Just as well that we 'ordinary' folk are capable of making up our own minds without the help of political journalists telling us what we should think.

Strange eh? Most of the liberal politicians abrade the ABC for their supposed left wing bias and the so-called journalists from the "Australian" usually join in. Well they have to don't they as they work for a liberal biassed paper and as one of these 'clever, fearlessly independent' Australian s/c jounalists has been such grovelling liberal she has been awarded a place on the ABC board so now her workmates it seems are trying for the same or a similar reward. How proud these people are - look at me the only talent I have is to suck up to howard and now I'm on the ABC board and a nice little earner it is too, apparently no shame at all. It's so sad that jounalism has sank to the low standard it is today. One must remember that reading the Australian one is not getting news as much as one is getting 'paid?' liberal propaganda.The above is how I see things anyhow and there would be will be those who toady up to the Labour party for rewards as well. Regards, numbat

Peter, I agree with every word you've said. I quickly realised after the Coalition won power from Labor that media bias towards the Coalition bordered on pure deception and unfortunately, it's continued to this very day. The current Government should have been hung out to dry over issues such as Tampa, children overboard, IR laws and the biggie....the war in Iraq. From that has flowed draconian anti-terrorist laws by which any one of us posters could conceivably suffer at the Government's will should they take serious exception to something we write. I used to be an avid fan of the "Insiders" until I realised how biased the program was towards the Howard led Government. I often wondered in amazement just why they kept returning that fat slug Piers Ackerman every other week and gave him the gold key to the crapper so he could heap praise on everything Howard and all things negative on Labor. I stopped watching in disgust. So too have I stopped buying Australian newspapers. Their quality has deteriorated to a heavily distorted bias towards anything Liberal. Same with television news. One quarter general news, one quarter pro Howard crap and the rest is adverts. Thank God for the Internet. No wonder the young are disinterested in politics.

We need a new term to describe these people. They are not political journalists at all, they are opinionators.

Political journalism is supposed to be about communicating the bare facts (all of them, not just the barrow pushing ones) and, as Leigh points out, letting us make up our own minds.

What passes for political journalists today is just an elite club of gossipers with cushy jobs making a living out of our need to know and their own need for fame.

I want a bumper sticker: "Is that true, or did you read it in the papers?"

In 2000, Denise Allen won the seat of Benalla for the ALP for the first time in 95 years. Sadly, she lost it two years later whilst recording 42% of the primary vote. As a constituent whom she helped, I lost a valuable resource to my detriment. Denise was effective because she was willing to challenge the political system in her constituent's interests. How healthy is that? When Denise resigned from the Labor party last year, one of the things she noted was the practice of being told what to say and do by some some junior political adviser in the Minister’s office. ALP and Liberal parties have mastered the art of suppressing local members lest they do anything that might involve the Minister/Shadow Minister. Well might it be the Minister’s job to churn out politically correct fare to be consumed by journalists, but it is the activist local member who is the true brewer of political debate. Their job is to promote local issues with local media, and if they do it well, the story merits attention by city and national media by its intrinsic appeal. The media is the ultimate arbiter of a good story – and boring stories don’t run. No wonder political journalists spend so much time researching press clippings – they’re looking for any snippet that will expose an alternative thought that comes from a real person. If political journalists are at fault for stodgy reporting, so too are local members. It’s people who make a good story. When local members make themselves the subject they censor the story. Political journalists don’t write drivel by choice. When local members are too weak to promote issues that local people are passionate about, the political writer who is at the end of this food chain sups on very ordinary fare.

Greg Cameron

The campaign to oust Beazley and denigrate Rudd (in advance) shows quite graphically the state of the so-called mainstram media. The tragedy is that we do not have a diversity of print media in this country - Packer or Murdoch - take your choice.

As for the commentariat, they have shaped opinion and decided the destiny of others for far too long.

After being frustrated for years about the general lack of public information and education about dangers of poker machines in our communities, I was pleasantly surprised to discover one political jounalist at least, who allowed a full and transparent 'blog' debate of this and other issues in the recent coverage of the Victorian elections.

John Ferguson of the Herald Sun made true his promise to allow all blog comment that was fair and reasonable, despite his own opinions. John also made some perceptive comments himself and indicated to me that he was not into manipulation such as your article suggests.

