hey don - please see this article that explains that whether or not 2020 is a new decade is just semantics: https://www.mentalfloss.com/article/611490/when-does-a-new-decade-begin

All would (almost) be forgiven if the educated ABC announcers would learn that "vunerable" goes not exist.

Don't blame the clowns for acting like clowns, blame yourself for going to the circus.

The ABC is the one shining beckon of integrity and unbiased reporting we have left is not partisan and serves us all with equal equanimity! Privatising it would change all that in favour of what the current private media produces, highly biased, patently partisan commentary and king-making power!

Instead of this BS I would de-privatise what has already been privatised and return the social amenity these bought and paid for instruments by our forbears at great sacrifice and therefore not up for grabs or sold to buy the votes of the ignorant! Or have our destiny decided for us in the halls of power in a foreign land! Or the by coal industry stooges!

As for diversity, look to the private media first! Our ABC does them like a dinner!

. Time we decided our own destiny as opposed to having it decided for us, to our eternal detriment! Hands off our ABC!
Alan B.

There's no doubt the ABC is a hotbed of idealism. I can't find the link but a few days ago one of their online articles said the Snowy 2 project could fully replace coal in Australia. Trouble is that Snowy 2 if it ever gets built can only generate 2 gigawatts maximum and a minute ago black and brown coal were generating 18 GW according to NemWatch. Facts may not be so important in the ABC world view. I wonder if that's why at least one senior journalist with a basis in reality felt they had to leave.

besides sport, i watch more ABC and SBS than anything else.

I think both networks are top class.

However, I am not bothered by the quesrtion about whether the ABC or any other network gets privatised.

I look to PBS in the US, and even SBS here to know what quality will prevail for public interest broadcasters, notwithstanding the political bias of many attracted to such networks.

the abc is largely a marxist organisation. Many highly paid feminist who simply hate the Western system that has enabled them to receive their overpaid jobs. Conservative Governments have made a huge mistake in funding an organisation that promotes perversion and rebellion and hates the natural family. Tony Abbott stooped the boats (all on the abc swore it could not happen), got rid of the breathing tax (all swore it could not happen) but failed to defund this national disgrace. Their target now is Morrison. They think he can change the climate. What an arrogant bunch they are.

the abc is largely a marxist organisation.
runner,
There's no denying that !

I found most of the stuff that Don quoted and pointed to be more or less rubbish, especially the thing about the BBC being a "secular church". Yes the BBC does promote a mostly secular world-view, but so does every other newspaper, magazine, radio and TV.

How could it be otherwise because all of human culture (or what remains of authentic human culture) is now controlled and patterned by the now world dominant secular ideology/paradigm.

So too does the Australian, the Australian Spectator, and Quadrant magazine too, although they quite often pretend to promote a religious understanding of human culture. But the archaic "religion" that they promote is only the most superficial and factional and most often dim-minded and perverse expressions of ancient national and tribal cultism.
Furthermore the ancient Middle Eastern "great religions" are now engaging in global warfare with each other, and as such they are deeply and dangerously psychotic - and in effect always were so.

No one who doesn't work or benefit from the ABC can surely claim they are not not biased.

The ABC is just as bad as its big sister the BBC, and is a prime example of bias to the leftism, greenism, civil activism and even terrorism. The only balance I see in the ABC it is ability to be equally biased in it national and international views. But will it every change??

Its staff run the joint as a private club for "pseudo-intellectuals" who look down at the public who they supposedly report to. They rarely allow or tolerate alternative views to their "special world view".

Labour, Greens and independents love them, and even though the liberals have a majority (made slim by the ABC's honouree BFF Malcolm Turnball), they will never have the strength (or will) to take on a reform of the current ABC.

You can't blame pollies I suppose. Those few who have taken on the media win in the long-term. It's akin to trying to win a debating competition, where your opponent has the only microphone in a large stadium - those close to the stage may hear your arguments, but the rest of the stadium will only the opponents arguments.

