Good morning boys, huddle up.

Spindoc,

Looked this morning at my OLO user profile (brought back some memories) and it appears that I have made 494 article comments, and 244 general discussion comments - 738 in total.

Now, you say I have abandoned 182 or 183 threads in the last 3 years?

What are you, some kinda paranoid stalker with a neurotic fetish for counting my OLO comments?

.

You know Shadow, you remind me of so many of the 'conservative ilk' ... incapable of saying you made a mistake or got it wrong. Rather, you fluster and bluster, squirm and worm - much like Abbott.

Now, I have more important thinhgs to do - bye bye.

I would just like to add a few comments about "newspolls."

I recently read an interesting article by Julian Burnside.
In which he wrote, "It is a strange paradox that while
we live in a torrent of information, there is such a
limited range of available views. Media ownership in
Australia is notoriously narrow. Mainstream media offers
little diversity, and such diversity as there is runs
along pedictable lines. The economics of print and
electronic media tend to drive opinion in the direction
of populism. This has unhappy results now that both
major political parties have, it seems, abandoned their
founding principles and form policies by references to
media coverage generally and to news polls and focus
groups in particular..."

It seems that the loudest voices in the dominant outlets
play a major part in shaping the views that are expressed in
news polls - and these of course tend to influence not
only the major political parties - but all of us. Today it
is impossible to predict how either party will respond to
changing circumstances. The modern fact of political life
is a result of new technology which allows
political parties to see what policy responses will
produce an electoral advantage to key marginal electorates.

Lexi,

Do you only read the New Matilda?

Newspoll is an independent organisation that specializes in determining the views of the populace at a particular point of time, and has proven to be more accurate than any other similar organisation. Their reputation would be destroyed if they deliberately skewed the data.

As for news reporting. Most people get their news from the TV, radio, or internet, and to assume that opinions are shaped en mass by one media alone is ridiculous. The same issues appear in different media across different corporations.

What you can control is the type and style of question asked. You could make anything to suite a purpose. Especially the Australian, a filthy rag that should be discarded.

Qld house prices falling, a new coal mine scuttled, what is this CN doing. Maybe its his intention to shut the state down, and go hippie style. He is trying to weasel out of a solar project as well, It's all backward, and accelerating.
Does anyone know what they voted for.

I get my information from a variety of sources.
As everybody knows. However as one poster
explained:

"New Matilda provides informed comment,
opinion, scientific and political discourse.
While others ... reveal themselves to be simply
sensational tabloids by comparison."

As Julian Burnside ttold us:

" I find that I need to find something between
the desert of mainstream media and the jungle of
the internet. I need a place where rational diverse
views can be found on matters of enduring importance.
New Matilda for me is such a place. Some people obviously
prefer to stick with the desert of mainstream media."

He summed things up thus: -

"It would be difficult to agree with every view expressed
in the columns of New Matilda, but it would be equally
difficult to disagree with them all. And it would be
impossible to criticise any of them as irrational or
foolish."