While political journalism may be subject to bias traditionally, so long as journalists are supported via feedback and blogs, I believe that such media journalism may become more responsible and transparent as result in future.

Thank God for blog and comment sections in all web-based media...I believe that via the internet, any blocks to media presentation will be much reduced. Traditional 'power mongers' must hate the net and its potential to challenge their interests, in my opinion. The net will change the 'status quo' that has dictated what we read in a way never previously thought possible.

Political journalism is a 'two way street'. The journalist writes, yes, but we read...and it is up to the public to support our journalists also, to challenge or to encourage them. The public has been offered a golden opportunity for feedback via the web and we must use it, to provide input on which true public debate rests.

Just as we probably get the government that we deserve, we also get the media that we deserve so it is no use bitching without offering our services also as appraisers of public media opinion, that may help to educate a public that now has real chance to influence public political policy. Power bases ARE changing via online media and we all must recognize our responsibilities as well as our rights, in development of a responsible media.

When I worked as a press secretary in Canberra, and had a pretty close idea of what was going on in Cabinet and the departments, I coined the "one-ninth rule" about political journalism.
The journalists knew and wrote about one-third of the items which were on the government's main agenda at any particular time. Two-thirds they did not know about. What they knew and wrote about these items was one-third of the truth, and two thirds was wrong.
Hence what we read and hear from the Canberra press gallery represents truthfully one-ninth of what is happening.
Apart from the over-confidence of reporters, and the ignorance of the electorate in a compulsory voting democracy, I also doubted the effectiveness of the academic profession of political science - which based much of its thinking on what was published in the newspapers.

I agree with chainsmoker in the much of what passes for journalism these days is little more than opinion - or at best a few facts put forward to underwreite an opinion soon to follow.

There is nothing wrong with opinion - and at least they are usually badged as such - but they are now the dominant feature of most of the papers.

And the real down side of that is people tend to g follow the lead of those who opine with some kind of blind faith rather than look for the truth that they mind find in straight reporting - the letter to the editor reflect that regularly.

And that is where you get the opinions of the Bolts, Ackermans, Pearsons et al carrying such weight - and yet there are those on the left who do proffer opinions but nothing like the avalanche we get from the conservatives these days

Then next after opinion mindless speculation - leadership challenges come to mind

since the political press is writing about events outside the interest of the civilians, their standard need not be high, a "clayton's" political commentary is sufficient.

the civilians have no interest in politics, beyond that of gossip, because they have no power to influence events, and such information as is published is in any event, of historical interest only.

if you but grasp the significance of aristotle's description of democracy well enough to realize australian society has no common elements with democracy, current affairs come sharply into focus: there are continual 'anomalies' in australian democracy simply because it isn't a democracy.

unfortunately, this article doesn't reflect any perception of this, the author is essentially saying: "this horse doesn't run very fast," while looking at a burro.

Spot on Peter,

Reading the papers, and seeing all the print dedicated to a pointless drunken dispute between two rivals at a work function makes me quite angry. What other stories could have filled that space? The last time I was drunk and disorderly at a work/uni party, I can't remember if there were comments the following day. But Milne has a go at Mayne, and we want to write a novel.

It's a conundrum. I almost hate journalism for it's prissy arrogance, and yet I really love being published. Give me a column in any of the newspapers and I'd become just as relaxed and comfortable as the next journo. And I probably wouldn't see the error in devoting a few hundred words to a petty rivalry if I was in that plush leather chair, semi-reclined and looking out to sea from my mahogany lined office with built in putting range. No, wait, what was I saying...

And I absolutely agree that OLO is a vital resource. As a blogger, I've got a lovely blog, but apart from bots who leave pornographic links, it's hard to guage the response and readership that you're actually getting.

Yes to find out what is going on a lot of time searching not just newspapers and journals but much more, even then the skill of politicians/business/Church in hiding something may beat you
Julie Macken recent articles in New Matlida on Nuclear power and the reasons for the sudden interest in climate change by Howard is an example A different spin. She Might be wrong so more checking.

But this is democracy modern style. A trend noted by Alex Carey of designing information and its release to achieve a desired end, long ago. Chomsky did further analysis of the trend as did McLuhan. These can be dismissed as left further argument not needed or so the brainwashing says like finding a homosexual who is a great mathematician who helped solve the German Code machine, one or other occupation will be concealed or derided, or the person suicides. Societies rule is established media wise.

