otb,

I actually don't "cherry-pick," Australia's social history.
I merely refer to what historians have written.
My references have all been gleaned from the history
books which tell us how historians have interpreted the
past - and in order to understand the present and the
changes we are making (or are about to make) we have to
understand the past. You obviously don't see the relevance
of any of this - however I don't happen to agree with you.

We do need to know and understand our heritage in order to
understand why some of us behave the way we do. People
study family history for that reason - which is
very popular all over the world. People are tracing their roots.

As far as the ABC is concerned - I've already explained the
reasons as to why I think that a public broadcasting
corporation like the ABC deserves our support. Why supporting
"minority interests" is important to this country (hence
my references to the Sydney Opera House, et cetera).
Anyway, I can see that asking you not to attack a person's
character and provoke flaming for you is an impossible task.
You're actually sounding unhinged and that's not a problem I
want to continue to handle so I shall take Suse's advice and
simply move on.

Dear Suse,

You've been absolutely spot on about otb.
And I won't be responding to him any further.
His agenda seems to be that of a cyber bully
who posts deliberately personal, abusive messages, with
the intention of provoking a response.
I've made the mistake of responding. I should
have known better.

Hi Foxy,

I’m sorry to see you getting emotive about the ABC, diverting the thread and chasing Unicorns.

The Opera House has nothing to do with this thread. Your want the ABC is because you like it and it’s the only channel you watch. I love Petaluma wine but don’t ask you to pay for it.

This thread is about the fact that the ABC services a minority audience, it is no longer unique in the media market place, it has lost its differentiation and is going backwards.

You seek to compare Arts and Sports subsidies with the ABC subsidies. Lets look at that.

The Federal Government subsidizes professional team sport to the tune of $2.1 Bn. This is an industry that earns $4.1Bn and enjoys a participation rate of 64%.

The Arts sector enjoys a range of subsidies totaling $88m, earns $21Bn in revenue and has a 57% participation.

The ABC gets $1.15Bn and yet of the Top 20 program content ratings- “free to air-all households”, Seven and Nine have six News and Current Affairs programs in the Top 20, the ABC does not have one, Zero!

The most generous ABC participation is OzTam’s 5 city metro average for ABC1 at 11.9%, ABC 2 at 2.5% with no other ABC channel getting over 1%. More significantly this drops to national share figures of 6.1% and 1.1% against subscription households.

The ABC generates no income for Australia other than wages and expenses. In fact because it can no longer afford to pay for local production, much of the Australian taxpayer funding is going overseas.

The ABC competes with commercial businesses unfairly, it is no longer unique in Australia. It syndicates news from global sources but only differentiates itself by selective coverage or omission (censorship).

If the ABC model was changed to reflect the real world, cut their overspend on N/CA, political panel shows, investigative/activist sensationalism and 24 hour and overseas news (we get news from overseas, why send it back there?). The there would be more left in the pot for the general programming you like and Radio National

Dear spindoc,

We'll have to agree to disagree on this issue.
Chasing unicorns? Always bear in mind that
there is more than one side to every story.
It isn't wise to accept only one interpretation of
events as your only source of information. That's
why in the narrow world of Mainstream Media - a
public broadcasting system, in my opinion, is vital
and should be supported. You did ask for opinions
afterall and at the very least - you as the founder of
this thread should respect what someone has in good
faith given, whether you agree with the opinion or
not. Otherwise you could come across as being dogmatic,
and pig-headed.

Foxy, (to spindoc), "Otherwise you could come across as being dogmatic,
and pig-headed."

Any mirrors in your house?

otb,

Any mirrors at my house?

No. I don't have your narcisstic tendencies.
And, unlike you -
I also take great pains to make sure that I'm
never spotted lingering around pools of water.

Foxy,

Since I have been unable to get any response on content whatsoever to any issues, I was prompted to ask this question.

“Is it the case that nothing is actually read or comprehended and you just “feel” the issues emotionally and can only respond with emotion?”

You predictably picked the first line of my post, you ignored entirely the rest of the content then slid nicely into emotive jousting with reference to << you could come across as being dogmatic, and pig-headed.>>. Really Foxy?

For what, responding directly to your assertions and providing FACTS?

You gave me your example of Sports and Arts, I gave you the stats. No comment.

I raised and substantiated the issue of ABC censorship. No comment

Foxy, neither yourself or the rest of the ABC St Judes Club have responded to a single item of the topic material, on ratings, market share, credibility, trust, technological evolution, competition, ABC structure, customer (public) needs, market saturation, industry funding models, syndicated news differentiation, retail operations, general programming funding share, uniqueness, the case for public funding or any alternatives.

No comment, nothing.

Why has not one ABC supporter come up with a single reason for keeping the ABC? You just say, well, I like it.

Is that an intelligent, thinking, analytical, rational, mature, articulate, educated or informed response? Of course not, it’s an emotive non-response.

One might reasonably ask the question, does this sound like a “thinking ABC audience”? Not really because there is absolutely no evidence presented that you have thought about anything, you just “feel”.

You seek to admonish me for not accepting your “opinion”, yet you never offered one Foxy, you just “insisted” that you ‘liked it” but gave no justification, no explanations, no merits and no issue responses.

It has already been suggested by members of St Judes that <<we dyed-in-the-wool ABC supporters >>, << free-to-air is for the 'plebs'>> and the << ABC is for a 'thinking' audience>>

Nonsense, all the evidence suggests that your dependence on being spoon fed on a diet of ABC opinion has lobotomized your intellectual capacity.