SM,

This isn't about liking or not liking journalists -
it's about ethical journalism and reporting.
We can dislike someone intensely yet still respect
the accuracy of their reporting. However the
journalists mentioned previously -
unfortunately do not subscribe
to ethical journalism. Not in any thinking person's books
anyway.

All one has to do is look at the reporting record
of these people. Piers Akerman's persistent personal
attacks on our former PM - for example, and the private
relationship of her and her partner being brought into
question. Of course you may think that sort of
journalism appropriate - just as you may also
think that Peppa Pig is a strident feminist.
You may think that the lawsuit against Mr Bolt
was an infringement of the freedom of speech - despite
the fact that Mr Bolt should have checked his facts
before writing his column.

However, you may like to ask
why Mr Akerman has been sacked from the ABC? Surely a
journalist of his calibre (your claim, not mine), deserved
to be kept on. But then I'll wager you'll brush that aside
as well - as being part of a Left-Wing conspiracy.
Ahhhh, those Lefties - making things difficult - for
"honest" decent people like yourself.

I have a question, what is the reason very nearly half of this country find the rants of Bolt and others like him obnoxious?
Are we who both value the ABC and fear the rants Murdock,s media serves up mad?
See SM at the least, as many think as I do, as those who think so badly about the ABC.

Is there anyone prepared to say Murdock press is any better than a rag?
No honestly Murdock,s Sydney paper is no longer a news paper but some thing just a bit dirty.
Joseph Gobbles would be proud of it.

SM, there is nothing wrong in anything George Roberts wrote, or said one his video report. The allegation by asylum seekers, that their hands were burnt by Australian Naval Personnel. Then the Indonesian police reported the burns were inflicted by the Australian Navy. Finally its reported that a video appeared to support the claims. Where is the bad journalism there. Unless you take the simplistic line that the Australian military can do no wrong.

"I had seen Adam Bandt shagging Sarah Hanson Young in the parliamentary toilets," A disgusting bit of smut by you, that's not even funny. To impugn two peoples reputation on a public forum, with a pathetic attempt at crass jocularity is a low act. Yet you are the first to jump onto your high moral horse when it suits.
p/s Forget the attempted humor, your are a bore.

The ABC does presume to 'fact check' everyone else, why not itself?

"ABC Fact Check determines the accuracy of claims by politicians, public figures, advocacy groups and institutions engaged in the public debate"

http://www.abc.net.au/news/factcheck/about/

Few would believe that Aunty is as independent as some decades ago, at least before the political correctness that the ABC seems to excel at.

Foxy,

Firstly, this is about the ABC being a publicly funded organisation that is mandated to remain politically neutral, but fails spectacularly to do so.

With regards Piers Ackerman, your hissy fit is misguided. PA denounced Sadler for his questions, but had the temerity to state the bleeding obvious which is that there were similar rumours circulating in the press gallery.

PA's attacks on Juliar for lying and being generally underhand was because she had lied and was devious for which she was dumped.

Paul,

The sentence used was "New footage appears to back asylum seekers' claims of mistreatment by the Australian Navy." The footage did nothing of the sort. It showed the asylum seekers with burns to their hands, and aired their claims. There was nothing else to support their claims. Considering that the ABC admitted that this was a mistake, I don't feel the need to try and prove it further.

Secondly, I said:

"For example if I said to a reporter that I had seen Adam Bandt shagging Sarah Hanson Young in the parliamentary toilets, that would be slander"

So please don't misquote me then attack me for something that you said, especially after your regular tirades of insults against Abbott. You are a boor, (and I can spell it too).

SM, you are a typical sounding English public school bore (regardless of how you spell it), who comes across as a smug conservative know it all, with an elitists attitude. Who to show superiority over us lesser mortals needs to post "You are a boor, (and I can spell it too)" jolly good old chap. jolly good, you have dictionary online, unlike you, something I rarely use.
Your smutty "joke" about two Greens MP having sex in a toilet was not funny. Humor, amongst many other things is something conservatives like yourself lack. If you want to make smutty jokes about "sex", make one about Abbott, the failed priestly candidate, and the popular sexual practices of Catholic Priests, that could be funny to some.
End of subject.