The Record of a News paper talking of the an American newspaper by Friel and Falk shows how much spin a newspaper can impart For the Iraq War propaganda some American newspapers have apologised, the Australian never.
WE are of course taught to trust in large measure the media’s meanderings treating opinion as opinion but FACTS as Fact. Trouble is fact is now designed fiction. Goes too far and if ever we lose a war there is waiting the Nuremberg Trials where precedent for hanging n editor for bias can be found.
If we all learned I F Stones, a reputable journalist there are still some but commerce rules, who stated “Governments lie”
The Internet is a bit better than just blogs I can access and use for cross checks any number of media sources. Using this I and many others came to the conclusion the Iraq war was a con job. Confidence trick, before the event.
Illegal too but few papers are suggesting prosecution by international court for trashing another country and causing 650,000 extra deaths plus or minus confidence limits of 300,000.

"These three realities - the ignorance and personal bias of journalists; the failure of journalists to actually find stories; and their inaccuracy in reporting when they did - typified my experience with political journalism."
It seems to me that the author is asking to have his political opinion be respected while encouraging his readership to question the validity of other political opinions. That newspapers and political journalist ought to refrain from picking and choosing and report what the political parties or political leaders deem relevant and correct.
Newspapers have always been soapboxes for personal political speeches to influence that particular readership. X times was such and such and Y times was politically at war with B times and the only good paper was to read my times. If your political education and outlook is coming from any paper rather than local involement you don't deserve an opinion. It's not yours in the first place. Bloggs are not any different. People need to exercise discernment and investigate issues not learn to accept a political directive. If your reading a paper or joining bloggs for purposes of agreement you will not learn anything new or be challenged in any significant way.

A bit of light relief - I speculated that maybe the ACTU and some fellow travellers could get together with say The UK Guardian and launch an alternative news website in Australia.

A daily news source that was pro union, pro environment, etc etc.

Set up now, within a few years I think a majority of people will be sourcing their news from the web and we could have some balanced alternatives.

Dear Western Red....
a news media 'pro-union' ? good grief. There is already the Fairfax mob, and by Pro-union do you mean 'anti' business ?
Sounds just a tad like THEM/US on steroids.

Would it not be more preferable for all of us, employers and employees to work together for a better and sustainable Australia in terms of jobs ?

UNIONS.. ok..lets look at the myth and the reality.

1/ THE MYTH. Labor unions are meant to function as a barrier to exploitation, to give a collective voice to organized worker groups, and to seek improvements to pay and conditions.

2/ THE REALITY. Socialist leaning people, who have as their primary goal the establishment of a socialist utopia where income and land is re-distributed etc. stand as candidates for union executives and promise not 'better' pay and conditions but UNSUSTAINABLE pay and conditions. i.e. they pander to the pure greed factor in workers.
Builders laborers is a classic example. When a bloke who just has to pick this up, and put it there etc.. push a barrow around and general laboring duties gets paid sooo much more than say a teacher....there is a bad prawn at the barbeque mate.
Organizing is often by intimidation. One of the 'organizers' goes to my gym and he is very HUGE. Johnson tiles is just near me. Craig whatshisface did time over that criminal attack.
Now..what have they given us ? Hundreds and hundreds of workers each month losing their jobs to where ? wellll we know that answer don't we...to China etc.
IF...the unions want to keep those precious pay and conditions they need to target the RIGHT place and that is CHINA and its slavery.
I'm an employer and if I hear of a demo/protest at the Chinese embassy I'll be right there with the workers.

Your right but most people dont want to know they have been brainwashed into a certain thing.

The media doesnt help whatso ever, they take the point that 2 partys are there nobody else.

They should project the news what is happening out there which doest happen.

Like myself with the Australian peoples Party even though not registered they take it as a joke.

I find this pretty bad as people say they have no real choice and then ask me why they havnt heard about this, well not interested and doest run with their agenda.

We are stuck with what we have until people make that choice to hear the truth which many dislike as they hope their lives will just carry on without any real change and just put up with it.

so if we dont do anything then we are just at fault as they are for not trying to change this media agenda

Very discerning thesis again Peter, helping us middle roaders to pluck up enough courage to use reason about current world problems rather than to rely completely on faith in either media or our politicos.