The ABC should be a neutral reporter, and not an opinion maker, it should cover all sides of issues with balance and impartiality. The new chairperson Ita Butrose has had little impact

of course the ABC is biased.

But I don't think there is another media source which is as important, as seen by its bushfire radio and tv coverage.

again, I have no problem with the ABC being privately funded. then the people who support the public broadcaster can continue to support it.

in overall terms, in terms of tv, I actually prefer SBS at the moment. SBS has hardly gone backwards with more private support.

I also want to say that the ABC also have some very good and fair journalists. too many people appear to lampoon the ABC as if all of its staff are the same.

ABC also have some very good and fair journalists.
Chris Lewis,
I'm afraid you'll need to come with a better line than that to convince us.

I think both networks are top class.
Chris Lewis,
Have you ever seen top class journalism to make this statement ?

When my son started work at the ABC a friend told him to hide that he
was a Liberal voter if he wanted to make a career at the ABC.
He worked there for about 10 years and as he said the only ones in the
closet were the Liberal voters. The queers didn't need a closet at the ABC !
I just do not know how anyone who watches it can possible say it is not baised.
The attacks on the PM over global warming and the fires was blatant !
There was nothing balanced in any way.

I should add that I watch it every day, radio & TV and their coverage
is good, but given the opportunity they will make every event pay.

'The attacks on the PM over global warming and the fires was blatant !
There was nothing balanced in any way.'

there hatred used to be somewhat disguised. That changed when Abbott made a fool of them by stopping the boats and giving the UN the finger with the gw religion. The sneering, baby hating, perversion pushing Marxist ideology came to the fore. It retreated a little when they helped Turnbull and his mates backstab Abbott. Now its back with a conservative at the helm.

Individual,

what I meant from top class was that they are the few networks that actually raise many serious current affairs issues occurring around the world.

I probably would not get to watch many issues if it was left to commercial networks.

perhaps I am now displaying my bias for having an interest in current affairs, like Four Corners, dateline and foreign correspondent.

I have already stated a number of times I think the ABC is biased in general terms, although I also believe they have some good journos not necessarily big names.

I do believe strongly that the ABC should also be much more dependent upon raising its own revenue

I would agree that some of the ABC high paid journos are indeed very biased with their questioning. I sometimes cringe watching the 7.30 report.

I have long thought David Speers was exceptional, so hopefully he can make a difference.

Chris Lewis,
I must admit that axing Q & A was a major step towards improving the ABC !

Individual,

i stopped watching Q&A years ago; a very poor show

having said previous, i thought Barrie Cassidy was pretty good too.

There was a a guy who retired from ABC Newsradio in 2019 after twenty or more yeasrs working for the ABC. I cant remember his name today, but his retirement speech on radio left an impression to me that he had considerable intellect and a balanced view towards Australian politics.

sad that i cant remember his name.

Chris lewis,
The concept of Q & A is actually a very good one. The problem is that the Marxists have hijacked the program with the consent of the just as Marxist bureaucrats within the Public Service who keep providing them with OUR Tax Dollars to sabotage the Nation. Get some insipid Leftie host & Presto, you have a taxpayer funded propaganda machine.
I have tried to find out for 50 years what makes a human being so gullible to propaganda & my conclusion is that it is the education system's dumbing-down agenda !
Hand out Degrees to people who don't even know what they have done to receive certificates & the stage is set for the next, even more dumb generation.

yes, fair dinkum debate will show strength and weaknesses of each policy stance. Only then can policy debate move on to more plausible solutions.

virtually all issues have two sides, and all perspectives need to be heard in a debate.

if the host is biased, and allows a show to turn into a bully fest, it merely becomes another biased show that turns many off

i really think much of the blame lies with the education system, dominated by the left in the humaniaties.

when once i proposed to write a critical article on the HIP, which i did, iwas told to send my polemic rubbish to Quadrant magazine.

Obvioulsy his opinion of myself hit a low after he found i had been published in quadrant given i was not so sympathetic to Labor.

And even more isulting to my hopes to work in academia, which i thought was committed to calling a spade a spade notwithstanding the reality that we all may have some bias as humans, i actually voted Labor at the time

What was so annoying about Q & Q was that the panels always consisted of people not representing the real everyday world. A program such as Q & A should be held in areas of relevance not have academic ignoramuses dribble verbal diarrhoea from within their comfort zone of a studio surrounded by their ilk.
For example, the bushfire crisis, Q & A type programmes should be held in a town directly affected, with a panel consisting of a bureaucrat & greenie who opposed back burning, a bureaucrat who is dragging their heels in matters compensation, the ATO commissioner, a representative of those opposing National Service, a member of a family who lost everything, a home owner who lost everything because the home was built among trees, an insurance officer & a fre fighter who was in the thick of it not some commissioner who watched it all from his air conditioned office. And, most importantly, don't have a one hour programme, make it at least three hours !

"All would (almost) be forgiven if the educated ABC announcers would learn that "vunerable" goes not exist". ateday.

Sorry mate, I'll only let them off, when someone convinces them that Arctic & Antarctic both have a C in them, & they stop using ladies with those dreadful high squeaky voices. Surely equal opportunity still means choosing one of the fairer sex with a reasonably modulated voice.

Yes Hasbeen but they put the whisperer on on weekends !

Hasbeen,
Would that make the disoriented refugees from the Orient ?
Imagine how disorientated they must be !

individual

while i don't always watch all topics, i think insight on SBS does make a reasonable attempt to bring in different people, say experts and those affected.

what do you think?

a politics show that does that would be great. Even Insiders suffers from supposed elite experts.

Chris Lewis,
Insight has actually improved lately, fewer inexperienced academic experts & more of the real affected people on the show.
The compare still gets taken for rides every time there's some indigenous issue but in general it's way above Q & A ever was.

My position in all things ABC, is a mixed bag.
I do watch it for the series at night, some films and generally as a distraction from the days do-ins.
I can't for the life of me justify scraping the bottom of the barrel with Ita Butnose, in the top chair.
The bias I have witnessed by pretty much all media outlets, of all denominations, has been nothing short of disgusting.
I recently had to write in to complain about a couple of self adulating presenters who were typical of media presenters.
They are all so far up themselves and so full of it that they forget, they are nobodies, they are generally ignorant, and also of the real world.
They lack all sense of community, and understanding of what they preach, in other words they are just vacuous shells of human like forms, who's only claim to fame is that they work in an industry that exposes them to the world.
And because of this they have begun to believe that they are an authority on EVERYTHING.
I was incensed when that maggot Lisa what's her face turned to the camera with the most hideous attempt at looking serious, and announced as arrogantly as you like, "mothers, tell your son's to stop raping girl's".
I can't repeat what I said, it wasn't pretty.
All media people MUST be brought to heel, by forcing them to understand that their opinions are not wanted, nor are they even of any value.
They are nobody and know nothing.
Their jobs do not include the giving of personal opinions, because they are experts at NOTHING, so when the programme is about NOTHING, I will ensure they get first option to present it.
This was just one example which is typical of the industry as a whole, and yes I mean ALL the media, not just TV.
It's just that the ABC is the worst of the bunch at continually giving personal opinions, which translates into bias, and confirms everyone's observations and comments on the topic.
They're a gutless lot, afraid of being alienated,

ALTRAV,
Pretty much says what can be said about that mutual admiration ignoramus outfit !

Skimming through the comments I see the boringly predictable assertion that poor old Aunty has been hijacked by the usual suspects, i.e. "Marxist / left-wing feminists" etc. etc. Come on gang you need to up your game if you want to be taken seriously.

the boringly predictable assertion that poor old Aunty has been hijacked by the usual suspects, i.e. "Marxist / left-wing feminists"
Aries54,
Where are this assertions not proven ?