bonmot is a troll, he deliberately posts to get reactions from other posters by insulting and berating them, without addressing the issue.

Using foul (rude) language is not trolling, it is just that, foul language.

Trolls deliberately try to get under the skin of other posters, and rarely address the topic.

Thanks bonmot ..

I'm not up with medical issues these days. Have they developed a pill for verbal diarrhoea? I hope so.

There are a couple of posters who could certainly use one.

Thank you Amicus, you reminded of this (also to the author):

http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=12454#215461

Like you say, get over it.

Well said, Valerie.

And those who think there is a bias to one side of politics forget Counterpoint. It is simply so bad that it more than tips the scales.

The ABC regards itself infallible. It never admits bias when bias complaints are made.

Yet it slips up by failing to portray itself as unbiased. Witness the ABC TV Insiders program in which two of the three guest commentators are always Left Wing, or Q&A where the studio audience is stacked with Left Wingers.

The ABC's annual budget is not insignificant. Sadly, we are not getting value for the vast funds committed to it. It is time for rigorous review of the ABC's operations and charter.