Reason enough even to have faith in the Guardian which portrays letters and discussions from three global quarters, Britain, France, and the US?

It was the Guardian years back which prompted questions about what happened to Saddam’s so-called 300, 000 topline troops, whether they were all shot, just let go, or whether historically, if paid enough, were more likely to accept positions and be relied on in the US forces than the Shias?

There have been guarded reports through SBS Dateline, that Paul Bremer had made suggestions about the Sunni military being conveniently used by the Americans, but the question is, why was not this critical political argument ever taken up by our media?.

From those of us who were against the illegal attack on Iraq, it could be said, to Bush, Blair and Howard, well and bloody good and serve you right, that most of Saddam’s soldiers could now be the Sunni suicide terrorists creating such mayhem in Iraq?

But really under the theorem of ethical reasoning. with the bloodshed that has been caused over the years between the Sunnis and the Shias we should have not wanted it that way. When it all boils down the hundreds of thousands of citizens killed in those years will have been such a loss to a future democratic Iraq if it ever happens.

There was mention from one of of GWB’ crew the other day, that it looks like the Iraqi problem might have to be left to the historians. Well now, as all official historians must be graduates from Uni’ Schools of Humanities, and who are also often called left-wing loonies or fruitcakes by many of our contributors, one wonders what a genuine media will make of it all in the finish?

Going by what has been left out in the recent story of Iraq, a genuine media could be hard to find?

Good article Peter, and good term Chainsmoker - "Opinionators".

Years ago my father noted that most of the news was really just commentary on the news, and not the actual facts.

I too, often get the feeling that the journalist is trying to sway me to one side or the other, rather than impartially deliver the bare facts.

Also, bravo to Online Opinion - you really fill a void. Thankyou.

Sorry guys and gals

This blog line proves conclusively that The Forum can be little more than a collective masturbataorium. Fancy looking to The Guardian as a guide! Even in a country dunny, it would be unacceptable - try the Independent. The poverty of our press is self-evident and you only have to follow the Shanahan/Kelly line on the ALP leadership to see a demonatration. (I see they've changed Shanahan's photo image - the constipated look giving way to a sick smirk). It's all froth and the herd swallow it uncritically.

If all we are going to get is a society of the (agony Aunt) distressed and complainers, playing lovely-dovey with each with blogging, rather than addressing the issues of a government/press oligarchy, then it is time to say good-bye, The intellectual bankruptcy of some contributors doesn't do the idea/reputation of OnlineOpinion any good at all. Do you all blog on the sick, sorry and limited New Matilda as well?

I know it's Christmas and we all get matey but the problems of this country will still be there when we gradually emerge from our collective festive stupor in Feb-March 2007. It is an election year and time to rid ourselves of infestation by the lackeys of Murdoch and Packer.

And a Merry Christmas to you all - watch out for grumpy cops acting as tax collectors.

Good work Peter,

Was it George Bernard Shaw that once said that once war is declared, believe the opposite to most of what you read, then the rest is questionable? Anyone is free to correct me on that general quote, its not even verbatim.

Anyone who has lived in Europe since the war in Iraq, knows, that what they read in their papers and see on their televisions, is vastly different to what we read and see. Even Canadian journalists have more freedom of speach than ours do.

The Internet has at least given us some intellectual breathing space.

The failure, is more a culture and regime.

What is currently happening in the circle of "media ownership" should smell the rat that it always was.

Shame on the Liberal parties Communications minister, that held a straight face whilst changing media ownership laws.

It was written all over her face in a press conference after the decision was voted on, that the Media owners would expand their interests into rural areas and other, such as radio, as they did.

Journalism no longer upholds truth and integrity, because it can't.

The drunken outburst between two media writers at the journalists awards just about sums it all up.

Suebdootwo
"Journalism no longer upholds truth and integrity, because it can't." Can't what? As in any longer?
More wishful thinking than fact I'd say. Newspapers have always projected their own view and supported their own interest above all else. Distributing information regarding events is how they make money, choosing from which angle they project that view is how they get and keep their targeted readership. Even the most basic statement like "the sky is blue", promotes a differing of opinion and even sharp arguement as the depth and hue and tint of blue is debated.
This attitude of political correctness that demands to be all things to all people equally has also infected the reporting of the news and public opinion. We only need one newspaper and one opinion and it's understandable that one company or person controls that distribution of that thought. We can't have one person being right and another said to be wrong. That's not fair. The sky isn't blue. It's blueish. Everyone is right. Even the coloured blind.
If something exist it must be torn down to make way for the something new. That something new doesn't need to be any different or better or more efficient, just something new. Selling dissatisfaction is the name of the game. Designed obsolesence. Cars, trucks, values, morals, ethics, people, it doesn't matter.

