David, I have now read your article again, less tired than before. It is however all over the place and almost unreaderable.

You fail to convince me that Media Watch is biased. It can't be biased according to your left-right political spectrum because it is not reporting news or current affairs. It is possible for it to be biased in other ways, but you didn't convince me of this either. Claims that personal attacks against you constitute bias have no credibilty coming from you the "victim", such claims to be taken seriously, would have to come from an objective source, so there is a bit of hypocracy in your argument as well.

You certainly haven't convinced me that the ABC as a whole is biased. It is water tight, you haven't even provided one valid example of bias anywhere on the ABC.

You did mention that they only employ one conservative comentator, but according to your previous paragraphs ABC television doesn't even have 'left-right spectrum' commentators presenting their personal political views, only presenters, which are all as objective as possible. How then, do you know the political left-right spectrum views of any of the television presenters? You could only know this personally as I, as a viewer don't have a clue who any of them vote for.

Cranky,

Everything that you have said so far makes sense, except the claim that the ABC is biased. No one one this forum or in the original article has provided any evidence of bias on the ABC.

Provide evidence or your case is blown up in your face.

Not aiming this quote to anyone in particular - BUT if it fits Cranky wear it :Quote: "The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts" - Bertrand Russell (1876-1970)

An excellent article David, that sums up the ABC very well. In fact the only issue on which I would disagree is his implication that only left-wingers are disrespectful of authority. I adhere to the convict tradition, which may be summed up as follows:

1. The Government is the Enemy of the People.
2. No taxation with or without representation, with any deficiency to be made up from the sale of politician’s assets.
3. The main problem with elections is the no matter whom you vote for, a politician is ALWAYS elected.
4. Always vote NO in referendums.

Journalism has an instinctive tendency to lean left because human nature dictates that the only important news is bad news. Being therefore constantly confronted with the mishaps and disasters of humanity they could not last the course without a “bleeding heart” outlook. In addition, they have a vested interest in change, because change is news. None of this is new, and was described by a French writer back in the 1930’s as “La Trahison des Clercs”.

I became an enthusiast for our Constitution and the Monarchy after the events of 1975, when the Prime Minister of the day was wiped like a dirty rag by Her Majesty’s representative. I considered this an extremely democratic move, as a dismissal must result in an immediate election, as the new PM would otherwise be unable to secure supply, meaning that the people had the opportunity to cast judgement on the issue. Another thing I like, as per item four above, is that only the people can alter the text of our Constitution, not the politicians. I gather that the only other country that we share this with is Switzerland. If only we had citizen initiated referendums

I’ll try again!

Rossco, answer your own question and tell me where would you go if you wanted unbiased reporting in this country? Or more to the point, where SHOULD you be able to go to get this unbiased information? The answer is the ABC. I don’t give a toss if you can’t get unbiased information anywhere else in the universe, you should be able to get it at the peoples broadcaster. At the moment you can not. That is the point. No other news service matters. The ABC are publicly funded and have a mandated obligation to provide unbiased information. Packer, Murdoch or any other media owners are not publicly funded and have no obligation to unbiased coverage. And what do you mean that I can’t accept that all views, including left-wing should be aired on the ABC? That’s exactly what I’ve been saying!! More than views, it should be the truth, fair & balanced. And if the left or the right or the Christians or atheists don’t like it, well tough.

Penekiko, four words articulate ABC bias – David Marr, Liz Jackson. Here’s a link for you that provides all the evidence for bias you’re ever likely to need. http://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/

I wonder what context Russell said that quote? Probably not in the context of media bias. I’m not surprised you picked that one Numbat, you’ve probably had it pointed out to you your whole life.

OK, let's get back on track here. Cranky keeps telling us we are missing the point, and that this is all about ABC bias, which is supposedly plainly obvious from programs like Media Watch.

But as we all know, but have so far been too polite to mention, is that the entire article was just another attempt by David Flint to paint over the Media Watch expose of cash-for-comment, and the good professor's passive role in the whole shameful episode. It is simply a sustained attack on the credibility of David Marr, following the Lateline programme that again demonstrated how Flint had abused his position at the ABA through his reluctance to move against his mates.

Let's revisit that for a moment.

"TONY JONES: But can I ask you why, to pick up David Marr's point, can I ask you why it wasn't a public scandal, from your point of view, that this was happening? That sponsors were paying, secretly it appears, for opinions from radio broadcasters?

PROF DAVID FLINT: It was never shown that they were paying for opinions. What was shown was that they were paying in contracts to a presenter to do certain things, but certainly it was never established that they were being paid to give opinions."

So let's call a spade a spade Cranky. This is a person of little credibility, using the good offices of OLO to attempt once again to divert attention away from himself and his hypocrisy.

This is not an article about ABC bias, but the self-serving apologia of an individual who had been caught with his metaphorical pants round his ankles.