FranGol said:
"When people like Stickman trot out as 'fact' that “…The exodus of ABC staffers into Labor preselection is hardly an advertisement for a wholly impartial staff, is it?”, you have to ask: Why has the myth – or more accurately, the lie - of a natural ALP/ABC nexus developed? Why is that lie so often trotted out by critics of the ALP? Why don't people who accuse the ABC of political bias never mention the Coalition-ABC connection? Bias or ignorance?"

A point which I have already conceded to Johnj...what do you want? Blood?!?

Anyway, I suspect someone who has more time than me could compile an equally long list (if not longer) that went the other way, you know.. Clare Martin, Bob Carr, etc, in addition to those already mentioned.

The only way to settle it once and for all would be to take a poll of voting intentions of current ABC staff.

As I have said before, and do not resile from...

ABC = public service = ALP-inclined (on average) = I don't care because I still love watching it because they produce great content.

Coalition ideology is to sell the farm regardless of its efficiency or the value of its production.

As regards the ABC, I have no doubt that the Coalition would prefer the ABC of the Fifties - that along with the remainder of the media toadied to royalty, the Empire and all things blue-rinse, exhorting all to know their place in the order of things (and stay there). Cringe, cringe and more cringe to your betters.

But times have changed and it is OK to question and propose solutions other than the traditional, approved ones.

John Howard with his 'never you mind' is a clone of John Bjelke Peterson. He is also into 'feeding the chooks', just like Joh. Of course the ABC can be irksome, don't they know who is writing the cheque?

"Good on you, Felicity, for having the courage to publish your politically incorrect views without fear or favour. As for the huff and puff of your gainsayers, well that's all it is - mirrors and smokescreens. Not a single one, repeat, nary a one, has picked up your principal arguments and addressed them in a cogent manner. How intelligent is that?

Burkey said: It's so sad to see someone as young as you still fighting the cold war. No, it's *great* to see someone as young as you still fighting for what you believe in. You're the wave of the future. Let the huffers and puffers fade away in their armchair politics and recycled, shop-soiled ideas. Time is on your side. Go for it.
Posted by apis, Saturday, 11 August 2007 2:21:16 AM"

Good for you, Aphid; I like to know my place. I am enlightened. I shall look at Fliss in a whole new light.

Well someone has to fill Santo Santoro's shoes.

What happened to him again?

Congratulations Felicity.

strayan

Surely the sweet young thing doesn't presume to one day be the hairy chested wielder of Old Faithful, the super-sized muck rake passed down to Santo by the Master, Tony Staley.

Apis, one cannot address Felicity's arguments in a 'cogent' manner when the majority of her article was a radical right wing dummy spit, or should I say, silver spoon spit. It's clear she only wants to pay taxes on Coalition-approved agendas, such as propping up Mersey hospital. Unfortunately she strikes me as having the very young and immature attitude of selfishness greed and appears to have been brainwashed into radical right-wing thinking, and against the ABC because it offers a variety of opinions.

Fancy thinking that the ABC audience are mostly wealthy, definitely erroneous thinking. We are older and wiser but because most of us are compassionate and humanitarian, we stay out of the shark pool where we could have made more money by cheating and lying, thus we're not wealthy.

ABC television and radio offer a wide-ranging and educational variety of programming, which it would lose is it was privatised, becoming only another channel offering rubbish for the inane.

Australia already has limited media diversity. We're way down the list of world nations in terms of media freedom. I suggest all of you read 'Silencing Dissent, How the Australian government is controlling public opinion and stifling debate by Clive Hamilton and Sarah Maddison. IMO Felicity’s article is another example of controlling and numbing and dumbing gullible and naive voters.