As a retired grain farmer and breeder, thought Peter's excellent
thesis pertaining to the failure of Australia's political media, might take in what should be the worst media crime of all, the suppression of news by order of a ruling political party.

Bad enough to obey orders to suppress vital news in wartime, but this action was about a weakening of our Bio-Security trade laws, as a result of the Bi-Lateral Trade Agreement with the US.

It was through the SBS Dateline programme that George Negus first arranged the graphic report about a shipment of suspected Foot and Mouth infected Brazilian carcase meat landed in NSW, and to make matters worse, the meat was reported just simply buried in a city dump rather than destroyed with the recommended acidic treatment process. Burrowing reptiles could have brought out some of the meat portions to be carried away by scavenging crows, etc.

Dateline also included angry reports from a a couple of cattle breeders in Queensland, and which gave me the incentive to make comment into our Online. As time went by with nothing in the media and my OLO Posts not commented on, rang up SBS to see if George Negus had been sold a pup at the time, as they say. But the SBS operator was so quick with an answer which was simply - we had to quieten it down - gave shocking realisation that it was news that had been ordered to be officially suppressed.

After two attempts trying to get information through our OLO, felt like giving our group away as an organisation weakened by some sort of official surveillance until I received a ring from a Queensland journalist who said he had had a gutsfull of trying to get his report in the news also on behalf of Queensland cattle breeders.

Finally, the amazing thing is that even my own grandkids who are now running the farms, thought it best to keep quiet because they have been told by Liberal Party members, not to upset the government over the foot and mouth scare.

For a citizen who for 6 years has been trying to get a matter exposed so that the Government Department responsible can have the light shone on them and those responsible can be made to answer and held accountable so as to change behaviour and attitude, I think places like On Line Opinion makes a huge difference.

It seems to be up to the media to expose matters as the Government only acts on what is exposed and the process of dealing with allegations and complaints is to ignore, discredit, cover up, close the matter and deny.

For some reason the media keeps away from some issues and is not interested in dealing or reporting on some matters.

At least if a person can say their piece on On Line Opinion and feel that they are being heard, if only by some it really is a needed avenue and outlet. It beats taking drugs.

Six years ago was the first time I went to the media with a story of systemic victimisation, bullying and educational neglect aimed at my children and the media outlets all either said that they were not interested or just turned on me. I have tried many times since then but because nobody will help my family the victimisation and neglect aimed at my children hasn't been stopped.

http://jolandachallita.typepad.com/education/

Following this link; http://www.safecom.org.au/do-not-disturb.htm
and read Mungo McCallum's excellent review of Robert Mann's book - Do Not Disturb: Is the media failing Australia?

• See also the ABC Radio National transcript of interview with RM. An excerpt from this review reads:

"It is certainly true that the Howard years have produced a major shift in attitudes, and that even the broadsheets are now dominated by conservative columnists: there is no longer a shortage of right-wing Phillip Adamses. But the problem goes deeper: journalism itself has become more cautious, more ready to toe the line."

• and

"The situation appears hopeless, but not desperate, because the public seems not to care. David Marr cites the ongoing issue of asylum seekers as an instance where the clear dereliction of the media has been matched by the callous indifference of its audience. Guy Rundle suggests that this is part of a more general cultural change in which the neo-conservative right has become the paramount force in Australia."

• http://www.theage.com.au/news/reviews/do-not-disturb/2005/09/08/1125772645221.html

• I'll give the last words of this post to Noam Chomsky who said

" The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum - even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate."

• And this is exactly what the Murdoch press does here in Straya.

