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?