SM,

For someone who sashays around here as if he knows a thing or two - it's always rewarding to rediscover just how vacuous you are.

Thanks for the opportunity.

Blot is right-wing mouthpiece - end of story.

P,

Such unparliamentary language.

Bolt is the conservative version of Tony Jones.

SM, Bolt isn't even in the same ballpark as Tony Jones.

Bolt presents his own ideas and opinions, which are so far right, it's a wonder he doesn't fall over! Tony Jones presents a show displaying other people's questions and answers, and there always is at least one minister or political spokesperson from opposing political parties on Q&A, so he isn't as far left as you imagine.

Bolt is known for his nasty comments, whereas Tony Jones is usually polite to a fault.
So I can only assume you don't like him because he and the audience members ask the 'wrong' questions?

I think it best you don't watch it if you get so easily upset.
And don't rant about the ABC being a TV channel we all pay for with our taxes, and thus should only say what you want it to say, because we all pay taxes for something or other we don't agree with.....

One of Tones problems is he made the opposition leader the minister for the ABC. Turnbull's political philosophy seems to be total opposed to that of Tones, its too liberal. If Tone could replace the opposition leader with a man in his own mold, Joseph Goebbels name springs to mind, problem solved. Monday nights on the ABC could then be given over to real TV, like non stop 24/7, speeches from Fearless Leader. I know 90% (there's that infamous 90% again) will tune out, but Shadow Minister will be glued to his telly, taking down every word verbatim!

None of this changes the simple facts that was quickly and voluntarily admitted by the ABC that Q&A's executive production seriously erred in giving a podium to the offender.

Further, the Board has implemented a review because it has been publicly embarrassed by the Q&A team.

Although there are concerns that the review could have been more obviously independent and seen to be so.

Also, isn't it high times that the taxpaying public was allowed some direct consultation, a voice, in how the ABC is run? Once again, the taxpayer pays, but is excluded from having an effective voice. A nit like the Labor Party, where members are welcome to do the hard yakka, but the entrenched factions always have the final say over policy and nominations.

There are some superb practical models available to ensure that the public has an effective say in the administration of public agencies, OTHER than the usual political reaction by the agency or politicians when forced into considering the public, which is nominating their own preferred (wo)men for paid 'representation'. One of the universities could easily set up direct consultation and regular public reporting with a small research grant and a PhD candidate.

BTW, why can't Q&A be presented in other centres in rotation and have other hosts?

Is Australia to be represented overwhelmingly by the opinion of metropolitan urban types, exclusive to one city? -The feckless Hipsters of Ultimo and other inner-city suburbs of Sydney.

Rotation to other centres
That would also help to resist the culture of the 'celebrity personality' that has grown in the ABC, where the interviewer herself/himself who is a major part of the 'news'. In the background the Executive Producer and his/her production team, whose opinions rule apparently, but they are never put up front themselves for any scrutiny.

An exercise in 'Gotcha' theatre with the easily-led colosseum mob of inner Sydney Hipsters and rent seekers, but hardly an 'exercise in democracy'.