I thought that Peter made an interesting point (possibly unintended) by referring to a "youngish print journalist (who afterwards went on to have a successful career as a senior staffer in state politics)." Politicians, staffers, journos and "independent" commentators (such as Dr McMahon or the illustrious Kevin Donnelly) seem interchangeable. This changeability is not entirely healthy given that the role of the press in helping to keep politicians accountable. Lord Northcliffe's famous dictum is that "news is what someone, somewhere is trying to suppress; the rest is just advertising." Politicians are simply trying to advertise their wares, while making sure the damaging stuff doesn't get out. They now get media training and are endessly reminded to "stay on message" ie repeat the slogan and try and avoid getting sidetracked into actually SAYING ANYTHING.

Sadly, the public doesn't seem to expect (or demand) anything better. Most people expect politicians to lie, they just want the lies to be palatable.....

As for the ignorance of journalists, Lord Northcliffe (again) defined journalism as "a profession whose business is to explain to others what it personally does not understand."

"..the author is essentially saying: "this horse doesn't run very fast," while looking at a burro." wrote Demos
Bingo!

Our celebrity journo's wouldn't be there if they were any smarter or more cluey. Their dimness and lack of useful curiousity are primary critieria in their unwritten job descriptions. What fool of a businessman or politican would smile on a journo who cites last years lies or an interviewer who has the wit to interrupt the regurgitation of propaganda to demand honest answers to pertinent questions?

Real journalism is not in many powerful peoples interests (no conspiracy reqd), and since we're too dim to notice or care that the TV, radio & print news is pap, why should they? Just don't pretend its a democracy.

The media, especially the commercial media pander to the lowest common denominator. An audience that is entertained and mesmerised by the likes of Australian/American Idol , Big Brother and another repeat of the Simpson’s, A Current Affair, CSI ect isn’t likely to be capable of analysing content. The weather on breakfast shows are vehicles for flogging motel resorts as opinions and book advertising is sold as information to pre-commuters. The news on commercial FM radio not evolved since the 1980’s is nothing more than a string of arrogant slogans. Those who are likely to recognise the propaganda that is now called news are unlikely to be watching television or listening to commercial radio. I doubt the propaganda which is now offered as news is a government conspiracy. The most likely explanation is that journalists, editors and producers are simply intellectually lazy and poorly trained. This allows their bias not only filter through in their alleged reporting but at times gush through. In the case of the old guard such as the Oaks and Milnes’ and the rest, when I hear their reports I only hear old men pompously feathering their egos. Sadly for them they have become like an aging brat pack expecting more mileage from their past glory rather than maintaining hard work to keep fresh and intellectually agile. They have become as old and tired as the government. The media have even built two shrines to parade their peacocks – ‘Meet the Press’ and ‘Insiders’.
As for the news paper media, I didn’t realise they still report news. Every metropolitan and national news paper I have read over the past decade has been only opinion and infomercial. It appears journalists working for many regional newspapers are the only professional journalists. Perhaps the reason is that regional journalists have to live amongst those they write about. That said, take out the sports page and probably nobody would buy a newspaper.

My, my you all have such short memories !!

Does anyone remember the hatchet job done on Margo Kingston by the press barons ? She actually tried to create a "mainstream" press blog (SMH). They nearly killed her ! Go to: http://webdiary.com.au/ and see what remains of her legacy to open journalism.

While you're feeling adventurous, have a look at:
http://www.yourdemocracy.net.au/

It also allows for open and frank journalism and discussion.

Harsh comments for the season of goodwill, comrades!

There appears to be a lot of bile but little in the way of constructive suggestions as to how we could create alternative media in this country.

Guardian, Independent, whatever, the point was that the ACTU and fellow travellers could feasibly create a web based daily alternative to mainstream reporting. While it would make sense to get some sympathetic foreign investment it is not the crucial point.

If we want alternative views and media then we can create them

Why assume we need media at all westernred? The media is only a frivolity, cake for the plebs, part of societies indulgence in its own immaturity. Who that has anything constructive to do, a life to live would miss knowing it will be 32C today and you can get a 10% discount if you book a flight to Homogeneity Island resort if you book tosday? Knowing refugees float on rafts made out of their children and national discourse stops point blank because a Prime Minister says so, that eating the imported American Lamb that the local supermarket stocks on Australia day is patriotic?

Turn off the TV, walk off the obesity. Turn off the radio, learn to play an instrument. Forget the newspaper read a book

True of False?

From Robert Manne - Rupert Murdoch has helped turn much of our modern media into a Neo-Con enterprise.