The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Politics of talkback radio > Comments

Politics of talkback radio : Comments

By Colin Long, published 15/5/2007

Politics Australia-style: avoid the issue; and repeat 'ad nauseam' the pre-determined message.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
My sympathy Colin, its very hard living in a fantasy. Can I gently suggest you discard the quaint notion that this is a functional democracy.
Posted by Liam, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 4:08:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bravo Hedgehog,

I'm always amazed how some people (who are so far to the right that everybody else is to their left) are ready to criticise the ABC for bias when no other broadcaster is subject to the same degree of scrutiny.

When Labor were in Government, they were also criticised - even to the point where Neville Wran refused to take questions from ABC reporters.

As I recall, most of the satirical output was directed at Hawke, Keating and Whitlam when they were around and at least their news reporting is free from editorial interference from the wings.

While the ABC is funded by the taxpayer, private broadcasters are paid for from advertising which is a levy paid by every consumer on the goods and services they buy.

While not everybody is a taxpayer, we are all consumers and are forced to contribute to the running costs of all private broadcasters - and this doesn't even include "cash-for-comment" or "sponsored" private broadcasters.

I'm sure that in total, the commercial stations cost us all far more than the so-called 8 cents per day we pay for the ABC.
Posted by wobbles, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 4:24:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Excellent example this thread. No one talking about what the writer raised. Isn't this exactly what the article is about? No one listens and answers the questions they want to answer. In which case my answer is...a pineapple. Now figure out the question, has something to do with JWH and a very uncomfortable attempt.

Ringing talkback? Sucker. If you listen to shows like Laws and Jones you will notice the first few are all "on side" with their rant of the day. All primed staffers of course.

And do take Jones seriously. He is a major problem for our country and I would actually rate him as more of a danger to our society than all the so called terrorists we have in OZ. He's number one. Howard is 2 as he takes what Jones says as gospel.

As to bias. In our media? Go on, no way. Couldn't believe that. If only some of the jocks actually knew something about some of the topics instead of going for the vulgar and irrelevant always.

Hey Runner, which branch do you belong to mate?
Posted by pegasus, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 4:41:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You guys are as blind as a bat. Next thing you will be trying to tell me that Phillip Adams represents mainstream Australia or that Kerry O'Brien is running for One Nation. Your denial would keep the Counsellors in business for a long time.

Pegagus, personally I would vote for any individual or party that protects the unborn and looks after the elderely. Unfortunately I think neither of the big parties see enough votes in this. So which side of the fence am I on? To be honest my hope is not in the Politicians. If it was I would be sadly disappointed by Mr Howard, Mr Rudd, Mr Brown and MS Hanson.
Posted by runner, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 5:07:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Runner – offering not a shred of evidence - revives the old mythical beast of ABC bias: it’s ‘largely just a voice for the ALP’. I thought the beast was dead after the Peter Reith hunting fiasco in 2003. (Reith certainly was a dead duck.) Other investigations since have repeatedly found no bias beast at the ABC.

In fact, the evidence runs the other way. In 2004 the ALP found it necessary to lodge an official complaint with the ABC for bias in the treatment of local federal election candidates by ABC regional radio. Some would say Howard has turned the ABC Board into a Branch of the Liberal Party with handpicked stooges. The ABC’s censorship of the best-seller “Jonesville” had Howard’s fingerprints all over it. His savaging of ABC budget ensures a dispirited compliance.

Both Kerry O’Brien and Barry Cassidy once worked as media advisers for the ALP; David Hill stood as an ALP candidate after he left the ABC; and Bob Carr, former Labor Premier of NSW, once worked as an ABC journalist. None made a secret of their connections.

Can the same be said of the following ABC staff or ex-staff? Gary Hardgrave, Peter Collins, Peter McArthur, Bruce Webster, Jim Bonner, Pru Goward, Cathy Job, Vicki Thompson, Ian Cover, Rob Messenger, Grant Woodhams, Ken Cooke, Chris Nicholls, Eoin Cameron, Cameron Thompson and Chris Wordsworth. They’re all Coalition staffers or MPs, now or in the past.

The ABA, the government-appointed umpire lists all the breaches of the code on accuracy and fairness in news and current affairs. It found that ABC television breached the code on four occasions over eight years, 1998 and 2005. Channel 9, by contrast, breached the code on 19 occasions. (http://friendsoftheabc.org/bias)

Every year the ABC posts on its website a Newspoll survey of community attitudes. The May 2005 survey commissioned by the ABC found 9 in 10 Australians believe the ABC provides a valuable service to the community, and half believe it provides a very valuable service". (www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/documents/ABC_Newspoll_p49.pdf)

Radios 3AW, 2GB and Channel 9 would kill for that level of public confidence and trust.
Posted by FrankGol, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 5:27:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Two items should be remembered. Governments lie (I F Stone) and seek to control the message
This they ensure by carrot, offer of largesse, and stick, accepting presence and indeed questions from only media representatives of their choice.
Labour had a propaganda department perhaps less secretive that the current, none are welcoming of input from the plebs.
Once upon a time for a very short time but as our own, and thus good though not a sportsman, writer/academic has noted research on how to influence people has been all the scientific rage for a long time and the press being commercial is not stupid.
Trivia is found to be more profitable both in terms of readers and advertisers than truth.
We were shown this over Iraq but most of us were too ill informed uninterested (hence trivia and blow the idea of ‘democracy lost unless challenged‘) to be worried.

Nationalistic Patriotic our troops are there and she will be right mate combined with the UN is no good might is right and we were happy accepting.
Mind you we dispute the dreadful though contained in the results of an accepted technique showing 655,000 extra deaths plus or minus 300,000. That is the lowest 355,000 genocide not us!
Posted by untutored mind, Tuesday, 15 May 2007 5:51:25 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy